Why so many people see letter as containing onlt 3 words and ignore part where Linus says that maintainer shouldn’t randomly blame userspace, how unrelated error code is(it’s like if your router crashed with message “there is no milk in the fridge”), repeats that maintainer shouldn’t randomly blame userspace, asks if patch good enough, says “WE DO NOT BREAK USERSPACE”,
I’m angry, because your whole email was so horribly wrong, and the patch that broke things was so obviously crap.
The fact that you then try to make excuses for breaking user space, and blaming some external program that used to work, is just shameful. It’s not how we work.
Ok ok, I know it’s a meme, but gentle reminder that :x is :w and :q combined (save and exit). I got taught that in high school (it was a dec unix with real vt120 terminals) and luckily for me I remembered that even if I didn’t touch vi for a few years afterwards.
Socialism means a central bureau decides what is needed and worked on
Meanwhile Capitalism is a System of decentralization
Foss Software isn’t being centrally ordered because someone higher up decides it is needed. First the need arises and then the “Market” (The Developers out there) create a Solution to fullfill this need.
This Market, this pool of Developers is decentralized in smaller Groups. And that’s good that way. I don’t want someone to decide which Software gets developed. Not some CEO and definitely not some Bureaucrat.
I mean, the F in FOSS allows decentralized usage and a lot of People in the FOSS-Community prefer decentralized Solutions
Socialism means workers collectively own the means of production, and it isn’t synonymous with central planning. Concepts like ParEcon, Worker Councils, Mutual Aid, and so forth reinforce this decentralized structure.
Capitalism is similarly not a system of decentralization but of many centralized islands. Each individual capitalist entity is very centralized in structure, more so than a system of Socialist entities, such as Syndicalism or Market Socialism.
FOSS itself rejects the profit motive and markets, and therefore is the antithesis of capitalism. Capitalism relies on private ownership, the profit motive, and IP protections, all of which FOSS abolishes.
Truthfully, the fact that you don’t want some CEO or bureaucrat deciding what gets produced unilaterally is precisely why your views are actually that of a leftist. You desire more democratization of production, a Socialist ideal to the core!
The fact that FOSS is based on non-profit decentralization is the very reason FOSS communities are dominated by leftists.
Socialism means workers collectively own the means of production, and it isn’t synonymous with central planning.
This can only be true if you stop thinking at the end of the sentence, without reading into any of the implications, or any circumstantial cause and effect.
If the workers collectively own everything, then that means that every worker has just as much right as anyone else to make decisions on how the process plays out. This means that the group has to come up with a way to make decisions. Since the group has to make a decision, and everybody has a right to make decisions, the group is effectively making decisions on behalf of those in the group.
If the workers collectively own everything, then that means they have to work together and organize to get things done. This means that the group has to come up with a way to organize. This means that the group will be deciding on behalf of those in the group what work is done by who.
If the workers collectively own everything, that means the workers have to decide what rules or laws to follow, and how to enforce them. So now the group has to decide by what convention it’ll hold its members accountable. If it wants to hold members accountable, it implicitly has the power to do so.
A group with decision making power that enforces law among its members is a central authority.
A central authority with power over the market and all decision making is central planning.
Your description of capitalism legitimately sounds like mental gymnastics. You can call anything centralized if you reduce the context to only itself. That is dishonest, the context here is the market. If a market is centrally planned, then all aspects of the market need to be centrally planned by the same unit. That’s what central planning means. A disunited group of private entities all planning things for themselves is absolutely not an example of central planning.
If Workers democratically and decentrally decide things, it’s central planning, and not only is it central planning, it’s more centralized than if they had no say whatsoever a la Capitalism?
I’m sorry, I don’t subscribe to mental gymnastics like that. I prefer decentralization and democratization over letting the few control everything unopposed except by each other.
I didn’t say the workers decided things, I said they had a right to, and then alluded to the diplomatic issues that creates… In fact, I heavily implied they can’t realistically make decisions when I said the group decides things on their behalf.
Central Planned Economy: an economy where decisions on what to produce, how to produce and for whom are taken by the government in a centrally managed bureaucracy.
In socialism, the market is controlled by the state. This fits the definition of central planning perfectly.
In capitalism, the market is not controlled by a centralized bureaucracy.
You followed an arbitrary logical chain to depict one form of Socialism, yes.
In Capitalism, the market is controlled by Capitalists, who represent a minor fraction of the population. In Socialism, the economy is controlled by everyone.
linuxmemes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.