On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 17:51:31 +0000, Eduardo Valle wrote:
> Rob it is incredible how your focus is on the machine,

My focus is on the individuals that use those machines.

> but to make
> those machines get connected there
> is and are a infra structure that is NOT neutral, equal and free.

Indeed there is. One means of addressing this is in the software that 
connects to, communicates over, and runs it.

I also support groups that seek to intervene politically and 
economically in this.

I do not however support groups that attack the freedoms of software 
users in the name of "Open Source".

> It seems completely naif and stupid to mantain these position under
> these condition.
> I know your work and Futherfield and admire it but there is a gap
> between on what you think and the digital condition.

My focus on Furtherfield is deliberately limited to a positive view of 
digital art, and my comments in this discussion are deliberately limited 
to the idea of Free Software as opposed to Open Source or a broader 
technocultural gestalt. This isn't the entirety of my concerns, as I 
allude to above. I am certainly to opposed to broader activism and 
reform.

> Monopolies, Programmed obsolescence and you thinking that you are
> free ...

I have explained how Free Software addresses monopolies and 
obsolescence, and also the limitations of my claim of freedom in its 
use.

> Google the monopolies of search engines, huge enterprise and you are
> happy that they support "free" software...

I am where they do. Returning value from corporations to society is a 
good thing where it happens.

If we were discussing corporate or economic or political or social 
reform outside of software that would be a different matter.

Even by the time we get to Software As A Service, Google is fail.

> ICANN Dictatorship in the Merchant order city and you think that
> everything is fine...

I do not think that everything is fine. My point is that Free Software 
is a key part of the solution to corporate enclosure of the noosphere 
that cannot be replaced with vaguer notions of "open", and that trying 
to do so serves the interests of those corporations.

- Rob.

_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Reply via email to