4 ms·

> ...called the ICE contract a betrayal of open source’s commitment to “inverting power structures and creating access and opportunities for everyone.” Hmm, in

> ...called the ICE contract a betrayal of open source’s commitment to “inverting power structures and creating access and opportunities for everyone.” Hmm, interesting. I always saw open-source from a freedom and power angle. I have a program, I should be able to edit it. I never saw it in a social justice angle of "inverting power structures". It may well be the case that having Linux be GPL helps Amazon more than me and entrenches power structures and I'd still not be upset because it does help me.

mc32 7y ago
Yes this is a re-interpretation. Like encryption systems it was considered “turnkey” in that we wouldn’t care who used the technology from spies, lovers, to terrorists. But now it’s getting politicized like everything else.
IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
The open source movement is explicitly about power: who gets to (legally) copy/see/modify/distribute/etc. So it's always fun to see these demands to "keep politics out of it". If you did not see that is was nothing but politics before, it's because you don't notice the politics when you agree with them. That doesn't mean the analogy you are quoting is entirely valid or meaningful: OSS is pretty close to communism in it's "from each what they can, to each according to their needs". But it's easy to see that zero marginal costs are required for this to work.
- scarejunba 7y ago
  Oh no, I'm not asking to "keep politics out of it". The politics are most definitely part of it, but like everything else, they very narrowly specify the politics: "Code must be free. If you have a binary, you should have the right to edit it.". That's a really wise political angle and I'm grateful for all the people who made it possible. But it doesn't take a position on abortion or immigration or anything and I prefer it that way. To be clear, I recognize the right for free people to protest companies. I recognize the right for employees to protest their employers' dealings with companies.

mc32 7y ago

Yes this is a re-interpretation. Like encryption systems it was considered “turnkey” in that we wouldn’t care who used the technology from spies, lovers, to terrorists. But now it’s getting politicized like everything else.

IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago

The open source movement is explicitly about power: who gets to (legally) copy/see/modify/distribute/etc. So it's always fun to see these demands to "keep politics out of it". If you did not see that is was nothing but politics before, it's because you don't notice the politics when you agree with them. That doesn't mean the analogy you are quoting is entirely valid or meaningful: OSS is pretty close to communism in it's "from each what they can, to each according to their needs". But it's easy to see that zero marginal costs are required for this to work.

scarejunba 7y ago
Oh no, I'm not asking to "keep politics out of it". The politics are most definitely part of it, but like everything else, they very narrowly specify the politics: "Code must be free. If you have a binary, you should have the right to edit it.". That's a really wise political angle and I'm grateful for all the people who made it possible. But it doesn't take a position on abortion or immigration or anything and I prefer it that way. To be clear, I recognize the right for free people to protest companies. I recognize the right for employees to protest their employers' dealings with companies.