On Oct 11, 2006, at 4:16 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
I don't quite understand? Who objects to open source? It's not of any political importance, but it seems to be a nice thing to have around. And how could leftist opinion of any sort, pro or con, make any difference here anyhow?
As I recall, when the Macintosh computer first came out, some of the best software, notably RedRyder, a great modem program for Mac, was written and distributed freely by enthusiasts. This isn't exactly open source software, but it is the genesis of it, including the attitude of it. It was political in nature, just like the Mac itself. The operative adjective is "alternative". The software was written by people who did not want to work for a corporation, even the enlightened Apple. The difference is this: in the absence of the corporate environment, common sense and creativity are not stifled. Unfortunately, there are unintended consequences. Corporations glom onto anything of merit and rarely is the creator paid (YouTube is a notable exception). The recycling mind-set of the 60s and 70s hippies gave birth to today's pre-faded jeans. So, likewise, looking through one peep-hole, we might assert that open source, shareware, freeware, beerware, and anti-corporate common-sense folk artists are the farms corporations harvest to feed their otherwise barren selves. It's a modern day raiding of the commons, and political in nature, methinks. Dan Scanlan
