2 ms·
An anarchist ought not care what the license terms are; they are already operating in an ethical framework that revokes concern for a collection of words that r
by dleslie 10y ago
An anarchist ought not care what the license terms are; they are already operating in an ethical framework that revokes concern for a collection of words that rely on state violence to have meaning.
- sounds 10y agoCool! A discussion where the anarchists are represented clearly! Do I understand libertarianism the way sgentle does? He compares anarchism:libertarianism::permissive license:GPL, so I guess he's using libertarianism in the sense of "absolute minimum amount of government necessary to enforce property rights." As to whether you preserve freedom best by causing "unfreedoms," philosophy already has some pretty useful things to say, such as ue_'s comment: Hegel ... described the freedom of the savage being a kind of unrefined freedom Some freedoms are conflicting by their very definition. Resolving the conflict is at its core the imposition of an ordering over the set of all freedoms, or in other words, a value system. Almost all the discussion on this article can be reduced to a comparison of well known value systems and attempts to sway readers to one or another.
- placeybordeaux 10y agoDepends on if you are being pragmatic or not. Even if you don't believe that the state should enforce it's will on you over the license of the code you are using, it will try.
- nimih 10y agoAn anarchist could very well see using a license as a political act: disagreeing with the existence of an institution doesn't prevent you from using the levers of power provided by that institution to achieve a given end.