4 ms·
> decentralized systems with no private ownership aka anarchy. that turns out to be worse.
by richardwhiuk 6y ago
> decentralized systems with no private ownership
aka anarchy. that turns out to be worse.
- EGreg 6y agoAnarchy is simply absence of tall hierarchies. You can have each individual community choose what OpenStreetMap tiles to use, what to censor etc. Like HN does. What if HN was kicked off a host? They would put the backups somewhere else and repoint the DNS. What if ICE seized their domain? Then we could move domain name resolution to a DHT. What if AT&T refused to carry it or charge extra? The signal could route packets along other lines. No single point of failure. It’s not just about banning 0% or 100% but the prices and friction imposed by privately owned rentseeking infrastructure monopolies. Why in a span of less than 10 years, VOIP has caused international calls that used to cost $3 a minute to turn free and have video! The weird thing is that when A wants to connect woth B you think there has to be a one-size-fits all C that can block it.
- andrepd 6y agoYes, as we all know, open source software is a failed experiment, a cesspit of "anarchy".
- EGreg 6y agoAs well as science, language and other human endeavors. No one is in charge! I’m glad society advanced so much from secret alchemy cults with their “intellectual property” protections on their secrets.
- mixmastamyk 6y agoThat’s a good description. A successful cesspit of anarchy.
- jbman223 6y agoMost open source software is neither decentralized nor publicly owned.
- TuringTest 6y agoAll of it is, otherwise it wouldn't meet the 4 freedoms that define open source. The 'project' maintaining the software may be centralized, but all its users "own" the software in the sense that the don't need to ask permission to the maintainer, and they can create their own modifications.
- hojjat12000 6y agoYou're mixing a few different things. Free software and open source are different. and for each of them there are hundreds of different licenses that allows you to do something but not another.
- TuringTest 6y agoFree software and open source are different marketing strategies for the same concept. The most commonly understood meaning for both terms is the same, from the very moment the Open Source Initiative was created.
- vlovich123 6y agoNot open source. Open source is a resounding success. The marketplace with the problems is advertising. We need to enact laws banning selling of third party data and make leaks a liability (perhaps even one that automatically pierces the normal corporate veil and opens VPs and up to personal liability if there was any circumvention initiated encouraged by them). Then businesses have to actually decide if the liability is worth it for them vs a free-for-all market that intelligence agencies and criminal enterprises are primarily funding.
- ohgodplsno 6y agoAh, yes, the little project known as Debian completely failed and never took off. Anarchy is so bad. How could it ever produce anything of value, like say the world's most used linux distribution?
- worik 6y agoWhat is your evidence? Mackknovist Ukraine, Spanish Republic, and Zapitista country now... All were/are quite different. Worse than what?