In regards to this ongoing conversation. I think the term "Libreware" is appealing because it is distinct from the gratis interpretation of freeware or "free software" - I have found myself usually FLOSS in the past or (free libre open source software) although I understand there is some animosity towards the corporate open source moniker I think that in theory it explains to people some of the underlying freedoms better than just the word "free".
In regards to appropriation of the term "freegan" I would suggest that this will possibly just create more confusion as "freegan" is a term for someone who doesn't eat meat or dairy unless they find it in the dumpster or it would have otherwise gone to waste. It is also used by people who eat food secured from the waste of large corporate grocery stores that often throw out large amounts of food that is still edible because they are in the business of charging people for food not giving it away. I appreciate the emphasis on free software as a resistance movement and the analysis from a labor perspective rather than as simply someone who chooses to avoid using proprietary software. While I respect people who choose to avoid using proprietary software as a personal choice I think it is far more important that we build viable alternatives to the proprietary freedom limiting software and I think that abstention or boycott is one strategy but perhaps focusing on how libreware opposes domination in many regards might be effective as well. As far as using the term communist I suspect that word might be a little loaded by itself. But I do in general appreciate the emphasis on fighting for freedom, demanding freedom for others and the analysis. Thanks for the thought provoking discussion. Robbt (developer for the LibreTime project - a radio automation system built using libreware) On 2/13/20 7:13 PM, Thomas Lord wrote: It seems to me that the root of the free software movement is not "the four freedoms" - although they are critically important. Rather, the free software movement originates in the observation that proprietary software is a form of social domination. First, in a proprietary software world, while programmers cooperate to create software, nevertheless that software is alienated from them. The social order prohibits them from using the product of their own work as they see fit. What first suggested this to RMS, the stories go, was that a world of proprietary software sometimes arbitrarily compelled programmers not to cooperate among themselves or with others. A move to proprietary software divided and conquered the community of Lisp hackers. A move to a proprietary software prevented RMS from fixing a bug that interfered with the use of a printer at the AI Lab. Voluntary cooperation is one of the cornerstones of society, but a system of proprietary software vigorously suppresses voluntary cooperation. Second, in the proprietary software world of the 21st century, we have seen that software has become a means of technological domination. Software systems perform fully automated mass surveillance. Software systems increasingly engage in involuntary behavioral modification on a massive scale. These systems (for example the entirety of commercial social media and on-line advertising) serve a variety of brutal social practices, with no end in sight. In this way, the alienated product of programmer labor has come not only to dominate they themselves, but the whole of global society. The four freedoms, if they were to be fully realized, would represent a tactic of resistance - an attempt to take down the abstract, out of control, system of social domination that software has become. As the movement goes forward, it seems unlikely these will be the only tactics we need. As a community of activists, we have yet to really discover an effective strategy to combat proprietary software in social media, the internet of things, and so on. Yet the drive for software freedom - freedom from the domination of software systems alienated from us and semi-autonomously propelling us to an unfree society - remains the root of the movement. "Freegan" is not a good choice of word to describe those of us who struggle for software freedom. The word "freegan" describes a pattern of personal consumption. A freegan might mean someone who themselves declines to use proprietary software (when they have a choice at all). A freegan might mean someone who suggests others make the same choice. But because "freegan" expresses what is fundamentally a personal preference, it fails to convey that the free software movement is about liberating all people from the abstract social domination of computing systems. All power to the people, not to the firms and formations holding copyrights, patents, trade-secret server software, and surveillance platforms embedded throughout our environment. To find a better word, let's consider how software - which seems like an innately useful thing! - comes to dominate us through this process of alienation. In the world in which we live, a person whose most developed work skill is programming, is likely to have very little choice in how they earn their subsistence other than by developing software that is either formally proprietary (like Microsoft software or Google services), or that is formally libre (e.g. under a suitable license) but practically an element of a proprietary systems (e.g. Ubuntu or Red Hat). When people (with little choice) work for such systems of production, they produce the software that is then alienated from them and that then is integrated into a quasi-autonomous system of social domination. A fundamental demand of the free software movement, therefore, is a labor demand: that nobody who develops software should have to suffer that alienation from what they produce. We demand that when we write software, the software is for everyone equally - not for the private appropriation of some firm or government or other formation. When we put teeth behind our demand, it becomes a demand that takes control back of our own labor: We work as programmers for everyone, or we don't work. Yes, we might "selfishly" direct our efforts towards our own desires as programmers - but we never yield our right to share and cooperate freely, or to deprive others of these freedoms -- and we demand the same of all society. So, software freedom is about the right of programmers to their own time, and their own efforts. We reject prohibitions on cooperation. We reserve the right to use our work to help anyone, anywhere, as we see fit. We strive to construct a world in which these demands are met. Are such demands only for programmers? Of course not. We make tactical moves specific to programming, but we do not demand that other types of producers accept the kind of domination we reject for ourselves. There is a name for this already. We demand freedom in how we spend our time. We reject others being deprived of that self-same freedom. We are communists. -t On 2020-02-13 14:57, Bob Jonkman wrote: I knew I'd heard the word Freegan before. "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Although I expect there is still a lot of overlap between that group and out brand of Freegans. --Bob. -- Bob Jonkman <bjonk...@sobac.com> Phone: +1-519-635-9413 SOBAC Microcomputer Services http://sobac.com/sobac/ Software --- Office & Business Automation --- Consulting GnuPG Fngrprnt:04F7 742B 8F54 C40A E115 26C2 B912 89B0 D2CC E5EA On February 13, 2020 5:12:26 PM EST, Roberto Beltran <robertobelt...@protonmail.com> wrote: I've heard "freegan", which carries with it all the work vegans have done to market their cause, so that "freegan" gives an instant recognition to our cause too. That would be great if not for "freegan" already being in use for something else: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism I wouldn't be surprised if there was a lot of overlap between the two groups. I really think there might be too. I should go to vegan events to promote hahah --Roberto. _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list [5]firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss References 1. mailto:bjonk...@sobac.com 2. http://sobac.com/sobac/ 3. mailto:robertobelt...@protonmail.com 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism 5. mailto:email@example.com 6. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss References 1. mailto:bjonk...@sobac.com 2. http://sobac.com/sobac/ 3. mailto:robertobelt...@protonmail.com 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism 5. mailto:5]email@example.com 6. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss 7. mailto:bjonk...@sobac.com 8. http://sobac.com/sobac/ 9. mailto:robertobelt...@protonmail.com 10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism 11. mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org 12. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss 13. mailto:email@example.com 14. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss