Login Join IOPS

How do we get iops to use Open Source free software - because this non standard shit ain't working

forest
  • Written by:
  • Published on:
  • Categories:
  • Comments:
  • Share:

Micheal Albert is visionary about economics and many other things but one thing he is not considering is that using/believing in free software is somehow anethema to parecon, or that free software peoiple only think of free software to the detriment of parecon. I could say that about any single issue idea such as feminism that his wife loves ardently. The reality is that parecon is inconsistent with copyright and I had to change browsers just to use this broken non-standard code simply to be able to post to this blog. ((I switch from Mozilla Firefox on Ubuntu 13.10 to Chromium). If the code of this website observed standards then it would works no matter which browser or platform I am using.

Discussion 9 Comments

  • Rod 16th Dec 2013

    I've had no problems with Firefox so far (on either Windows or Linux). The entire website was down for a few days however and is just up again. Perhaps it's something to do with this. In the forums there's a 'Site' section where you can report bugs or discuss the technical part of the site (http://www.iopsociety.org/forum/the-site).

    The website is built on a php framework called CodeIgniter, which isn't free software, but is open source. The code that's built on top of the framework is closed for now. There has been discussion on going open source however a while back (http://www.iopsociety.org/projects/iops-website-team/going-open-source), but nothing has come of it yet.

    One more comment, you seem to mix open source software, free software and public domain (uncopyrighted) software. They are not necessarily the same. In particular, free software needs some form of copyright law to enforce the restrictions in it's license.

  • Gerry Conroy 16th Dec 2013

    Ok, Roderick, that answers my forum comment, thanks.

    Jason, both of the 'blogs' you've posted are short comments/questions which should have been posted in the forums. This practise is a problem for the site, for obvious reasons. Moderators would normally transfer your two posts to the forums and delete the 'blogs'.

  • 18th Dec 2013

    @Roderick: Thanks for the feedback. I'm confused by your statement that I "seem to mix open source software, free software and public domain (un-copyrighted) software". When you say "They are not necessarily the same. In particular, free software needs some form of copyright law to enforce the restrictions in it's license." you misunderstand what I meant and the level of my understanding of copyright.

    I have in the past argued with Stallman and Albert (for very different reasons, of course). Parecon is based on getting remunerated based on only two things, effort and sacrifice, therefore negating any form of copyright. In parecon, copyright would be seen like any black market, and incompatible. Everything, in a sense, would be GPL but not needing a license. In capitalism, as we are now, this is not the case, of course.

    The spirit of a self adaptive society means (especially in this day and age) full access to how things run which must include software. As Lawrence Lessig says, "Code is law."

    • Rod 18th Dec 2013

      Yes, I did misunderstand you. I was talking about copyright in the sense of any restriction on the distribution of software (if that makes sense).

      I think we mostly agree on this. Closed source software should be the exception in a parecon. I don't know if something like the GPL would be necessary to enforce this in a parecon (perhaps it would). At least we sure can use it now while we're still stuck in the dark ages.

  • Michael Albert 22nd Dec 2013

    Your post/comment, is a bit odd to me. I have never said or written anything like what you imply. At south end press, long before open source and free software, we published books essentially without copyright as a matter of principle. I would say the free software movement and open source have fallen far short of their potential, but that is very far from your assertion about my views. You can find articles relaying what I think on the matter, if you are interested, and debates too, most recently with advocates of peercommony which goes well beyond the early formulations.

    Also, I am not married, being against the institution in principle. And of course, someone being feminist doesn't mean they are only feminist, and, more, for most feminists the viewpoint is far from what you call single issue, and even far from focusing only on one area.

  • 24th Dec 2013

    @Michael Albert: When you say "long before open source and free software" I think you mean the FSF (Free Software Foundation), South End Press started in 1979 and the FSF started in 1984. While that is true Richard Stallman and all other computer scientists were in a free software peer review type of ecosystem before it got polluted by companies closing down software code and making it proprietary. So in that sense truly free software predates South End Press. Not that the time line really matters.

    "Without copyright" and public domain is much different than the protections and guarantees afforded to all users under the GPL (a sad necessity in Capitalism).

    "The geek culture is anti left.The left culture is not anti geek. So when I contact various people in the open source movement and I want to talk to them, they don't want to talk to me." Michael Albert (talking to VisiononTV founder Hamish Campbell https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb-C_uzqMv0 starting at 14:30miniutes in the video). I am cofounder of ParIT Worker Co-op http://parit.ca which is a pareconish (I say pareconish because the economy hasn't changed) workplace that only uses free software and has helped liberate the software of Mondragon http://mondragon.ca etc. I have noticed loads of people connecting parecon and free software, Justin Podur comes to mind. So instead of investing in proprietary closed software why not extend "diaspora", "around me", "newscloud" or "elgg"?

    So I suppose my question is why do you give more grace to feminists etc on the "left", than to free software geeks, when it comes to diversity of thought?

  • 25th Dec 2013

    After watching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb-C_uzqMv0 it's clear Albert has proprietary cronie programmers. He never refers to code, but artists (meaning graphic designers) or shows any understanding of technology. The emperor wears no clothes in this situation. I just wish had enough grace to bow out of a conversation that is above him technically. That doesn't make him horrible, just human.

    The way I think about it is Marx, brilliant man dealing with things in his time, economics and society changes way slower than technology though. So when it comes to parecon and shusshing radicals at Mondragon, he's awesome, technology wise he needs some brushing up, that's all I'm saying.

  • 25th Dec 2013

    I would feel more confident being a coder revolutionary having the website software hosted on github http://github.com so that at any time I could click on fork me if I felt like it. A project gets free hosting if it's open source and capitalists have to pay if they want to use it.

    Ram Wools Yarn Co-op gets enterprise class consulting because of their ethical pay structure, and being a parecon free software worker co-op gets us the biggest discount.