7 ms·

The https://quitter.se https://quitter.se anti-capitalist message didn't resonate with me, so I joined the https://gnusocial.no https://gnusocial.no federation.

The https://quitter.se https://quitter.se anti-capitalist message didn't resonate with me, so I joined the https://gnusocial.no https://gnusocial.no federation. Much friendlier :)

js8 11y ago
I am not familiar with either, but I am curious why does "anti-capitalist message" matter so much? I thought the purpose is to build a messaging network that everybody can use. And even GNU founder can be considered anti-capitalist. I am asking because to me, to decide to join some (not political) community based on your own political opinion, is a good way to live in your own bubble. The real strength of the Internet is that we are exposed to contrarian positions, even at the expense of our comfort.
- pekk 11y ago
  It is a federated messaging network. I don't see that it is any more subject to filter bubbles than Twitter is. Everyone chooses who they follow anyway. If you want to subscribe to feeds from people with politics opposite yours, you can do that.
  - js8 11y ago
    That was my point. The intro site may have "anti-capitalist" in it, but at the end of the day, it's up to users what they do with that network.
- mikekchar 11y ago
  Before the horde descends, I thought I might respond to the suggestion that RMS is anti-capitalist. This comes up frequently and is a bit of a red herring. I won't try to speak for him (he can obviously do that well enough himself), however I think it is worth considering the free software movement in today's reality. Back when they only thing that described free software was the GNU manifesto, we still had the idea that writing software that enabled businesses was a good idea. It may be a consequence of free software that it will become difficult to charge money directly for software (as a product), but that shouldn't stop companies from making money. Especially now when we see how open source software is almost taken for granted, we can see that companies flourish, not die. It is true that you practically can not charge money for a compiler any more, but are we worse off? No. We have different and arguably better business models for that kind of software -- and we haven't given up capitalism at all. My tools are dramatically better than they were 30 years ago (when I first started in this business). The cost has also dropped to nearly zero. We have become efficient. It is true that the FSF considers software freedom a moral imperative. While it may be true that some kinds of software will be difficult to produce in this manner, we can see that there are several very large companies that thrive producing virtually every kind of software. Personally, I don't think there are many businesses that will be better off with our old software-as-a-product business models -- games being a probable exception. What we have now is better, more efficient, enabling for the general population -- and much better for businesses. I have a hard time seeing it from an "anti-capitalist" position. And, just from my personal perspective, I don't think RMS ever did either.
  - DasIch 11y ago
    Have you ever read anything by RMS on what he calls Service as a Software Substitute (SaaSS)? I can't think of many large businesses who aren't "guilty" of that.
    - Frondo 11y ago
      This looks like the SaaSS article: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s... The payoff comes at the very end, "Do your own computing with your own copy of a free program, for your freedom's sake." Nah, I'll pay someone to do compute (and maintain the API, infrastructure, etc.) for me. I'm a huge free software advocate, but in the SaaS situation, I'm not paying for a program, I'm paying for results. As such, it's immaterial how I get those results--they could have a roomful of people arranging bits by hand. (What if that's how they were doing it? Would that represent a loss of freedom, if I were paying people to shuffle bits by hand?) This particular essay seems like the RMS take on that old saw, "if all you have is a hammer..."
      - tremon 11y ago
        The loss of freedom, in your case, is control over the development direction of your tools. If the tools match your business, fine. Let's hope they still do in a few years. If the match is only partial, your choice is between lobbying for tool change from your vendor, or conforming your business to match the tool.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > I have a hard time seeing it from an "anti-capitalist" position. The FSF position is anti-capitalist in at least one technical sense -- in the domain of software, it morally opposes capitalist model of property rights (and, in practice, uses a hack around the mechanism by which that model is implemented to subvert it.)
    - x1798DE 11y ago
- shmerl 11y ago
  > And even GNU founder can be considered anti-capitalist. You are mixing up anarchism with anti-capitalism.
  - js8 11y ago
    Not really, IMHO you're the one mixing them up. Take Noam Chomsky, he self-identifies as anarchist too, but I think you would have a hard time not to call him anti-capitalist. I understand anti-capitalism as a criticism of the current economic system (or at least aspects of it), so it's independent to anarchism, just like it is, say, independent to Christianity.
    - shmerl 11y ago
      Noam Chomsky doesn't speak for all anarchists. Anarchism comes in different forms. > I understand anti-capitalism as a criticism of the current economic system (or at least aspects of it), so it's independent to anarchism, just like it is, say, independent to Christianity. That's exactly my point (that it's independent). In case of Stallman, he isn't anti-capitalist per se, but he is definitely an anarchist.
      - tete 11y ago
        What makes him anarchist?
        shmerl 11y ago
        His core ideas of free software are based on the concept of being free from control over it. The idea is anarchistic since by controlling the software and computing technology one controls society in some way, and the more technology is intertwined with social aspects (which gradually happens the more technology progresses), the higher is that level of control.
        majewsky 11y ago
        You could just as well argue that his ideas are democratic, giving power to larger groups of people than before. Teaching the people to run their own services sounds pretty similar to what happened during the enlightenment, when people were taught to read at a large scale for the first time.
- Outdoorsman 11y ago
  Agreed...you grow by entertaining ideas other than your own, or those of the group you find yourself closely identifying with... As F Scott Fitzegerald said: A test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. Using the Internet just to confirm your existing beliefs sounds a bit too much like tribalism...isn't there something better to aspire to?
- mpitt 11y ago
  Just a RMS quote from the latest FOSDEM: the Free Software movement takes some ideas from capitalism, some from socialism and some from anarchism. (Quoted from memory) Unfortunately I can't give you a verifiable source, but the whole talk will be available at http://video.fosdem.org/2016/ud2218a/ http://video.fosdem.org/2016/ud2218a/ at some point.
- norea-armozel 11y ago
  The GPL couldn't work without one of the common features of capitalism: protection of intellectual property. Also, Stallman has never gone record saying capitalism should be abolished. He simply didn't feel computers should be constrained by IP. At worse, he's a Georgist on IP since IP to most modern Georgists is held in common like land.
- rocky1138 11y ago
  I didn't say that I wouldn't read from Quitter. I follow a few people from there. But, I said that I didn't register there. To me, registering with the service after reading that goal would be a vote in favour of that goal.
- anonbanker 11y ago
  Not all of us are anti-capitalist. Before I woke up to the reality of the world around us, I was strictly anarcho-capitalist (like, "Fire Departments should negotiate contracts for payment before putting out your fire" level). Turns out, I just hate monopolism, to the point that extreme competition turned out to be the lesser evil. The only political opinion you should share about Free Software, is whether the software honors the four freedoms[0]. The rest (open source software, FOSS, etc), are corporate add-on sales attempts. 0.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition
kbart 11y ago
Trending tags: #anarchy, #antifa, #nonazis etc. No thanks, I'll pass.
- quadrangle 11y ago
  you'd prefer #yesnazis ? ;)
  - kbart 11y ago
    No, in my opinion and experience, both "nazis" and "antifa" are violent utter morons, so I prefer none.
motters 11y ago
Although I dislike capitalism in general I think that message should be changed to something more neutral. Maybe some capitalists might want to have their own GNU Social site where they can boast about swindling, exploitation and their beloved centralization of everything. In my debian package for the qvitter plugin that message already gets replaced, but I can also submit a patch upstream.

The https://quitter.se https://quitter.se anti-capitalist message didn't resonate with me, so I joined the https://gnusocial.no https://gnusocial.no federation. Much friendlier :)

js8 11y ago

I am not familiar with either, but I am curious why does "anti-capitalist message" matter so much? I thought the purpose is to build a messaging network that everybody can use. And even GNU founder can be considered anti-capitalist. I am asking because to me, to decide to join some (not political) community based on your own political opinion, is a good way to live in your own bubble. The real strength of the Internet is that we are exposed to contrarian positions, even at the expense of our comfort.

pekk 11y ago
It is a federated messaging network. I don't see that it is any more subject to filter bubbles than Twitter is. Everyone chooses who they follow anyway. If you want to subscribe to feeds from people with politics opposite yours, you can do that.
- js8 11y ago
  That was my point. The intro site may have "anti-capitalist" in it, but at the end of the day, it's up to users what they do with that network.
mikekchar 11y ago
Before the horde descends, I thought I might respond to the suggestion that RMS is anti-capitalist. This comes up frequently and is a bit of a red herring. I won't try to speak for him (he can obviously do that well enough himself), however I think it is worth considering the free software movement in today's reality. Back when they only thing that described free software was the GNU manifesto, we still had the idea that writing software that enabled businesses was a good idea. It may be a consequence of free software that it will become difficult to charge money directly for software (as a product), but that shouldn't stop companies from making money. Especially now when we see how open source software is almost taken for granted, we can see that companies flourish, not die. It is true that you practically can not charge money for a compiler any more, but are we worse off? No. We have different and arguably better business models for that kind of software -- and we haven't given up capitalism at all. My tools are dramatically better than they were 30 years ago (when I first started in this business). The cost has also dropped to nearly zero. We have become efficient. It is true that the FSF considers software freedom a moral imperative. While it may be true that some kinds of software will be difficult to produce in this manner, we can see that there are several very large companies that thrive producing virtually every kind of software. Personally, I don't think there are many businesses that will be better off with our old software-as-a-product business models -- games being a probable exception. What we have now is better, more efficient, enabling for the general population -- and much better for businesses. I have a hard time seeing it from an "anti-capitalist" position. And, just from my personal perspective, I don't think RMS ever did either.
- DasIch 11y ago
  Have you ever read anything by RMS on what he calls Service as a Software Substitute (SaaSS)? I can't think of many large businesses who aren't "guilty" of that.
  - Frondo 11y ago
    This looks like the SaaSS article: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s... The payoff comes at the very end, "Do your own computing with your own copy of a free program, for your freedom's sake." Nah, I'll pay someone to do compute (and maintain the API, infrastructure, etc.) for me. I'm a huge free software advocate, but in the SaaS situation, I'm not paying for a program, I'm paying for results. As such, it's immaterial how I get those results--they could have a roomful of people arranging bits by hand. (What if that's how they were doing it? Would that represent a loss of freedom, if I were paying people to shuffle bits by hand?) This particular essay seems like the RMS take on that old saw, "if all you have is a hammer..."
    - tremon 11y ago
      The loss of freedom, in your case, is control over the development direction of your tools. If the tools match your business, fine. Let's hope they still do in a few years. If the match is only partial, your choice is between lobbying for tool change from your vendor, or conforming your business to match the tool.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > I have a hard time seeing it from an "anti-capitalist" position. The FSF position is anti-capitalist in at least one technical sense -- in the domain of software, it morally opposes capitalist model of property rights (and, in practice, uses a hack around the mechanism by which that model is implemented to subvert it.)
  - x1798DE 11y ago
shmerl 11y ago
> And even GNU founder can be considered anti-capitalist. You are mixing up anarchism with anti-capitalism.
- js8 11y ago
  Not really, IMHO you're the one mixing them up. Take Noam Chomsky, he self-identifies as anarchist too, but I think you would have a hard time not to call him anti-capitalist. I understand anti-capitalism as a criticism of the current economic system (or at least aspects of it), so it's independent to anarchism, just like it is, say, independent to Christianity.
  - shmerl 11y ago
    Noam Chomsky doesn't speak for all anarchists. Anarchism comes in different forms. > I understand anti-capitalism as a criticism of the current economic system (or at least aspects of it), so it's independent to anarchism, just like it is, say, independent to Christianity. That's exactly my point (that it's independent). In case of Stallman, he isn't anti-capitalist per se, but he is definitely an anarchist.
    - tete 11y ago
      What makes him anarchist?
      - shmerl 11y ago
        His core ideas of free software are based on the concept of being free from control over it. The idea is anarchistic since by controlling the software and computing technology one controls society in some way, and the more technology is intertwined with social aspects (which gradually happens the more technology progresses), the higher is that level of control.
        majewsky 11y ago
        You could just as well argue that his ideas are democratic, giving power to larger groups of people than before. Teaching the people to run their own services sounds pretty similar to what happened during the enlightenment, when people were taught to read at a large scale for the first time.
Outdoorsman 11y ago
Agreed...you grow by entertaining ideas other than your own, or those of the group you find yourself closely identifying with... As F Scott Fitzegerald said: A test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. Using the Internet just to confirm your existing beliefs sounds a bit too much like tribalism...isn't there something better to aspire to?
mpitt 11y ago
Just a RMS quote from the latest FOSDEM: the Free Software movement takes some ideas from capitalism, some from socialism and some from anarchism. (Quoted from memory) Unfortunately I can't give you a verifiable source, but the whole talk will be available at http://video.fosdem.org/2016/ud2218a/ http://video.fosdem.org/2016/ud2218a/ at some point.
norea-armozel 11y ago
The GPL couldn't work without one of the common features of capitalism: protection of intellectual property. Also, Stallman has never gone record saying capitalism should be abolished. He simply didn't feel computers should be constrained by IP. At worse, he's a Georgist on IP since IP to most modern Georgists is held in common like land.
rocky1138 11y ago
I didn't say that I wouldn't read from Quitter. I follow a few people from there. But, I said that I didn't register there. To me, registering with the service after reading that goal would be a vote in favour of that goal.
anonbanker 11y ago
Not all of us are anti-capitalist. Before I woke up to the reality of the world around us, I was strictly anarcho-capitalist (like, "Fire Departments should negotiate contracts for payment before putting out your fire" level). Turns out, I just hate monopolism, to the point that extreme competition turned out to be the lesser evil. The only political opinion you should share about Free Software, is whether the software honors the four freedoms[0]. The rest (open source software, FOSS, etc), are corporate add-on sales attempts. 0.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition

kbart 11y ago

Trending tags: #anarchy, #antifa, #nonazis etc. No thanks, I'll pass.

quadrangle 11y ago
you'd prefer #yesnazis ? ;)
- kbart 11y ago
  No, in my opinion and experience, both "nazis" and "antifa" are violent utter morons, so I prefer none.

motters 11y ago

Although I dislike capitalism in general I think that message should be changed to something more neutral. Maybe some capitalists might want to have their own GNU Social site where they can boast about swindling, exploitation and their beloved centralization of everything. In my debian package for the qvitter plugin that message already gets replaced, but I can also submit a patch upstream.