3 ms·

In a capitalist society, paying for software is good, actually.

by wizzwizz4 2y ago

gonzo41 2y ago
That's just propaganda. Our society is more like kings and serfs that capitalist these days.
- tastyfreeze 2y ago
  This is absurdly false. The serfs can become kings as evidenced by newly minted millionaires every year. However, the reverse is also true as there are plenty of fortunes lost as well.
  - pavel_lishin 2y ago
    Yes, yes, we're all temporarily-displaced millionaires.
    - tastyfreeze 2y ago
      You surely won't become one by griping about the unfairness of other people's success to a bunch of strangers. 500k new millionaires in 2023 in the US. Why can't you be one of them in a coming year?
      - wizzwizz4 2y ago
        That's about forty times my annual salary, ignoring expenses. Living like a miser for my entire working life, I could become a millionaire – though not a multimillionaire.
      - pavel_lishin 2y ago
        > 500k new millionaires in 2023 in the US. Why can't you be one of them in a coming year? I know it's a rhetorical question, but the actual answer is "because I feel like it would require more work than it would be worth". Of course, all the millionaires I personally know got there through 95% luck, so who knows! Maybe I'll personally be cursed to follow their path.
  - sumeno 2y ago
    Being a millionaire is table stakes for a minimal retirement, not being fabulously wealthy. Not something particularly impressive
    - edoceo 2y ago
      In USA, it's something like 15% of the population is millionaires, IIRC. Being the special 3 out of 20 - I'd say is impressive.
  - autoexec 2y ago
    The serfs can become kings The odds of a poor person becoming a rich person in America is extremely low and socioeconomic mobility in the US is getting worse all the time. I'd guess that most poor people have better odds of getting hit by lightning. A lot of new millionaires are property owners. Anyone who gets their money from real estate is not a serf.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  That's what the word "capitalism" was coined to mean – if you ascribe to the theory that Louis Blanc coined it.
gorjusborg 2y ago
I don't know if it is that simple. Paying by people who develop software will tend to keep the software in good shape, but there's no guarantee. Also, the developer doesn't necesarily need to own the code to improve it, or build you a copy.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  I mean that paying for software keeps the people who write the software from starving to death, or having to fall back on corrupt behaviour (e.g. accepting bribes from the advertising industry) to survive. It is, of course, not a guarantee of continued work quality, but it helps avert the material conditions that inevitably destroy it.
kyboren 2y ago
I am not entirely convinced that capitalism is the best system for producing software, especially established "infrastructure" software like OSes, web browsers, office suites, etc. I'm open to the idea, and recognize there are problems with non-commercial software, too. But the critical difference between software and physical commodities is that replication of software, once written, has a marginal cost approaching zero. I suspect that this difference significantly changes the calculus. My personal feeling is we should really think outside the box here. I like some sort of hybrid system with government-funded software bureaus producing FOSS code to replicate successful and important "infrastructure" commercial products after five to ten years or so. People get cutting-edge software created by the market, and exploitative rent seeking on critical software is minimized.

In a capitalist society, paying for software is good, actually.

gonzo41 2y ago

That's just propaganda. Our society is more like kings and serfs that capitalist these days.

tastyfreeze 2y ago
This is absurdly false. The serfs can become kings as evidenced by newly minted millionaires every year. However, the reverse is also true as there are plenty of fortunes lost as well.
- pavel_lishin 2y ago
  Yes, yes, we're all temporarily-displaced millionaires.
  - tastyfreeze 2y ago
    You surely won't become one by griping about the unfairness of other people's success to a bunch of strangers. 500k new millionaires in 2023 in the US. Why can't you be one of them in a coming year?
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      That's about forty times my annual salary, ignoring expenses. Living like a miser for my entire working life, I could become a millionaire – though not a multimillionaire.
    - pavel_lishin 2y ago
      > 500k new millionaires in 2023 in the US. Why can't you be one of them in a coming year? I know it's a rhetorical question, but the actual answer is "because I feel like it would require more work than it would be worth". Of course, all the millionaires I personally know got there through 95% luck, so who knows! Maybe I'll personally be cursed to follow their path.
- sumeno 2y ago
  Being a millionaire is table stakes for a minimal retirement, not being fabulously wealthy. Not something particularly impressive
  - edoceo 2y ago
    In USA, it's something like 15% of the population is millionaires, IIRC. Being the special 3 out of 20 - I'd say is impressive.
- autoexec 2y ago
  The serfs can become kings The odds of a poor person becoming a rich person in America is extremely low and socioeconomic mobility in the US is getting worse all the time. I'd guess that most poor people have better odds of getting hit by lightning. A lot of new millionaires are property owners. Anyone who gets their money from real estate is not a serf.
wizzwizz4 2y ago
That's what the word "capitalism" was coined to mean – if you ascribe to the theory that Louis Blanc coined it.

gorjusborg 2y ago

I don't know if it is that simple. Paying by people who develop software will tend to keep the software in good shape, but there's no guarantee. Also, the developer doesn't necesarily need to own the code to improve it, or build you a copy.

wizzwizz4 2y ago
I mean that paying for software keeps the people who write the software from starving to death, or having to fall back on corrupt behaviour (e.g. accepting bribes from the advertising industry) to survive. It is, of course, not a guarantee of continued work quality, but it helps avert the material conditions that inevitably destroy it.

kyboren 2y ago

I am not entirely convinced that capitalism is the best system for producing software, especially established "infrastructure" software like OSes, web browsers, office suites, etc. I'm open to the idea, and recognize there are problems with non-commercial software, too. But the critical difference between software and physical commodities is that replication of software, once written, has a marginal cost approaching zero. I suspect that this difference significantly changes the calculus. My personal feeling is we should really think outside the box here. I like some sort of hybrid system with government-funded software bureaus producing FOSS code to replicate successful and important "infrastructure" commercial products after five to ten years or so. People get cutting-edge software created by the market, and exploitative rent seeking on critical software is minimized.