3 ms·

There's going to be a lot of negativity in these comments. I don't have numbers and this is purely anecdotal observation, but there is a large contingent of sup

There's going to be a lot of negativity in these comments. I don't have numbers and this is purely anecdotal observation, but there is a large contingent of supporters of the FSF that base their association to the foundation on their political positions (read: a very large number of communists, democratic socialists, and anarchists support FSF). Any criticism of RMS will be met with at least anti-corporate but most likely anti-capitalist rhetoric. Full disclosure: I cut off my contributions to the FSF in fall of 2004. It was obvious it outlived its utility even then. Now I ride to downvote hell...

HideousKojima 3y ago
Copyright is anti-capitalist. It's a state-granted and state-enforced monopoly on intellectual property (which is itself a legal fiction). I'm about as anti-communist and anti-socialist as they come, and I still support the free software movement because I see the current state of software licensing (not to mention issues with hardware ownership etc.) as rent-seeking by those who do not want to have to compete in the free market without the force of the state backing them up. It also undermines individual property rights. Whether or not the FSF is still the best champion for this cause is a different matter, but I support anyone pushing against the world of proprietary software.
- brodouevencode 3y ago
  You are absolutely on to something here. We need an alternative to FSF.
- kmeisthax 3y ago
  > Copyright is anti-capitalist ...uh, what? Like, if you're referring to, say, some hypothetically limited version of copyright where it's more or less a private right-of-action for artists to sue publishing firms for unpaid work, then sure. That would be anti-capitalist, specifically because the Soviets tried that. As it currently stands copyright is the foundation of modern capitalism. Yes, it doesn't feel like that if you're, say, a right-libertarian or a hardcore free market guy. However, you have to remember that capitalism and a free market are two different things. Capitalists do not care if the market is free, they care if line goes up. They will happily choke off the free market using monopoly power or government power if it will make them more money. A large corporation deciding that you will own nothing and be happy does not make them suddenly hardcore pinko commies. This is just the end stage of capitalism: once you run out of legitimate ways to make a profit, you find ways to steal from others. That's why we used to have antitrust laws[0] to keep companies from becoming democratically unaccountable quazi-governments of their own. And in my opinion the greatest own-goal right-libertarians ever made was campaigning against their use. [0] Antitrust law in the US has been functionally braindead since the "consumer welfare" standard was adopted by a bunch of federal judges litigating from the bench in the 1980s.
yarg 3y ago
Ah yes, the notorious den of communists that is Hacker News?

HideousKojima 3y ago

Copyright is anti-capitalist. It's a state-granted and state-enforced monopoly on intellectual property (which is itself a legal fiction). I'm about as anti-communist and anti-socialist as they come, and I still support the free software movement because I see the current state of software licensing (not to mention issues with hardware ownership etc.) as rent-seeking by those who do not want to have to compete in the free market without the force of the state backing them up. It also undermines individual property rights. Whether or not the FSF is still the best champion for this cause is a different matter, but I support anyone pushing against the world of proprietary software.

brodouevencode 3y ago
You are absolutely on to something here. We need an alternative to FSF.
kmeisthax 3y ago
> Copyright is anti-capitalist ...uh, what? Like, if you're referring to, say, some hypothetically limited version of copyright where it's more or less a private right-of-action for artists to sue publishing firms for unpaid work, then sure. That would be anti-capitalist, specifically because the Soviets tried that. As it currently stands copyright is the foundation of modern capitalism. Yes, it doesn't feel like that if you're, say, a right-libertarian or a hardcore free market guy. However, you have to remember that capitalism and a free market are two different things. Capitalists do not care if the market is free, they care if line goes up. They will happily choke off the free market using monopoly power or government power if it will make them more money. A large corporation deciding that you will own nothing and be happy does not make them suddenly hardcore pinko commies. This is just the end stage of capitalism: once you run out of legitimate ways to make a profit, you find ways to steal from others. That's why we used to have antitrust laws[0] to keep companies from becoming democratically unaccountable quazi-governments of their own. And in my opinion the greatest own-goal right-libertarians ever made was campaigning against their use. [0] Antitrust law in the US has been functionally braindead since the "consumer welfare" standard was adopted by a bunch of federal judges litigating from the bench in the 1980s.

yarg 3y ago

Ah yes, the notorious den of communists that is Hacker News?