| |||||||||||||
The abrupt merging of NouveauThe abrupt merging of NouveauPosted Dec 20, 2009 4:08 UTC (Sun) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: The abrupt merging of Nouveau by drag Parent article: The abrupt merging of Nouveau
I don't see where socialism enters into the open source situation. Socialism requires a central government to determine what each person's contribution to society should be (and enforce it). There isn't anything like that in open source. I do see a social responsibility or altruism angle, where someone voluntarily contributes code or licenses with GPL in order to bring about a better world for everyone, but that's basically welfare, which goes hand in hand with capitalism, not socialism.
(Log in to post comments)
The abrupt merging of Nouveau Posted Dec 20, 2009 4:21 UTC (Sun) by jmm82 (guest, #59425) [Link]
Corperations do not hire subsystem maintainers as good philantropists.
The abrupt merging of Nouveau Posted Dec 24, 2009 22:15 UTC (Thu) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
That's not socialism, that's communism ...
Actually, it's probably better described as Stalinism - where the government takes everything in the name of the people and then the elite use it as their own personal property.
Just like fascism, in fact.
In fact, also pretty much like the current "capitalist" setup - where the government and their cronies are walking off with all our money TODAY. What are the recent boom and current bust iof not yet another means for the already-rich to get even richer?
Cheers,
The abrupt merging of Nouveau Posted Dec 26, 2009 21:21 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] Socialism is a mixture of capitalism and communism (Marx thought it was a stepping stone on the way to communism). So for open source to be socialist, it would still need a central authority to direct some resources. And I don't see one.Neither socialism, communism, nor capitalism imply that government employees take stuff that rightfully belongs to others or that rich people get stuff that rightfully belongs to non-rich people, so whether that's in fact what happens when societies attempt to set up these economic systems, it really isn't relevant to the question of whether the existing open source economy is socialist, capitalist, or whatever.
The abrupt merging of Nouveau Posted Jan 19, 2010 20:29 UTC (Tue) by personman (guest, #63100) [Link] In my opinion, open source is anarchist, and anarchism is properly understood as a decentralized, cooperative, collectivist, libertarian-socialism.Decision making is largely done collectively and cooperatively, in a participatory fashion, rather than a central authority atop a hierarchy. Socialism only requires a centralized authority if you are referring to authoritarian socialism. Libertarian-socialism (anarchism) is a different deal. My two cents... -Andy AnarchismToday.org
|
|||||||||||||