Comment by geocar
4 days ago
> When talking about permacomputing, for example, I don't know why one wouldn't encourage, in any way possible, commercial viability that would lead to the stated goal.
Because capitalism is what destroys the world. Fucking duh.
There's very little point in spending so much time thinking about C compilers in forth that run on scavenged z80s these days if capitalism is actually viable.
> Because capitalism is what destroys the world. Fucking duh.
The issue is that “commercial” includes plenty of not-necessarily-capitalist entities as well, like sole proprietors and cooperatives (sole proprietors being single-member worker cooperatives).
Of course, a society in which worker cooperatives and individual craftspersons are the dominant forms of economic participation is probably (hopefully!) also a society which has done away with intellectual property and the enforcement thereof, rendering software license terms (including non-commercial use clauses) entirely moot.
> The issue is that “commercial” includes plenty of not-necessarily-capitalist entities as well
I see no issue, and believe me, I have the deepest empathies for people who participate in capitalism under duress.
If you could explain why I or anyone else should need to help some people murder so that those "not-necessarily-capitalists" we are so worried about can use my software without legal threat, I would happily listen to it, but I think you will be unconvincing.
I mean, you have realised that someone could just ask, right? I could listen to them, and if they had a reason that I agreed was good, I could give them whatever they needed for themselves without accessorising myself to that murder that others would do with those things.
Digital artifacts are the modern form of the means of production. Making digital artifacts available under a libre/free is giving these modern means of production to the public by putting it into the commons.
By requiring an interaction and explicit permission, you're putting yourself as a gate keeper to the means of production. In the best case, the uses will depend on your temperament at the time of request. In the worst case, such as a state backed morality commission, this could lead to corruption and abuse.
Part of capitalism is the ownership of private property, including intellectual property. If your focus is on making sure you have control over your work for things you think are moral, then the modern copyright system is in place for you to keep that control.
My focus is on empowering people with tools and making sure those tools aren't restricted in their use by a small oligarchy.
1 reply →