Hi. On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 08:00:20AM -0400, Celejar wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 07:45:08 +0100 > Joe <j...@jretrading.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:17:37 -0400 > > Celejar <cele...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 21:09:32 +0200 > > > Alexandre Garreau <galex-...@galex-713.eu> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, they’re not submitted to network effect, Debian is not a social > > > > network. Moreover, Debian is non-lucrative. Currently nobody can > > > > get *power* from it. > > > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by non-lucrative, but even though > > > there's no money involved, that does not mean that there's no power. > > > The power to decide what software to include in the distribution and > > > what to exclude is certainly power. Debian has an elaborate > > > constitution, with all kinds of rules, and the organization has > > > considerable power over the distribution. This is similar, in my mind, > > > to the power that an organization like Facebook has over its network. > > > > > > > I think in this context that 'power' means power over the real world, > > not just within a medium. It is unlikely that Debian can swing an > > election result. Debian has rules, but not over what people are > > permitted to discuss. > > I concur completely with your distinction, and I agree that it's an > important one. The original topic of the conversation, however, was > Github and friends, and I doubt that Github can swing an election > result, either.
Github gathers personal information, Bing uses it to influence an election via search results manipulation. It's real easy if you have the same owner of both services. Reco
