this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
31 points (76.3% liked)

Linux

48323 readers
698 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Reading about FOSS philosophy, degoogling, becoming against corporations, and now a full-blown woke communist (like Linus Torvalds)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Linux and open source in general completely blow apart capitalist arguments that profit motive is necessary for innovation and technological advancement. Open source ecosystem primarily run by volunteers has produces some of the most interesting and innovative technologies that we've seen. The reality is that people make interesting things because they're curious and they enjoy making stuff. Pretty much nobody makes anything interesting with profit being the primary motive.

[–] ThereRisesARedStar@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also without open source the capitalist tech sector would collapse

[–] axsyse@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It wouldn't necessarily collapse (it wasn't exactly suffering before FOSS stuff "hit the shelves", so to speak) but the gatekeeping that comes with it would certainly cause a tremendous amount of stagnation

[–] ThereRisesARedStar@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I work in software development. Almost all modern architecture would collapse without the open source ecosystem.

[–] Lurkerino@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isnt every important server run on linux?

[–] fox@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Half the user-facing internet broke for a few hours when one guy withdrew a shitty one-liner piece of JavaScript (the whole leftpad thing) because someone somewhere added it as a dependency to a dependency to a dependency until it was pulled into an enormous frontend library. The internet relies more on random open source contributions than a lot of people are aware of.

[–] zabadoh@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I disagree somewhat.

A lot of high tech development comes with a greed motive, e.g. IPO, or getting bought out by a large company seeking to enter the space, e.g. Google buying Android, or Facebook buying Instagram and Oculus.

And conversely, a lot of open source software are copies of commercially successful products, albeit they only become widely adopted after the originals have entered the enshittified phase of their life.

Is there a Lemmy without Reddit? Is there a Mastodon without Twitter? Is there LibreOffice without Microsoft Office and decades of commercial word processors and spreadsheets before that? Or OpenOffice becoming enshittified for that matter? Is there qBittorrent without uTorrent enshittified? Is there postgreSQL without IBM's DB2?

The exception that I can see is social media and networked services that require active network and server resources, like Facebook YouTube, or even Dropbox and Evernote.

Okay, The WELL is still around and is arguably the granddaddy of all online services, and has avoided enshittification, but it isn't really open source.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

The idea that these things wouldn't exist without commercial analogs is silly. You do realize that things like BBS boards and IRC existed long before commercial social media platforms right? In fact, we might've seen things like social media evolve in completely different directions if not for commercial platforms setting standards based on attracting clicks, and monetizing users.

[–] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

capitalist arguments that profit motive is necessary for innovation and technological advancement

I don't know who is arguing this because it's incredibly stupid. The greatest scientific minds of history, the mathematicians, the physicists, the inventors, were not capitalists, they're people with passion for their work.

If we move to a society that guarantees basic human needs and good education, we're only going to have more scientists and engineers that progress technology even faster.

[–] Thorned_Rose@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Capitalists argue this because it gives them the appearance of a moral high ground.

Enshittification shows how untrue this - capitalism by its very nature will always devolve into worse and worse offerings because it's reliant on squeezing out ever more profit.

Capitalism will only ever puh out the bare minimum of technological advancement. And keeping people in indentured labour (aka employees) to the capitalist system so that they either have no time to come up with innovations themselves or they own the intellectual property of any indentured workers means that the overwhelming majority of innovation is monopolised by capitalism too. Which also contributes to the appearance of pushing advancement.

[–] anarchotaoist@links.hackliberty.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Linux and open source in general completely blow apart capitalist arguments that profit motive

Wrong! Linux and open source only shows that the profit motive is not the only motive. One should broaden the definition of profit to encompass value in all its forms. ie A person can gain value from the satisfaction of DIY as it can be self-empowering. One can gain emotional value from sharing. It also invokes the law of reciprocation - value exchange but without a $ sign. The Open source ecosystem is also heavily funded by business who relies on open source components. It is a capital investment.

[–] yogo@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the profit motive is not the only motive that drives innovation, as you just agreed, then it isn’t necessary, logically. And not sure why you would then go on to expand the definition of profit into meaninglessness after agreeing there are other motives.

[–] anarchotaoist@links.hackliberty.org -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What? How the f do you transition from 'not only' to 'isn't necessary'? That is not logic - that is mental gymnastics with a triple back flip! Profit is the PRIMARY motivator! People wish to move away from discomfort more than anything else. Currency is the best way of alleviating discomfort!

[–] yogo@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. If X is a necessary motive for Y, then in the absence of X, Y cannot happen.
  2. Innovation can happen in the absence of a profit motive.
  3. Therefore, the profit motive is not necessary for innovation.
[–] anarchotaoist@links.hackliberty.org -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People can grow food in the absence of technology - but subsistence living is a hell of time!

nb. Marxists still have no answer for the calculation problem.

[–] yogo@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So I guess you agree that the profit motive isn’t necessary, because you moved to a completely unrelated point

So I guess you cannot process anything other than black/white logical fallacies let alone analogies.