this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
195 points (97.6% liked)
Technology
77790 readers
2432 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There are upsides.
Software freedom is usually associated with FOSS (legal and public exchange), but there's also scene (underground exchange based on personal connections).
The latter, of course, is not quite the heaven many people have learned to believe in, with everything being a public verified project with all the source code visible and legal to use for every purpose.
But the latter also has advantages, it's a non-neutered culture with all the old anarchist and hacker substrate.
Any heaven offered is usually a trap anyway.
I wonder if the whole purpose of promotion of FOSS by big companies was, long-term, this. Finding some way to abuse openness and collect for free the resource that becomes digital oil in the next stage, but only for those who own the foundries - computing resources for ML, that is.
Even if it wasn't, it seems that they are perfectly fine with it now.
I think it was, almost since mid-nineties. It's very notable how the whole initial visibility of FOSS came from universities and companies. Before that FOSS projects were not particularly visible compared to the scene in its various forms. (I was born in 1996, so talking about what I didn't see.)
GNU, for comparison, was considered that strange group of hackers somewhere out there.
I think it's when in popular culture hackers became some sort of anarchist heroes, - from movies to Star Wars EU etc, - then that culture also became something that had to be dealt with. Doesn't even matter if it really had such potential.
The threat was that personal computing and the scene combined are similar to the printing press, but multi-dimensional, - software, music, other art, exchange of it, - and the solution was to find the least potent branch. The branch that only aimed for exchange of gifts, public and legal and with no ideology attached (except for quasi-leftist activism somewhere around, but not too thick). And the branch that had the least amount of decentralization, obscurity and invisibility.
As a vaccine.
Can you more succinctly express your point, it got a bit muddy at the end. Are you saying they stole the least potent bit? And if you have the spoons could you elaborate?
Not "stole", rather supported. Like authoritarian governments might support the least potent youth political group of those existing, as a spoiler.
There's pluralism of respect and values, one might notice that FOSS doesn't really have much of that. It's pretty authoritarian. Just people think it's meritocracy and shouldn't be otherwise.
The longer I live, the more I think today's tech is a dead end.