What Would Be Disastrous For Linux, Open-Source

[deanjo]

Open source is communism after all!

Yup, in the purest sense of the word. Unfortunately "pure" communism is rarely actually practiced and past attempts have often been actually dictatorships trying to pass the guise of communism.

[?John?]

Yup, in the purest sense of the word. Unfortunately "pure" communism is rarely actually practiced and past attempts have often been actually dictatorships trying to pass the guise of communism.

Words of true wisdom. I actually think it's always like that - no matter what philosophy or social structure they claim to advocate, the people behind the scenes are always the same and so are their intentions. All these monsters care about is wealth and power and they abuse whatever attracts the sheeple at the moment to manipulate them into serving their design.

[?John?]

No, you have reason to question your friends these days. You know, I barely recognize this country anymore; the government has us seeing Communists in our soup.

That's why I hate the whole "every communist deserves to burn in hell!" attitude which seems to be virtually omnipresent in the US - it clearly shows how efficient the propaganda spread by the government during the Cold War has been, because some people obviously maintained the hatred for entire generations!
Now to prevent a major misunderstanding: I'm not a communist - I admit I may like parts of the philosophy here and there but if any of you feel the urge to classify people, I've always been thinking about myself as a humanist.

[evolution]

It would be better to tax proprietary software, since it doesn't otherwise contribute to the pool of common goods. Open source is communism after all!

[OFFTOPIC]

Well, nowadays there isn't just communism and capitalism, but 4 distinct political/social branches.

Communism -> Neo-Liberalism -> Authoritarianism -> Libertarianism

Linux isn't communism at all; in reality, Linux is like more a Leftist/Libertarian movement. (I don't understand why a lot of people confund/mistake Communism with Libertarianism when they're very different political/economical/social ideals).

Some useful info click here.

[/OFFTOPIC]

[ONTOPIC]

About something than can be disastrous for open-source: Patents. They destroy / seriously damage progress and might cause legal problems on Linux (in both kernel and related software)...

Some solutions for this problem? Develop programs and drivers in realtively "patent-free" countries (India, for example?), do "clean-room reverse-engineering" (which is not the ideal solution for Linux development... ) or... do like ATI / Intel have been doing with most of their drivers (release documentation to the community).

Cheers

[/ONTOPIC]

[deanjo]

Well, nowadays there isn't just communism and capitalism, but 4 distinct political/social branches.

Communism -> Neo-Liberalism -> Authoritarianism -> Libertarianism

Linux isn't communism at all; in reality, Linux is like more a Leftist/Libertarian movement. (I don't understand why a lot of people confund/mistake Communism with Libertarianism when they're very different political/economical/social ideals).

Some useful info click here.

I have to disagree with open source views being more Libertarian then Communism but then again even the open source movement operates under a guise. It would also depend on which of the various open source factions you want to compare it to. BSD would be closer to libertarian as it aims more for the rights of the individual for example and the GPL crew would be closer to the ideals of communism where it is more about the community.

Some solutions for this problem? Develop programs and drivers in realtively "patent-free" countries (India, for example?),

That doesn't really help anything as even though it is developed outside of a patent following country it still would be in infringement in the countries that do have software patents.

do "clean-room reverse-engineering"

This as well doesn't guarantee that it will be "patent-free". The problem with software patents is that you don't need to copy code to be in infringement. One can simply duplicate the functionality and be in infringement. One doesn't even have to be knowingly infringing on a patent to be in infringement.

[evolution]

I have to disagree with open source views being more Libertarian then Communism but then again even the open source movement operates under a guise. It would also depend on which of the various open source factions you want to compare it to. BSD would be closer to libertarian as it aims more for the rights of the individual for example and the GPL crew would be closer to the ideals of communism where it is more about the community.

Well, my point of view is that I think linux kernel / OS software development is more like "socialsm" than "communism", as communism IMPOSES a community to do something, whereas socialism can be considered as a more moderated / democratic way of communism (something more like "democratic development")...

You also have a very plausible point-of-view, I respect it...!

That doesn't really help anything as even though it is developed outside of a patent following country it still would be in infringement in the countries that do have software patents.

This as well doesn't guarantee that it will be "patent-free". The problem with software patents is that you don't need to copy code to be in infringement. One can simply duplicate the functionality and be in infringement. One doesn't even have to be knowingly infringing on a patent to be in infringement.

So all, in all, patents are like what I said: they destroy progress... and are, unfortunately, a major threat to Linux, Open-Source...

Cheers

[not.sure]

What if Microsoft bought Redhat?

[mrugiero]

[OFFTOPIC]

Well, nowadays there isn't just communism and capitalism, but 4 distinct political/social branches.

Communism -> Neo-Liberalism -> Authoritarianism -> Libertarianism

Linux isn't communism at all; in reality, Linux is like more a Leftist/Libertarian movement. (I don't understand why a lot of people confund/mistake Communism with Libertarianism when they're very different political/economical/social ideals).

Some useful info click here.

[/OFFTOPIC]

Hmmm... I think it is a bit more complex. See, two of them are ways to use the power, and two are economical politics. Also, they are too polarized. What about interventionist capitalism? It is not communism, private property exists, just they have bigger taxes to redistribute, being that to the poor or to different sectors of the economy, or to education, etc.
Also, being two ways of directing the country (or whatever it is being managed) and two ways of directing the economy, you can combine them as they are independant.
In fact, in Argentina our first neo-liberal government was a dictatorship. And it was authoritarian. Both, you see? And you can see authoritarian (in fact, most are) communisms. About libertarians, I'm not sure my country had that in the last 50 years...

[mrugiero]

Hmmm... I think it is a bit more complex. See, two of them are ways to use the power, and two are economical politics. Also, they are too polarized. What about interventionist capitalism? It is not communism, private property exists, just they have bigger taxes to redistribute, being that to the poor or to different sectors of the economy, or to education, etc.
Also, being two ways of directing the country (or whatever it is being managed) and two ways of directing the economy, you can combine them as they are independant.
In fact, in Argentina our first neo-liberal government was a dictatorship. And it was authoritarian. Both, you see? And you can see authoritarian (in fact, most are) communisms. About libertarians, I'm not sure my country had that in the last 50 years...

1 minute edit limit ??

In fact, looking the compass you linked to, it uses the four as directions, so it is implied it can be combined and not be "total" whatever it is.

[wirrbeltier]

Oh noez, Politics!

+1 for patents being the greatest threat to a widespread adoption of Linux, though.
The mere idea that you can trivially make claims to own an idea, not an implementation, is simply out of this age. Especially since the large ones in the industry have started to use it as a normal trick of the trade to keep the smaller competition in check. Once Linux makes enough money for some party, the patent trolls will come to leech off what they percieve as their share.