• eighty@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can relate to the “how the fuck is being a concerned human being extreme/poltical?” energy in the post hard.

      • HomoScotian@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s so exhausting, they treat it like a sport, it’s not about making anyone’s lives better it’s all just about their team winning

    • caribou@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Politics used to be something people engaged in. Now politics is the core to a lot of people’s identities, which means disagreement or debate is perceived as a personal attack and people will embrace a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance to avoid being wrong.

  • empireOfLove@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Linus gives exactly zero fucks about saying exactly what’s on his mind. And it’s almost always massively based. He’s always been great about that, we don’t deserve such a great mind.

    • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Was just coming here to say that. The entire Ethos of Open Source is basically the people owning the digital means of production. So some people really not grasp that?

      • OrangeSlice@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        So some people really not grasp that?

        Actually, yes, the original FOSS movement had more right-libertarian roots than anything to the left, although nowadays some might see it as “common ground”.

        • PorkrollPosadist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The politics of folks like RMS (personal issues aside) were far above average, but the Free Software Movement was very steeped in liberalism from its onset, and that explains many of of its present shortcomings. Its biggest failing was to believe that Free Software would ultimately win on its merits. In the early days this was understandable, when free software was often playing catch-up to replicate the functionality of established commercial offerings. When the GNU project was just a C compiler you could install on proprietary UNIX systems to dick around with.

          Today though, Free Software is more often than not superior to commercially available offerings, with the exception of some niche industrial segments. But still, Free Software adoption by end users remains incredibly marginal. No matter how many merits Free Software stacks in its favor, the “Year of Linux on the Desktop” never comes. We are still drowning in proprietary iOS and Android phones. The overwhelming majority of PCs still ship with Windows. All of it deliberately engineered to become E-waste in a couple of years.

          Folks, this won’t change unless we take over the factories where these PCs and phones are manufactured.

  • xenago@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Linus has always been political and principled, I mean he chose the GPL for a reason! Glad to see him state all of this outright though, it only makes me respect him more.

  • roda@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Woman right to choose, fair enough. Regulated guns, absolutely. The less guns the better. Gay people stuff, I couldn’t care less. Check.

    The man said it as it should be said.

  • Trash Panda@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hard fisagree. Linux isn’t political. Everyone has an opinion, it’s obvious Linus would too. But I am pretty happy that his opinion is one I personally agree with. Linux can be uaed by anyone though, and nothing stops far right activists (terrorists) from making a distro, which would still be Linux. There’s a heavily religious distro too, but that doesn’t make Linux as a whole religious.

    • raresbears@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Does that really make it totally apolitical though?. Like obviously it’s not inherently attached to a wide reaching political ideology, but it still is political in the same way that any free software is kind of political.

      • Trash Panda@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Personally I disagree but that’s ok, we can’t all see it the same way :)

    • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think we get to use cold reason to determine if something is political or not, just like a dictionary doesn’t control the meaning of a word, nor does a small group of ants decide what the colony does next. If Linus came out as a right wing extremist, it wouldn’t matter how apolitical the linux source code is, people would decide to distance themselves from him and everything he represents. Something is political the moment a society perceives it as relevant to their politics.

  • Puls3@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    One great thing about about software is you don’t have to agree with or care about what the creators thoughts and beliefs are, software is at the end of the day just software.

    Doesn’t get any less political than that.

    • Jonny@lemmy.rimkus.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I create software by myself and disagree. First it’s very political where and for whom I choose to develop software. Second, software is always made for a purpose and the purpose can be indeed (and is) very often linked to political or social cause. E.g. a software which only purpose is to harm people, say for controlling mass destruction weapons is in my point of view a very political software

      • Puls3@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        software is always made for a purpose and the purpose can be indeed (and is) very often linked to political or social cause

        Its not though, typically software exists to serve a basic function at its core, and it could be used or contributed to by anyone for any number of things.

        • Panos Alevropoulos@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You are thinking of software as if it exists in a vacuum. Software that is libre is a political statement. Software that is proprietary is also a political statement. Lemmy choosing to be decentralized/federated/interoperable is also a conscious political decision just as Apple chose to create its own proprietary ecosystem instead of caring about interoperability.

          • Ferk@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You can grow potatoes for political reasons too. Everything a human being does might be politically motivated, but that doesn’t mean potatoes are political.

            Anyone can take that same software, that was created as a particular political statement, and use it for the completelly opposite political reasons to make a completelly different political statement. Just the same way as many have used songs in contexts that are completelly politically opposite to what the original author of the song intended.

            In the end, the only thing that’s political is the goal/purpose/motivation of an action, not the result of the action. No piece of software/hardware/thing is political when you dettach the artist from the art and just see it for what it is, regardless of what the author might have wanted you to see it as.

            • bobs_guns@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              historically speaking, when you consider its domestication by indigenous people in South America, its appropriation by Spanish colonizers, its resistance to looting by marauding armies compared to grain crops, and the freaking Irish potato famine, I think it becomes quite clear that the potato is a politically relevant crop and could reasonably be considered political.

    • JasBC@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      One great thing about about software is you don’t have to agree with or care about what the creators thoughts and beliefs are, software is at the end of the day just software.

      It really isn’t though - no-one dared touch ReiserFS after the creator became a wife-murderer even though it, supposedly at the time, it was quite the piece of advanced code.

      • Puls3@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Was referring more to people trying to politicize software and push them into political movements they’re unrelated to. Open software is at is core free and as such anyone with any political leaning could use it or contribute to it and no one would know, and no one should care.

        • paaviloinen@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Now, what one considers free is political. You cannot decouple reality from politics, and the free software movement is just one very specific example how political this really is. It’s also these communities that generate politival movements that you may see as unrelated to the pieces of software in question.

        • Jonah@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Free software is, at its core, about the users having control over their own use of the software - the software isn’t controlled by some owner and licensed by the users, but instead all users have equal ability to understand and use the software. If you consider communism to be political, then free software is political, because free software is communism in its purest form.

  • seahorse [Ohio]@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I half agree with his gun regulation stance. While ideally there would be more caution given to who owns guns that is unfortunately not the world americans have been living in the last 80 years or so. The fascists have guns, lots of them, and I’m not giving mine up while they have them.

    Everything else he said is 100% based.

    • Hexorg@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah the gun law regulators generally ignore the fact that everyone and their grandma already has guns. And those with guns are not willing to do trade in programs.

      I’d like to see better psych eval and requiring to re-license every so often. That should start steering the country in the right direction. Of course I don’t see this happening any time soon.

  • lemme@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Did you know that linux kernel source code was leaked to the public? Go see for yourself how political it is!

    /s

  • Lilium@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Holy fuck, I love that guy even more now. I didn’t know that was possible.