Talking about capitalism VS any other ideology would take much more than some replies on slashdot, but here are my main arguments.
First you have to realize that you are living on the earth. Which have very limited ressources. These ressources are really easy to manage to continue living here. Capitalism dosent care about wasting or not the ressources, if they are available, if I have the cash to use them, I will, whatever it could do in the future. From a long term view, that is bad. The united states, as we know is the more capitalism representent country on almost all the aspects. We also know that if the USA continue consuming the goods they do at the same rate they do it, in not so many years, the earth will simply not be able to give what it is waited for. Capitalism is about wanting more money. But wait, if you was happy in your life already by having an amount of money in exchange of your job, why wanting more? You dont need more than one or 2 cars, really. Why an human could accumulate incredible sums or money when others can't even learn how to read and write? I dont say we needabsolute communism, but its jst stupid to need so much cash when you wont even be able to appreciate the goods it will brings to you.
That is a fact, the occidentals capitalims driven culture consume too much. It seems funny if we look at it at short term view. Well, don't think your little kids will have it as easy as you get it right now. Not bothering about what capitalsm is doing to the earth means you dont give a fuck about the future.
We have to cleverly organise our societies to make them more educated, intelligent and then think to access to a real democratic governement.
Right now the US gov is so fucking far from being a real democratic one. The goal for the policians is to keep he populatation as stupid as they can. This is easier to says anythings, to lies to them and to have a good image, to get (re)elected. The politicians wants the power and the cash, not the well being of the population. I really think the capitalism caused that. You think this is good to see the governement constantly lying to his population in order to keep the guys-to-the-top always more rich?
Now, what the heck is the open source movement is this!?! Liberty seems to be the foundation of the OSM. Capitalism (and governement driven by) is all against letting the population obtain free information, that could make people more clever and eventually think about what the governement is really doing. Or at least, if the gov dosent really block the access to the information, they are really not encouraging it. Free softwares are a way to encourage the development of the science without a capitalsm point of view, without the "i'm gonna write a better software than you, and I will have the power/monopoly on this part of the industry!".
I think that people who love the open source love the science in general. But science used by capitalism guys is used for what? you got it, to beat others and make the cash they could do if you werent there. Hey, but science can help people everywhere on the planet! Keeping science discoveries secret in order to make cash of it is relatively sensed at this time, because you have to live from something, i understand.
From a long term view, if many people would like to share what they just found, it will help everyone around including themselves. How could he live if he gives it for free then? well, that is where the changes isnt happening in our societies.
Governements should pay. WE pay the governement, we are the governement, and we pay each of us for the work we do. yes this is communism. But wait, it didnt worked in russia, people was not that happy and this caused many shit! I know.
Im talking about scientific communism here. First, it CANNOT happen if a bunch of people are really more clever than the others and they manage this kind of governement. EDUCATION must be THE priority to reach this kind of balanced system. Once the majority of joe sixpack
the Open Source movement is one of my main motivation to code and learn more. Its not about wanting money or more money, its about having a passion and make the work i do available to everyone in the world you would want to look at it or use it. When you do something, the way you do it, is driven by the ideology behind of it. Sorry I dont beleive in capitalism because i think its simply a stupid short term way of thinking.
IBM and such is maybe making money on the back of people who code for free, but the code is still free. And thats what people who write it want. At least these compagnie understand that there is a huge potential in the OSS. Don't the article writer think that if big capitalism industries like IBM profits that much from open source, its because open source IS currently really good?
OK i dont have much in my pocket for coding for free, but as a student i'm happier with more knowledge and less money, for the moment. Of course, once i'll have to get a real job I will have to get paid for the code i produce. All the source and projects i will had let on the internet will certainly help me getting a good job. If I cant get paid to develop open source softwares, sure i will continue to use my time to contribute the movement out of my job.
But wait, i still havent choose the exact path i'm gonna follow in the futur years at school. I'd like to learn some about politics. I will need this skill to be more efficient in my activism.
The governements and learning institutions are the first we should "harass" about then not using free softwares. My goal for the moment would be to convert the places in my country's governement to use linux as desktop for example, when its technically possible.
Also, I try to become better writting open letters and articles to try to explain the open source to the mass (in my native language heh). Ignorance about this technology is the number one enemy in my view.
Well, i'm becoming pretty much offtopic. But it was to say that the guy who wrote the article simply dosent have any kind of social consience and think for himself at the too much present moment.
Dont you read what i posted before replying?
Look:
By the same token, if an application isn't comfortable to me, then I'm going to pick another.
If you dont like the way the app works when you install it, why dont you change the settings? When you dont like the color of the default background qith KDE, do you switch for Gnome? Thats my point, if the app is good enough to adapt to anyone, then there is no need for another app!
Do we want a choice of applications, or do we want one massive, bloated but common set of applications that do everything that anyone might conceive that we want them to do? Like Windows and Office I suppose, but if that's all that you're looking for then a trip to Wal-Mart will fix that for you. I think that we have something better already.
Another proof you did not read what I wrote (bad english I know I assume it).
How can you have a "one-massive,-bloated-but-common-set-of-applicatio ns-that-do-everything-that-anyone-might-conceive-t hat-we-want-them-to-do" when its done the open source way? Is the KDE apps suite that much poor?
And if you dont want it, you can of course use something else. but if there is so much good things and energy done on one project, which is *fully* configurable, settable and more, which gives you the choice to arange the app the way you really need it, why not doing that?
The choice, the scalability, the customizability and the quality should be in ONE (open source) app itself, not diluated into many smaller projects.
Remember, i did not say it could be an easy task to manage/program these kind of apps, but it worth it!
The linux kernel IS this kind of software... And i bet you love it and you respect the standards used by this piece of code. Why dont you use any other kernels/OSes when the linux kernel is playin with your nerves with something? Because its open and configurable as hell, as well as being really MASSIVE(which it think you said wasnt really a good thing).
The fact isnt about having choice or not, but more of using and helping developping one application that will please to everybody. Easy task? Not. But still possible. The software must have many level of possible configurations. Higher could be buttons and "only point and click interface". Then comes, progressivly more and and more options for the power user. Scripting should be implemented in almost all serious app projects. The lowest configuration possible should obviously be the source code itself. If something can be adapted to yout need while keeping the best existing standards in its use, why looking for an alternative? When you want to get better at sport, you dont put your brain in another body, your make the necessary exercices to make your body adapt to the needs. And it works. My comparison isnt perfect but explain what i'm trying to say.
I cant explain all the points of my current argumentation, a webpage i'm gonna write will. Anyways, explain me please why you would need another app if another can do what you want, when you simply have to set it for.
(the concept already exist (the linux kernel) but i think its not used for mostly of the normal apps)
HEY, WAKE UP! "Choice is good Choice is good!" We heard it enough now!!
Its all about standards, GOOD standards. Why aren't you fucking complaining about not having the choice of which standard you could use to have a decent graphical interface manager? Don't you realise you are stuck with the base system that the X consortium is develloping! thats EVIL man! I'm wainting to see you begin to code your own GUI system for GNU/linux! Because choice is so important!
The open source ideology for computers isnt based on having the choice of the apps, its based on the fact that you can freely modify and make everything you want better. By being able to make something better and sharing it freely with everybody, you eliminate the need of releasing something else that will do the same fucking function, but with diferant standards. The Open source permit the people to work together, why the heck would you want to waste your time building your things on your side, thinking that YOU got the best idea? Share you idea and if its REALLY good or even better, be SURE that your idea WILL BE used, and with no waste of energy doing it by yourself. Even more, thousand of people will be able to make you idea better.
If each big project had to be separated into many little project that you think could encourage the motivation of doing somehting better than the others, and then make the technology advance that way, i think you are wrong. Thats look like a capitalist guy into the open source world. You are not against the others but with em. I really think that the motivation is higher when we all want to make "something" the best that humans can do togethers, than what humans against humans could do by being in competition.
I dont think i found the way the open source should absolutly be. But I see time and energy seems to be wasted or at least, not as well used as they could be in the open source community. I think its because people dont ask themselves where the motivation of doing it and releasing it under GPL came from, for each them/us.
If you know that the software you use is the best the humans can develop at the time you are living, because they all put their energy together to make it good, you should not want to have the choice, because you still have the choice of suggesting changes and improvement to this god dammit software.
Now its the time for flamers to make fun of the quality of the english i wrote. And for the intelligent people who could see the ideas in the background of these poor english skills, to argue my ideas the best they can.
Your post is a "by default linux zealot" one. Stop trolling please, or if you wasnt, Windows isnt 100% bad. Why not take the good and easy things that end users already like to make linux easier for em? Linux will stay open source even if it have the exact windows look. The diferance is you will be able to change easily what ever you want.
"What is a good thing is the increasing agreement on standard protocols for exchange between the two."
For this i must say you are absolutly right.
"Who is right? Neither of us - it's a personal judgement."
This can't be right. Mathematicly there is always one of two things that works better for something (we are all humans and we're not diferant to REALLY NEED a SO diferant desktop). It is maybe hard to calculate but its only a matter of variables. Putting efforts in 2 desktops project at the time looks to me as a waste of energy. The error was maybe at the beginning when they each started their own projects, because now they technically can't merge. But continuing each projects separetedly wont make one desktop become better faster. As you said, standarize protocols between both is a good solution, but we arive at a point that if there is so much same protocol we get the same desktop base, separated into 2 diferently customized ones. Which one is written in C and the other in C++.
Dont anyone see any waste of work time here?
Lets makes happen the KDE and GNOME merge. For the ones who say that the competition was pushing the two teams to develop better things among the other, why not bringing a linux (100% open source) desktop to the end user could not be a good motivation?
If you think internet or anything cause bad social-side effects to society, you simply have to improve the education level about the "problems" in the schools, at every levels.
It may not be easy, but why not fix the problem at its root? Lets adapt us to the changes.
Lets wait some years to see too realistic video games gets completly banned from almost all countries. Because these games will allow the player, among other things, to cut and see any parts on the body of the virtual character. Not a problem when 3d graphics arent that realistic yet. But once it will looks like TV or better, with differants zoom levels, some people won't like children to play with it.
Oh, and stileproject.com could become useless when it'll happen.
I really think he got arrested only because he sold illegally imported modchips. Because why not take down CNN.com too, they report 0sec worldwide illegal activities too.
Slashdot Mirror
Talking about capitalism VS any other ideology would take much more than some replies on slashdot, but here are my main arguments.
First you have to realize that you are living on the earth. Which have very limited ressources. These ressources are really easy to manage to continue living here. Capitalism dosent care about wasting or not the ressources, if they are available, if I have the cash to use them, I will, whatever it could do in the future. From a long term view, that is bad. The united states, as we know is the more capitalism representent country on almost all the aspects. We also know that if the USA continue consuming the goods they do at the same rate they do it, in not so many years, the earth will simply not be able to give what it is waited for. Capitalism is about wanting more money. But wait, if you was happy in your life already by having an amount of money in exchange of your job, why wanting more? You dont need more than one or 2 cars, really. Why an human could accumulate incredible sums or money when others can't even learn how to read and write? I dont say we needabsolute communism, but its jst stupid to need so much cash when you wont even be able to appreciate the goods it will brings to you.
That is a fact, the occidentals capitalims driven culture consume too much. It seems funny if we look at it at short term view. Well, don't think your little kids will have it as easy as you get it right now. Not bothering about what capitalsm is doing to the earth means you dont give a fuck about the future.
We have to cleverly organise our societies to make them more educated, intelligent and then think to access to a real democratic governement.
Right now the US gov is so fucking far from being a real democratic one. The goal for the policians is to keep he populatation as stupid as they can. This is easier to says anythings, to lies to them and to have a good image, to get (re)elected. The politicians wants the power and the cash, not the well being of the population. I really think the capitalism caused that. You think this is good to see the governement constantly lying to his population in order to keep the guys-to-the-top always more rich?
Now, what the heck is the open source movement is this!?!
Liberty seems to be the foundation of the OSM. Capitalism (and governement driven by) is all against letting the population obtain free information, that could make people more clever and eventually think about what the governement is really doing. Or at least, if the gov dosent really block the access to the information, they are really not encouraging it. Free softwares are a way to encourage the development of the science without a capitalsm point of view, without the "i'm gonna write a better software than you, and I will have the power/monopoly on this part of the industry!".
I think that people who love the open source love the science in general. But science used by capitalism guys is used for what? you got it, to beat others and make the cash they could do if you werent there. Hey, but science can help people everywhere on the planet! Keeping science discoveries secret in order to make cash of it is relatively sensed at this time, because you have to live from something, i understand.
From a long term view, if many people would like to share what they just found, it will help everyone around including themselves. How could he live if he gives it for free then? well, that is where the changes isnt happening in our societies.
Governements should pay. WE pay the governement, we are the governement, and we pay each of us for the work we do. yes this is communism. But wait, it didnt worked in russia, people was not that happy and this caused many shit! I know.
Im talking about scientific communism here. First, it CANNOT happen if a bunch of people are really more clever than the others and they manage this kind of governement. EDUCATION must be THE priority to reach this kind of balanced system. Once the majority of joe sixpack
the Open Source movement is one of my main motivation to code and learn more. Its not about wanting money or more money, its about having a passion and make the work i do available to everyone in the world you would want to look at it or use it.
When you do something, the way you do it, is driven by the ideology behind of it. Sorry I dont beleive in capitalism because i think its simply a stupid short term way of thinking.
IBM and such is maybe making money on the back of people who code for free, but the code is still free. And thats what people who write it want.
At least these compagnie understand that there is a huge potential in the OSS. Don't the article writer think that if big capitalism industries like IBM profits that much from open source, its because open source IS currently really good?
OK i dont have much in my pocket for coding for free, but as a student i'm happier with more knowledge and less money, for the moment. Of course, once i'll have to get a real job I will have to get paid for the code i produce. All the source and projects i will had let on the internet will certainly help me getting a good job.
If I cant get paid to develop open source softwares, sure i will continue to use my time to contribute the movement out of my job.
But wait, i still havent choose the exact path i'm gonna follow in the futur years at school. I'd like to learn some about politics. I will need this skill to be more efficient in my activism.
The governements and learning institutions are the first we should "harass" about then not using free softwares. My goal for the moment would be to convert the places in my country's governement to use linux as desktop for example, when its technically possible.
Also, I try to become better writting open letters and articles to try to explain the open source to the mass (in my native language heh). Ignorance about this technology is the number one enemy in my view.
Well, i'm becoming pretty much offtopic. But it was to say that the guy who wrote the article simply dosent have any kind of social consience and think for himself at the too much present moment.
If you dont like the way the app works when you install it, why dont you change the settings? When you dont like the color of the default background qith KDE, do you switch for Gnome? Thats my point, if the app is good enough to adapt to anyone, then there is no need for another app!
Another proof you did not read what I wrote (bad english I know I assume it).
How can you have a "one-massive,-bloated-but-common-set-of-applicati
The choice, the scalability, the customizability and the quality should be in ONE (open source) app itself, not diluated into many smaller projects.
Remember, i did not say it could be an easy task to manage/program these kind of apps, but it worth it!
The linux kernel IS this kind of software... And i bet you love it and you respect the standards used by this piece of code. Why dont you use any other kernels/OSes when the linux kernel is playin with your nerves with something? Because its open and configurable as hell, as well as being really MASSIVE(which it think you said wasnt really a good thing).
The fact isnt about having choice or not, but more of using and helping developping one application that will please to everybody. Easy task? Not. But still possible. The software must have many level of possible configurations. Higher could be buttons and "only point and click interface". Then comes, progressivly more and and more options for the power user. Scripting should be implemented in almost all serious app projects. The lowest configuration possible should obviously be the source code itself.
If something can be adapted to yout need while keeping the best existing standards in its use, why looking for an alternative?
When you want to get better at sport, you dont put your brain in another body, your make the necessary exercices to make your body adapt to the needs. And it works. My comparison isnt perfect but explain what i'm trying to say.
I cant explain all the points of my current argumentation, a webpage i'm gonna write will.
Anyways, explain me please why you would need another app if another can do what you want, when you simply have to set it for.
(the concept already exist (the linux kernel) but i think its not used for mostly of the normal apps)
HEY, WAKE UP! "Choice is good Choice is good!" We heard it enough now!!
Its all about standards, GOOD standards. Why aren't you fucking complaining about not having the choice of which standard you could use to have a decent graphical interface manager? Don't you realise you are stuck with the base system that the X consortium is develloping! thats EVIL man! I'm wainting to see you begin to code your own GUI system for GNU/linux! Because choice is so important!
The open source ideology for computers isnt based on having the choice of the apps, its based on the fact that you can freely modify and make everything you want better. By being able to make something better and sharing it freely with everybody, you eliminate the need of releasing something else that will do the same fucking function, but with diferant standards. The Open source permit the people to work together, why the heck would you want to waste your time building your things on your side, thinking that YOU got the best idea? Share you idea and if its REALLY good or even better, be SURE that your idea WILL BE used, and with no waste of energy doing it by yourself. Even more, thousand of people will be able to make you idea better.
If each big project had to be separated into many little project that you think could encourage the motivation of doing somehting better than the others, and then make the technology advance that way, i think you are wrong.
Thats look like a capitalist guy into the open source world. You are not against the others but with em.
I really think that the motivation is higher when we all want to make "something" the best that humans can do togethers, than what humans against humans could do by being in competition.
I dont think i found the way the open source should absolutly be. But I see time and energy seems to be wasted or at least, not as well used as they could be in the open source community. I think its because people dont ask themselves where the motivation of doing it and releasing it under GPL came from, for each them/us.
If you know that the software you use is the best the humans can develop at the time you are living, because they all put their energy together to make it good, you should not want to have the choice, because you still have the choice of suggesting changes and improvement to this god dammit software.
Now its the time for flamers to make fun of the quality of the english i wrote. And for the intelligent people who could see the ideas in the background of these poor english skills, to argue my ideas the best they can.
Your post is a "by default linux zealot" one.
Stop trolling please, or if you wasnt, Windows isnt 100% bad. Why not take the good and easy things that end users already like to make linux easier for em? Linux will stay open source even if it have the exact windows look. The diferance is you will be able to change easily what ever you want.
"the maglev technique was excluded because it does not match the wheel-track technique used by railways in China" Seriously!?!?
This can't be right. Mathematicly there is always one of two things that works better for something (we are all humans and we're not diferant to REALLY NEED a SO diferant desktop). It is maybe hard to calculate but its only a matter of variables. Putting efforts in 2 desktops project at the time looks to me as a waste of energy. The error was maybe at the beginning when they each started their own projects, because now they technically can't merge. But continuing each projects separetedly wont make one desktop become better faster. As you said, standarize protocols between both is a good solution, but we arive at a point that if there is so much same protocol we get the same desktop base, separated into 2 diferently customized ones. Which one is written in C and the other in C++.
Dont anyone see any waste of work time here?
Why is the 1.3 still so popular? Is the version 2 still unstable or something?
Lets makes happen the KDE and GNOME merge. For the ones who say that the competition was pushing the two teams to develop better things among the other, why not bringing a linux (100% open source) desktop to the end user could not be a good motivation?
If you think internet or anything cause bad social-side effects to society, you simply have to improve the education level about the "problems" in the schools, at every levels. It may not be easy, but why not fix the problem at its root? Lets adapt us to the changes.
We need the same standards. But lets make these standards to be the best. Thats it
To the moderators: I think this one is really much more insightful than funny
I really thought that mozilla was free!
Lets wait some years to see too realistic video games gets completly banned from almost all countries.
Because these games will allow the player, among other things, to cut and see any parts on the body of the virtual character. Not a problem when 3d graphics arent that realistic yet.
But once it will looks like TV or better, with differants zoom levels, some people won't like children to play with it.
Oh, and stileproject.com could become useless when it'll happen.
Pure Governement Corruption (d)
i'll begin doing some php only when microsoft will have released Visual MSPHP. Thats it.
I really think he got arrested only because he sold illegally imported modchips. Because why not take down CNN.com too, they report 0sec worldwide illegal activities too.