[plug] Open Source and Communism (Ayn Rand is a nut)

[Shayne]

Chris,

First, keep in mind that being a Christian doesn't preclude you from an 
interest in politics, I realise there are some religious dialogues on 
"worldlyness" that seems to indicate so, But keep in mind that old JC
was political himself. Being a creature of the left , some of the most
dynamic activists I've known have been Ardent Christians , in once case
a guy who was constantly being arrested down south protecting "gods forrests".
And then theres the lovely old Sister Veronica from UWA whos been a 
ferocious champion of Human and Social rights.
Same too with the right, plenty of Christains there. Really Church and State
are separate matters, but that doesn't preclude you from taking part, just
keep in mind that they are different spheres.

*ANYWAY* I actually think that where as Proprietry software is strictly a 
beast of capitalism, that doesn't mean Open source is Communist at all.
If one *really* wanted to ascribe an ideological nexus, it would be between
Libertarianism(right anarchy) & Bautikun Style Anarchism(left anarchy), and 
those ideologies are probably best summarised in the argumentation of ESR and 
RMS respectively. There both anarchists, it's just the space of the discourse
left over really differs only after the wide goal of removing the overarching 
power structure has been removed. If that makes any sense.

The Linux Kernel project strongly resembles in some sense the power 
distributions that naturally emerge in syndicalist social organisations where 
heirachical power has been removed. Linus is the leader, only because people 
chose to follow him, not because they have to.

Oh and I hasten to add that it may be wise to take the article with a grain of 
salt, as with the strong Randist inclination it is prudent to add that Ayn 
Rand was widely regarded as a Kook. Consider that the Ayn Rand institute 
aggressively pursues critics, "ex communicates" dissenters, sees "altruism" 
as a great evil, and has copped the ire of many cult watch organisations.

http://students.depaul.edu/~sdowney/cult_def.htm

Why the Ayn rand institute would disagree with the article;-
http://microsoft.aynrand.org/ (A verry PRO microsoft bit of writing)
http://environmentalism.aynrand.org/ (Anti environmentalism)
Most disturbingly;-
http://multiculturalism.aynrand.org/ (Anti multiculturalism).

Beware of this lady.

On Sunday 17 November 2002 08:18, Chris Caston wrote:
> A good article to read on this subject is:
>
> The capitalist view of open source.
>
> (http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-05-18-007-20-OP)
>
> It basically describes software as a form of wealth and a product of
> mans mind. According to Ayne Rands theory Lassie Farez (sp) Capitalism
> man or (woman) can do whatever they like with their wealth.
>
> They could flush it down the toilet if they so wished. They could
> certainly release it under a license such as the GPL.
>
> In my opinion its important to see things in perspective. I'm a
> Christian and I keep my distance away from idealogy and that includes
> both capitalism and communism.
>
> I see open source as a best practice but am careful to not take it to
> seriously. I don't want to see software or anything else you may wish to
> put a fancy coptleft licnese on become a poltical debate.
>
> Imagine a whole society built using the ideals of open source.
> Even if it were possible you could waste a greate deal of your life
> trying to achieve it.
>
> regards,
>
> Chris Caston
>
> On Sun, 2002-11-17 at 13:58, Leon Brooks wrote:
> > There have been a couple of comments linking Open Source and Communism
> > bandied about recently, so here are a couple of points have have
> > pre-pondered (ie they are preponderous points) before the topic comes up.
> >
> >  * Open Source is going to happen anyway - whether or not it is
> >    government funded/sponsored/legislated and regardless of the
> >    philosophy behind it - for financial reasons. It's sad that most
> >    people diving into it seem to be blind to its more important
> >    attributes.
> >
> >  * Open Source is different to Communism in several important ways.
> >    The most obvious is that when you share your cow's milk, you have
> >    less milk, but when you share your software's source, you end up
> >    with *more* software.
> >
> >  * The second most obvious is that in Communism as she are practiced,
> >    control is centralised; in Open Source - particularly the GPLish
> >    flavours - control is carefully and deliberately decentralised.
> >    Most successful projects operate in `benevolent dictator' mode,
> >    but by their very nature what little control they have is purely
> >    by mutual assent.
> >
> >    In point of fact proprietary software is closer to Communism in
> >    this regard, and Open Source closer to Anarchism.
> >
> >  * Communism's theoretical basis is `from each according to his
> >    ability, to each according to his need' but Open Source's paradigm
> >    more closely resembles `from each according to his need to solve a
> >    problem, to each according to his ability to use a search engine'.
> >
> >    If that needs explaining: the more you need a solution, the more
> >    inclined you will be to adapt or start an OSS project to provide
> >    that solution. The better able you are to drive a search engine,
> >    the more likely you will find the most appropriate pre-existing
> >    solution.
> >
> > Cheers; Leon