Post 2174611 by technomancy@icosahedron.website
 (DIR) More posts by technomancy@icosahedron.website
 (DIR) Post #2174611 by technomancy@icosahedron.website
       2018-12-21T21:42:04Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       this post by @enkiv2 explains well a particular feeling I have on the tension between open source and free software: http://www.lord-enki.net/medium-backup/2018-12-21_Free-software-and-the-revolt-against-transactionality-3a44a1b7f96d.html"Software intended for businesses has a need that software intended for individuals does not: scalability. Software intended for individuals can be unstandardized, ad-hoc, quirky, and personal."
       
 (DIR) Post #2174612 by technomancy@icosahedron.website
       2018-12-21T21:43:01Z
       
       1 likes, 1 repeats
       
       from the same article: "For twenty years, we’ve been making corporations rich by buying into standardization and scale — making it feasible for them to funnel us into silos. We can stop this process, and perhaps even reverse it, by refusing to make un-frivolous software. Personal software should be personal: it should not scale or conform; it should chafe at strictures the same way you do, and burst out of any box that dare enclose it."
       
 (DIR) Post #2174613 by technomancy@icosahedron.website
       2018-12-21T21:52:28Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       my Clojure work has been about building large-scale systems that aren't that useful to Actual Humans.my work with the Atreus is more personal; I'm literally building a device that'll only be used by one person. it can't be mass-produced.my work with Fennel feels the same; it's powering games I've made that try to make political/artistic statements. people use it in their WM dotfiles. it's not going to power some cluster of microservices on k8s. (maybe it will? but only by accident)
       
 (DIR) Post #2180026 by technomancy@icosahedron.website
       2018-12-22T02:18:29Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       we're seeing more and more people come to this realization that corporate appropriation of open source is harmful; the article I linked above as well as https://blog.joeardent.net/2017/01/say-no-to-corporate-friendly-licenses/ but there are plenty more being written all the timeit's interesting to compare this to RMS's writings because a lot of these people are saying RMS was right without coming out and saying "hey you know what, RMS was right"
       
 (DIR) Post #2180044 by hierarchon@cybre.space
       2018-12-22T02:26:02Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @technomancy counterpoint: the GPL (and any software license!) only keeps honest people honest, as noted by the existence of GPL violations like http://astrange.ithinksw.net/ico/ and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandalthe countercounterpoint is that large evil companies can be surprisingly honest; i used to work for a megacorp that was very strict about license compliance (AGPL was basically a 'never, ever use this' signal)
       
 (DIR) Post #2180246 by technomancy@icosahedron.website
       2018-12-22T02:37:01Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @hierarchon lawful evil is a big thing, especially in corporate US
       
 (DIR) Post #2181186 by carlozancanaro@mastodon.technology
       2018-12-22T03:00:39Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @technomancy This is harder when we need to interact with other systems, built by other people. How do you make IM software that "chafe[s] at structures"? The software needs to interoperate with others, and thus can't be purely personal. Hence, standardisation.I'm really on board for people having the ability to build personal systems, but to do that in the modern world I think we need standardised "languages" to communicate with other peoples' software (whether personal or corporate).
       
 (DIR) Post #2181187 by technomancy@icosahedron.website
       2018-12-22T03:09:20Z
       
       0 likes, 2 repeats
       
       @carlozancanaro a truly P2P secure instant messaging system would be a good example here. there is no possible monetization angle thru control or surveillance, hence it resists appropriation.we are so accustomed to software that comes from VC backed startups that the idea of having your computer communicate directly with my computer is revolutionary and unconventional. but that is literally the whole point of the Internet!