Hi list, On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:46 PM, jtd <[email protected]> wrote:
Any way this is not the forum to vent our political spleen. So i wont > be replying unless it is specific to foss. > > -- > Rgds > JTD > I agree with this. I will limit to only FOSS. JTD wrote: Wrong. Foss does not aim to take somebody's work and make it public. > Foss aims to let developers make their work available to the public > while retaining full rights for the developer. > And for the record the state is by no means the public. > For communists also, state is only an apparatus for oppression. No difference, even when the communists are in power! But I can't figure our the difference in 'taking' or 'allowing' the software to be public. The aim is to make it 'public', so not much difference. On 'retaining full rights for the developer': Think of a developer, who works for a proprietary software firm. Does he get any rights on the software he produces other than the wage? Marx has written much about this situation. He called it as 'alienation of product from the worker. Communism is for ending this alienation. So, what is the difference between FOSS and communism, on this aspect? > > > > > At technology > > front capitalists are playing two roles: 1. Constantly innovate > > technology through research and technology for being competitive > > with other capitalists and for plundering the labour force more > > effectively. > > So dont innovate? or more precisely, innovate but as per the little > red book? Who said they shouldn't innovate? The innovate and so they rule the world. If they are innovating as per 'red' prescriptions, they will be given party cards, that's all. > > > > 2. Keep the technology as 'secret' to have edge with competitor. > > > > When monopoly intensifies, the second aspect turns to be anti-human > > and limits the whole progress of human kind. It is at this point of > > time, FOSS as a spontaneous movement came into being to oppose this > > monopoly. > > If they innovate to fight other capitalist, then there isnt a monopoly > right?. > > Please remember the case against Microsoft in which American court ordered bifurcation of the corporation.Monopoly is not allowed even by the capitalist principles of freedom of competition. But the capitalist practices lead to monopolization. By the mathematical theory of probability also, monopoly is not possible. That's why, with elite concepts FOSS came into being.That's why I called FOSS spontaneous. With regards, T Jayarajan -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
