We use windows at my work (I’ve been using Linux for 2 decades on home computer). I’m trying to migrate our work CPUs to Linux but the biggest road block is my unfamiliarity with librecad, I’m used to autocad. I use cad command line a lot and it’s hard to live without auto suggest commands. Libre has the capability but it’s very rough and not mature.
I have attended or been involved with five different state universities and a few different community colleges. For computer science, aside from one glaring exception, the default has been some flavor of Linux. The earliest for me at a school was Fedora 7. I think they had been running Solaris in the late 90s; not sure what was before that.
The only glaring exception is Georgia Tech. Because of the spyware you have to install for tests, you have to use Windows. Windows in a VM can be flagged as cheating. I’m naming and shaming Georgia Tech because they push their online courses hard and then require an operating system that isn’t standard for all the other places I’ve been or audited courses.
If you are talking about the computers themselves having Linux on them by default or dual bootable, then I’m kinda jealous. At the community college I attend, the computer lab for CS and IT related classes has only windowss 10.
The high quality institutions have Linux in their labs (either a separate lab or dual boot) and a server with say access for training ML models etc.
The dodgy ones have only Windows with no software and require students to buy a second laptop and install Linux. If they don’t the students fail. Those tests were done in handwriting but they are still an accredited university :(
Well, when you get from 3 to 2000 in only a few years, the vast majority of these versions will be unusable. No wonder they had to drop everything after 11…
Nixos is at 23.11 :) Also, rolling releases are kinda fun: the latest commit so far is 46ae0210ce163b3cba6c7da08840c1d63de9c701 which roughly translates to nixos-unstable 403509863565239228514588166489915404446713104129 :D
Idk, technically voluntary association is a key tenet of volunteerism/anarcho-capitalism, so if we’re just using volunteering as the basis we might as well say it’s volunteerism. I think anarcho-communism and anarcho-capitalism are a bit more nuanced than “sharing.”
Those advocating for it also use it to display their total lack of perspective and analysis of the mechanics of capitalism. I.e. one can use it as a sign on one’s head saying “not at home for the moment, try again later”.
Anarcho-Capitalism isn’t a thing, it’s just Libertarian Capitalists LARPing with Leftist aesthetics. The very rejection of individual ownership rejects Capitalism, it’s like saying Worker Co-operatives are an example of Capitalism because markets tend to not care what makes them up.
Just because FOSS would be “allowed” in Capitalism doesn’t mean it’s an example of Capitalist principles.
Yes and they’d argue that anarchism isn’t exclusively leftist (well, I’D argue that depends on one’s definition of left/right, because depending on who you ask it’s either good/bad, collectivism/individualism, or lib/auth, and by the latter definition they would then be leftist capitalists, which is funny to think about.) They support individual ownership without rulers, however they still promote sharing of things you own with your community if you can/want.
Right, and just because sharing is “allowed” in communism doesn’t mean sharing is communism. It being allowed in both not being necessarily representative of either is my whole point.
Regardless of what AnCaps argue, the fundamental fact is that Anarchy is a rejection of hierarchy, whereas Private Property itself requires both the Owner/Worker hierarchy, and a monopoly on violence that cannot be reasonably contested to uphold Private Property protections. As such, it can only be considered Libertarian, as it both maintains hierarchy and maintains some semblance of at minimum a nightwatchman state.
As for Left/Right, the standard definition is Collective/Individual ownership of the Means of Production, not necessarily collectivism/individualism or lib/auth. Individual ownership by definition is supporting rulers, the larger Capitalists are effectively no different from a Feudal state.
Sharing being allowed does not mean FOSS aligns with AnCap principles, that’s like saying bagel consumption is AnCap.
FOSS isn’t simply “sharing” either, it’s quite literally a rejection of Individual ownership and creating IP for the collective to use, fork, maintain, and distribute as they see fit. It isn’t a coincidence that FOSS enthusiasts overwhelmingly lean left, just like Lemmy tends to.
Regardless of what AnCaps argue, the fundamental fact is that Anarchy is a rejection of hierarchy, whereas Private Property itself requires both the Owner/Worker hierarchy, and a monopoly on violence that cannot be reasonably contested to uphold Private Property protections. As such, it can only be considered Libertarian, as it both maintains hierarchy and maintains some semblance of at minimum a nightwatchman state.
Regardless is right, because my comments were never about espousing the benefits of anarcho-capitalism, I was using them to make the point that simply because things share a similarity with a political ideology it does not in fact make them “that ideology.” Arguing about ancapistan in this instance is a “strawman.”
Sharing being allowed does not mean FOSS aligns with AnCap principles, that’s like saying bagel consumption is AnCap.
No this is my point, you get your own.
use, fork, maintain, and distribute as they see fit.
Your argument is that because FOSS would be permissible in AnCap society, FOSS being fundamentally constructed upon AnCom principles of rejecting Capitalism and centralization in favor of decentralized and collectively owned and distributed property makes it not in line with Anarcho-Communism.
When the article is giving an example of how Anarcho-Communism would work, Linux is a fantastic example. Nobody is saying Linux is Anarcho-Communism, or that Linux cannot exist within broader contexts, but that in an Anarcho-Communist society, the structure of Linux and FOSS would be the common structure.
Your argument is that because FOSS would be permissible in AnCap society…
Because voluntary association and sharing is also a core tenet of volunteerism/anarchocapitalism, as they also are of anarcho-communism…
FOSS being fundamentally constructed upon AnCom principles of rejecting Capitalism and centralization in favor of decentralized and collectively owned and distributed property
FOSS being similar to AnCom because both share principles of sharing
makes it not in line with Anarcho-Communism.
makes it notnecessarily Anarcho-Communist.
You’re making false equivalencies for the sake of it.
“This rejection of profit and ownership made by a self-admitted leftist is actually completely in line with for-profit individual ownership just because AnCaps don’t murder people for doing charity”
You’re just trying to be contrarion for the sake of it, lmao. Again, the article was showcasing examples of gift economies and how Anarcho-Communism would function, and Linux fits that definition. It wasn’t arguing that Linux is Anarcho-Communism itself. It is not an example of how Anarcho-Capitalism would function, as Anarcho-Capitalism is Capitalism, and FOSS is decidedly anticapitalist, even if said Capitalists wouldn’t murder Linus for rejecting Capitalism.
You’re again being needlessly contrarion, Anarcho-Capitalists don’t advocate for setting up networks of mutual aid and FOSS software, they don’t care about gift economies either. Using Linux as an example for AnCapistan would get you laughed out of the room, if calling yourself an AnCap didn’t already result in that.
I recall at one point Windows 10 was going to be the last version of the OS and they would just maintain that. I’m wondering if they said that to get the last of the Windows 7 and XP users to finally move to 10?
We use Ubuntu at my work. Custom built image PXE booted so every restart is fresh. Has its pros and cons. Libre office does a decent job at replacing Office but we use Google workspace so most users are moving off local files. 90% of our users work could be done entirely through a Web browser so OS doesn’t really matter as much any more.
technically, Darwin, the microkernel, is at 23.2.0, but it was based on the Mach microkernel from NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP (which is part of why it stared at 10)
I wasn’t trying to get into the weeds about actual kernel version numbers; I was just saying they made classic Mac OS from versions 1-9 and OS X from versions 1-14, and 9 + 14 = 23.
wrong. Mac OS X ended with Mac OS 10.15 (Catalina) in 2018. macOS Big Sur, macOS 11, was the first in a new generation of macOS that succeeded macOS X and included significant architectural changes to the platform.
linux
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.