Conversation

Notices

1. Christopher M. Hobbs (cmhobbs@loadaverage.org)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 20:24:45 UTC Christopher M. Hobbs

   • Bob Mottram
   private property is a concept that sits poorly with me these days.
   • Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Christopher M. Hobbs (cmhobbs@loadaverage.org)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 16:52:50 UTC Christopher M. Hobbs
     Well I got mad on the internet and left nasty comments on a post on freepo.st. The combination of this article and the one about the Linux Foundation removing member voting privileges just turned me into a grump today. Capitalism is infuriating, it's even more infuriating that capitalism is not seen as the root of these problems.
     http://freepo.st/community/FreeSoftware/post/h196z55v/How%20I%20Stumbled%20Upon%20The%20Internet’s%20Biggest%20Blind%20Spot
     @mcscx@quitter.se likes this.
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Bob Mottram (bashrc@quitter.se)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 17:12:16 UTC Bob Mottram

     in reply to
     @cmhobbs The Linux Foundation is a microcosm of how proprietarians always try to colonise the commons and then repurpose it.
     @mcscx@quitter.se likes this.
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Christopher M. Hobbs (cmhobbs@loadaverage.org)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 17:55:20 UTC Christopher M. Hobbs

     in reply to

     • Bob Mottram
     Excellent observation. The article I got internet-mad at even highlighted the "tragedy of the commons". Reading The Wealth of the Commons is a refreshing new light on that issue.
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Benedikt Geißler 🐃 (benediktg@gnusocial.de)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 18:28:34 UTC Benedikt Geißler 🐃

     • Bob Mottram
     @cmhobbs @bashrc The Twitter account of the Linux Foundation has posted an article which commends a proprietary video editor which happens to be available for GNU/Linux as well. Hence I do not think that software freedom is an issue for the LF. https://twitter.com/linuxfoundation/status/688378428039409664
     @mcscx@quitter.se and Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Bob Mottram (bashrc@quitter.se)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 19:37:28 UTC Bob Mottram

     in reply to
     @cmhobbs The original tragedy of commons idea is mostly a fallacy. The real tragedy arrives with exploitation by profiteers
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) (clackemovedtoheldscalla@quitter.se)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 20:11:23 UTC Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)

     in reply to

     • Bob Mottram
     @bashrc @cmhobbs That *is* the tragedy. The antidote is to regulate it to keep it a commons. Copyleft is how we do it in the software world.
   • Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) (clackemovedtoheldscalla@quitter.se)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 21:38:02 UTC Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)

     in reply to
     @cmhobbs I think you're being uncharitable toward the original article, maybe because you triggered on some things and didn't finish it.
   • Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) (clackemovedtoheldscalla@quitter.se)'s status on Saturday, 23-Jan-2016 21:39:43 UTC Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)

     in reply to
     @cmhobbs It is about how to get money into "open source", but not necessarily about monetizing it. Her heart seems to be in the right place.
   • Danyl Strype (strypey@quitter.se)'s status on Sunday, 24-Jan-2016 04:37:57 UTC Danyl Strype

     in reply to
     @cmhobbs  until they can making a living from libre, creators must work on proprietary to earn a living and libre only gets their spare time
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) likes this.
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Danyl Strype (strypey@quitter.se)'s status on Sunday, 24-Jan-2016 04:38:56 UTC Danyl Strype

     in reply to

     • Danyl Strype
     @cmhobbs changing that dynamic somehow is essential to getting beyond capitalism
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) likes this.
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) (clackemovedtoheldscalla@quitter.se)'s status on Monday, 25-Jan-2016 23:01:38 UTC Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)

     in reply to

     • Bob Mottram
     @cmhobbs @bashrc It's perfectly consistent to be in support of private property in material matters, yet criticize intellectual monopolies.
   • Danyl Strype (strypey@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 26-Jan-2016 00:08:00 UTC Danyl Strype

     in reply to

     • Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)
     • Bob Mottram
     @clacke @cmhobbs @bashrc sure, it's also consistent to see private ownership of material commons like land or water as equally illegitimate
     Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) repeated this.
   • Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) (clackemovedtoheldscalla@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 26-Jan-2016 09:01:00 UTC Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)

     in reply to

     • Bob Mottram
     • Danyl Strype
     @strypey @cmhobbs @bashrc Yes, sure.