[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/g/ - Technology



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: linux.jpg (214 KB, 998x679)
214 KB
214 KB JPG
Why does /g/ connect linux with communism?
>>
>>64123646
/v/ kids with no clue.
>>
>>64123646
BECAUSE ITS OPEN LIKE A WHORE
>>
>>64123646
FOSS in general is a pretty good embodiment of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Moreover the infinitely reproducible nature of software is a sneak-peak into general post-scarcity: material conditions under which capitalism becomes (even more) absurd.
>>
>>64123810
>FOSS in general is a pretty good embodiment of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
Maybe but it should be qualified here that there's not some higher linux power distributing better distros to smarter people. It's more merit based and filled with individual choices, making it more capitalistic.
>>
>>64123646
Because it's an American site with most traffic from America and those people have no idea what Communism even means.
>>
File: 1467980956695.gif (79 KB, 679x693)
79 KB
79 KB GIF
>>64123646
Because GNU/Linux. Richard Stallman is a communist whore and his GNU Licence his leftist manifesto.
Also because with GNU, you own nothing, GOYIM!
>>
GNU, not Linux. Because of the plague license.
>>
>>64123914
Communism is a Jewish scheme to trick retards into giving up their property to the ruling party which is often comprised of Jews.
>>
>>64123646
My friend, it's not L"i"nux,

it's Lournux
>>
Successful campaign from it's competitors actually.
It wasn't hard to convince the drooling masses of America that if something's free it must be communism.
They've been fed this kind of shit on a daily basis since the end of WW2.
>>
>>64125259
>chinese ruling party is comprised of jews
Communism was invented by an englishman who is a catholic saint now anyway.
>>
>>>/gnussr/
>>
>>64123646
Microsoft's old aggressive marketing against linux
Kids that get into linux are usually more left leaning because they are kids and think that the world is full of sunshine and happyness
Microsoft shills/fanboys actually believe this shit
Older linux community and more mature is generally more mid/right wing with the exception of some influetial people(aka people who dont do jack shit software wise)
>>
>>64123810
No. You have the right and option to choose how your work can be used and under what terms.
If you base your shit on something that is GPL, you’re using someone’s work, therefore you must accept his terms.

Nothing about it is close to communism. Communism would force everything to be “free as in freedom”
>>
>/g/ is right-wing
>/v/ is left-wing
Really connects the fours
>>
>>64125410
>Communism was invented by an englishman who is a catholic saint now anyway.
this is news to me, what's their name?
>>
>>64123646
It's just /pol/tards, and they also connect public libraries with communism.
They like Donald Trump FFS.
They keep posting racism frogs, and they deny the halocaust happened or that Hitler did anything wrong.
What I mean to say is, they're total fucking retards, if you catch my drift.
>>
>>64123646
I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
>>
>>64125867
I don't know if the halocaust happened, but the holocaust certainly did not.
>>
>>64125532
People who are better educated tend to be liberal.
People over 55 are generally more right leaning because those over 55 are generally less educated. Under 55s are more likely to have college degrees than those over 55.
>>
>>64123646
Steve Ballmer started this meme. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/07/31/ms_ballmer_linux_is_communism/
>>
>>64125609
Thomas more
>>
File: soc.jpg (37 KB, 301x480)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>64126655
well if that asshat is against, i'm for it
>>
>>64123646
fsf is puritanical zealots but im happy i learned about it admittedly and glad it exists

opensource capitalism is best i believe, but freedom software is perfectly important also. my opinions are worth shit though
>>
>>64123646
Because most people are brainwashed idiots. Free Software is a choice. In a communist regime you'd have a gun to your head forcing you to use certain software. Even then the ruling communist party would not allow people to roll their own distros or do much of anything without their consent.

communism != freedom

Free Software is more individualistic in the sense that it runs on volunteer work, cooperative effort, and doesn't hinder anyone from using or modifying the software.

People that are behind communism are jaded NEETs that don't understand the basics of economics and the insurmountable difficulty that is the distribution of resources. Their idea of fairness is enslaving entire nations.

Free software would be irrelevant in a communist society because the state would own all businesses. You would have a computer granted to you by the state with state-approved software. And God forbid you read unapproved material. To the gulag with you!
>>
>>64127274
What about a communist state in which the ruling party really is the people? Assuming we achieve some kind of technological utopia in the future that provides the infrastructure for such a socioeconomic system.
>>
>>64127274
But Linux isn't free software, senpai.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_blob
>>
GNU/Linux is Anarcho-Communist
>>
>>64123646
Because mods refuse to delete the /pol/ cancer. I'm so sick of this 'it's the jews', 'poo in the loo', 'communist!' mouth breathing folks.
>>
>>64127362
It would still be different.
Free software usually not capitalist: devs work for free with no expectation of profit, which is generally not in their rational self-interest. I don't know where Red Hat falls here though.
But it is not communist either: there is no mandate that they MUST share and give, and they can choose at any time to stop developing or to release the next version of their software under a non-free license (with the consent of all contributors, of course).

It's a culture of freedom but also of charitable, selfless giving. In these aspects it's better than either of those systems.
Of course if you tried to run a country on free software principles you'd probably end up with 0 contributors to the "coal mine" project and end up in societal collapse after a few weeks of lmaonoelectricity. It only works for stuff that people want to do. Otherwise you need to motivate them with paychecks or gulags.
>>
>>64127362
>What about a communist state in which the ruling party really is the people?

Power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely. When has such a society ever come about? Its a fantasy.

If everyone is equally sovereign then no one is in charge. It would be like putting a bunch of kings on an island without their armies. Who's in charge? The kings would eventually agree to be bound by certain laws like don't steal or murder. You would end up with private property rights. That's not communism in the slightest. At least not according to Marx.

This society would become more anarcho-voluntaryist than anything. Decentralized law and freely associated communities would be the norm. Money would still exist for things that will remain scarce like land and mineral resources.

>Assuming we achieve some kind of technological utopia in the future that provides the infrastructure for such a socioeconomic system.

At best we'd end up with a negative income tax that would take care of the poor and technology would take care of things like food production so most farms would be communally owned. You'd see the death of large monolithic cities like NYC and people would make such efficient use of land that no one would go hungry. That would mean that it would be impossible to make a living as a farmer so you'd end up with a co-operative model but it would still be capitalistic in nature.

There are very good economic reasons why communism has always failed and always will. If you care to here them I'll make a new post.
>>
>>64126972
lol no.
Just did my research on him, the closest thing to communism that he had was his association with he Whigs, and that was it.
Lol, he was near the end of him life when karl marx wrote the manefesto, you sure you weren't memed?
>>
>>64127069
>socialism
please leave /leftypol/, i'm only going to ask once.
>>
>>64127808
>>64126972
I thought you were mis-spelling Thomas Moore.
Thomas More wasn't a communist either, the most communist thing about him was his purportedly communist attitude towards property rights, but thats about the only mention.
"The Soviet Union honoured him for the purportedly communist attitude toward property rights expressed in Utopia." - His wiki page
>>
>>64123670
/thread
>>
>>64126460
>magic paper means im better than you
they say many words yet teach so little in Uni. You gain knowledge but nothing practical, life experience and wisdom is gained with age not magic paper from your liberal arts professor.

To quote an anon from /pol/:
"if you're younger than 30 and conservative, youre heartless; if your older than 30 and liberal, your brainless"
>>
>>64127921
He literally envisioned a communist society in his novel. But since you dont even know who he is not to mention read his book you dont know what you are talking about.

>thomas moore
>saint
what a retard
>>
>>64123810

So is the fact that closed-source software is almost always better proof that communism doesn't work?
>>
>>64127802
>a co-operative model but it would still be capitalistic in nature
If your society is still fundamentally capitalist this won't happen without VERY heavy government regulation.
The natural path is for businesses to centralize due to economies of scale. You would eventually end up with 1-3 megacorporations in an oligopoly who have ownership of all the farmland and all the automatic farming equipment.

As automation eliminates the need for human labor, a capitalist system will only increase inequality between those who own the machines and those who don't.
Under this system, the magical sci-fi ~~post-scarcity society where robots can fulfill our every need~~ would actually be a massive dystopia. A small ruling class would own the vast majority of the machines and thus control all of society. The unwashed masses would own little or nothing, and the obsoletion of human labor would mean they have no value to society, meaning no way to earn money or increase their quaility of life.

Not that turning society into Gulagistan would be better. Probably the solution is somehwere in between, a socialist society with capitalist economics but heavy regulation. But I think human nature is too fundamentally selfish to ever achieve a true utopia.
>>
>>64127726
>if you tried to run a country on free software principles you'd probably end up with 0 contributors
This. 90% of human beings are lazy asshole normies who consume what the elite 10% make. Some normies even go so far as to steal from the 10% and make a profit off it.

A good example is the producer-consumer dynamic of 4chan (or any social media site for that matter). Something like 10% of the total userbase makes memes (and maybe 50% of them make good memes), and the rest of 4chan faps to normie-porn on /b/ and kills those memes by spreading them to plebbit and twater.
>>
>>64128064
>social issues like gaymarriage or "let's not go to war against those viet guys" are for some reason on the same scale as economic issues like taxes and subsidies
>A 50 year old guy who wants conservative economic policy but not "kill all moslems" has nowhere to go and has to just decide which of his principles to compromise on.
This is just the two-party system being ass.
The US's naive implementation of a voting system makes it nigh-impossible to have more than two viable choices in an election, but the parties as they exist now have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo so it's unlikely to change.
>>
>>64128064
My country is really conservative. I mean REALLY conservative. I remember every year from highschool and in uni me and my friends would all have diner together.
Before the diner started we would all pray together(half of us are atheists and we still prayed). And we would all be well dressed instead of looking like college hipsters.(afterwards we would watch shitty movies and anime OVAs)
A friend of mine's dream was to work for my country's millitary and destroy some neighbour country's enemy plane.(I think he is still alive). Another one became a priest. Some other guys became doctors ,mathematicians,economists, physcisists. I work at a computers repair, support etc.
I think being conservatives from a young age(even though my parents are commies) helped us.
>>
>>64128200
Regulation is the enemy of the free market.
We should incentivise instead, and even then not do it to such a degree that it squashes bussiness. Every nation can be considered a platform for bussiness, and wherever the work is cheaper and the gains higher, there the corporations will go, so socialist economic systems will not work.

To limit mega-corp, for example, we should incentivize small business (give them a tax cut) and deincentivise mega-corps (essentially split a 100% cut between the number off independent corporations in an industry to determine how much they pay in tax and thus promote greater market shares, balanced such that corporations can grow nut never conquer an industry. For example: Corp1 and Corp2 are the only corporations in an industry, therefore each of them pay 50%/2 = 25% of their net income in tax. If 2 more corps are added which are independent of corp 1 and corp 2, then 25%/2 = 12.5% of net income is taxed for each corp. This is of course assuming equal share of the industry, the size of a corporation and how much of the industry they own will play a role in determining how much they are taxed. A monopoly will not be outright banned but will be taxed 50% of their net income. Note that the maximum taxible income never exceeds 50%)
I don't know if my suggested anti-mega-corp system would work realistically, im no economist. So do provide feedback if possible thanks.
>>
>>64128501
>Regulation is the enemy of the free market.
...which is exactly why I support regulation.
Unregulated businesses doing whatever they want in the pursuit of more profit leads to shit like secretly dumping the rats and rat poison into your sausage vats to save on costs, or paying coal mine employees in company scrip and locking them eternally into debt-slavery.

The free market will naturally work towards more efficiency, more quality (at least as far as consumers can notice it), and better technology, but it has no principle of preserving morals or human decency. For that we must regulate.
>>
>>64128064
Good to see Winston Churchill posting in /pol from the grave.
>>
File: 1427403013076.png (52 KB, 700x419)
52 KB
52 KB PNG
>>64128620

>state enforced morality
>>
>>64128914
>it's illegal to murder my neighbor
>even if his land has valuable oil in it and i could make more profit if I did so
fucking moralfags ruining my business this is why i need anarchocapitalism
>>
>>64128620
>The free market will naturally work towards more efficiency, more quality (at least as far as consumers can notice it), and better technology, but it has no principle of preserving morals or human decency. For that we must regulate.

So you think regulating the market will make actors in the market behave more altruistically? AAAHHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

>>64128501
This is a bullshit idea. You want to limit the power of business then you need to get rid of artificial government entitlements like LLCs. Business are operated by individuals. Corporate personhood is bullshit. So those individuals should be responsible for the actions of their business. An LLC limits a companies liabilities so they can only be sued for so much. Get rid of that shit. Get rid of all definitions as to what a business "is or is not". Force individuals to be responsible for their actions.

Taxing income means that fewer and fewer companies will actually want to operate in your country. Why not tax the land they use? Land is a scarce commodity. Tax the unimproved value of the land at something simple like 1% so after 100 years they will have paid the full value of the land. You make it a flat tax and computers can handle everything. The more you complicate shit the more overhead you have and then your magical tax system ends up being prohibitively expensive.

>>64128313
Very true. Our voting system is terrible but read Article 5 of the constitution. 2/3 of the states can come together and overrule the federal government to propose amendments.
>>
/g/ has always been the most left-wing board on 4chan.
>>
>>64129203
>So you think regulating the market will make actors in the market behave more altruistically?
Legislating punishments for immoral actions will lead to actors avoiding those actions out of rational self-interest, even if they don't care about the morals behind why you implemented the law.

Modern coal mining companies do not pay in company scrip not because they believe it is morally wrong but because it is illegal, and they want to avoid being punished by Uncle Sam.
>>
>>64128200
>If your society is still fundamentally capitalist this won't happen without VERY heavy government regulation.

That's not true at all. America already has TONS of farming co-ops. Many of them sell their goods to big businesses. Ever wonder where Great Value gets all of its shit? It does business directly with farmers.

America has over 80,000 pages of regulation. This hurts small businesses more than anyone else. Regulation in America is part of the cancer that is destroying the middle class.

>The natural path is for businesses to centralize...
>As automation eliminates the need for human labor...

It is true that businesses have a tendency to centralize but its entirely possible that technology can disrupt that. Imagine a ride-sharing app that was peer-to-peer in design and completely decentralized? No servers needed because people's phones act as peers. No middle-man corporation because its just a collection of drivers and customers rating each other on an open platform. Hyper-competition plus a rating system that enforces a kind of reputation means that the best drivers can charge a bit more and the worst customers can be forced to pay a premium. The consumer wins. The laborer wins. A monopoly of the people and for the people without any kind of regulation necessary.

4chan really needs to increase the 2000 character limit...
1/?
>>
File: alt-right must have.jpg (98 KB, 1305x1002)
98 KB
98 KB JPG
>>64123646
Another quality thread.
Thanks Mods!
>>
>>64129040
>>it's illegal to murder my neighbor
>>even if his land has valuable oil in it and i could make more profit if I did so

But anon, it is legal if you're the US government. Just replace neighbor with nation state (Libya, Syria, Iraq).
>>
>>64123810
>communism requires post-scarcity to function
>purpose of economics is to allocate scarce resources efficiently
Does communism even count as an economic system?
>>
>>64129286

>he's never been to /mu/
>>
>>64128655
You know Churchill would have loved /pol/, especially while drunk.
>>
>>64129347
Where can I order this?
>>
>>64123646
The license under which it was released, the GPL or GNU Public License, is written in such a way that Linux MUST be free, and anything you borrow from Linux and use in your own code must also be free and available for all other people to share.
It isn't _like_ communism it *is* communism in the traditional Marxist sense.
>>
>>64129478
"I don't know the difference between gratis and libre: The Post"

Remember the last time le communism memers had >40 iq? Me neither.
>>
>>64129326
2/?

The same can be said of an industry that is already doomed due to advancements in technology. Food.

The only reason a farmer can make a living in America is because of subsidies. Its basically farmer welfare. Without it farmers wouldn't be able to make a decent living because America produces enough food to feed the world several times over. Without subsidies tomatoes should be pennies on the dollar; Wheat, corn, and soy would probably be worth fractions of a cent.

How do we solve such a dilemma? You can delegate this matter to the states. Allow farmers to work their land tax free (we already do this) but have the farmers sell locally. If we raise the standards for food then, for a short amount of time, the prices will increase. But soon everything will be non-GMO, organic, grass-fed, no pesticides, etc. (We're talking about tech that is damned near unlimited). We'd have farm-raised fish that tastes wild caught and nourishes us as if it is. Prices would again drop.

The humane thing to do would be for agriculture to become cooperatively owned. So farmers would be able to live and work on large parcels of land along with biologists and other specialists working to guarantee food quality and eco-friendliness. You will likely end up with a mix of state-owned farms, privately-owned farms, and independent co-ops.

The thing is that a society will never be completely post-scarcity. Land will always be scarce and, therefore, always have value. Because of this fact many other scenarios are equally possible.

Land-owning farmers may opt to grow less food and allow homes to be built on portions of their land. They may find it more profitable to lease portions of their land to utility companies. Having a cell phone tower on your land may bring in more income than growing all the wheat in the world.

Regardless of the scenario they all can happen in the context of the free market. Will some workers become displaced? Yes. This is, unfortunately, inevitable.
>>
>>64129040
anon, anarchism does not mean there's no rules, it means there's no state
fuck anarchocapitalism in any case
>>
>>64129623
How nice of you to keep patching a broken system
>>
>>64129623
3/?

Workers being displaced by technology is a big problem. I would be in favor of government programs to retrain displaced workers and get them into other fields. Following my agriculture example, inevitably you end up with fewer and fewer people producing more and more food. You'll never end up with a completely automated system because you need biologists to make sure the system is healthy. Too many factors to leave it up to automation.

With increasing globalization you may see some of these displaced workers moving to third world countries and lending their expertise until the entire world is at first world standards. No communism needed. No heavy regulations needed. Just let the market be free.

I envision an America where the Federal government becomes greatly minimized and it only functions to keep the peace between the states. Its only concerns become the three main branches of government with the President's powers reduced (no more executive orders), congress having term limits, and the Federal Reserve finally being audited. The treasury would be reinstated to bring back gold-based currency but banks are allowed to have their own competing currencies (crypto finally becoming legit?). I also think fractional reserve banking would be outlawed as its nothing more than a Ponzi scheme.

From there you get a huge economic boom and the middle class explodes in size. Commies are still poor because their liberal arts degrees are still useless and they don't want to be "wage-slaves". All welfare is scrapped and replaced with a negative income tax that is almost completely automated. People still misuse money and buy crack instead of sending their kids to school but by and large things get better.

Income tax is abolished along with the IRS because if the Federal Reserve is ever audited you know that the Zionist Jews would be caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
>>
>>64128313
Why do we vote for politicians directly when we could just vote for political interests and elect politicians according to that?

>Jim believes in pro-life and tomatoes
>Jim votes for pro-life and tomatoes
>members or parlament are selected according to which of these things they stand for, and in proportion to the stances the public holds
>thus if 56% are pro-life and 20% are tomatoe, then that perentile would be occupied accordingly in parlament.
Why do we not do this?
>>
>>64128620
>t. didn't read the rest of the post
>>
>>64129438
Someone needs to larp as winston and shitpost on /pol/.
>>
>>64130124
You would then need a trusted third party to honestly rate the politicians according to how well they match the votes. In essence you're creating a central point of control with total power over the legislature in case of bribery, corruption, or political bias.

Some countries use "proportional representation", which is somewhat but not entirely like this. Say, there are 10 parties with different permutations of policies. Jim votes for the pro-life pro-agriculture party. After the election, it turns out that party got 8% of the popular vote, so it gets 8% of the total seats in parliament. Then the bureaucracy inside the party gets to decide which politicians they put in the seats they get.

I believe germany has a system like this.
>>
File: STEM.jpg (179 KB, 971x921)
179 KB
179 KB JPG
>>64129286
>/g/
>mot /lefty/
LOL!!!

/g/ is definitely pretty left but that's mostly because of the rust cancer, some of us here are pretty 1488 tho.
I remember an anon posted about technocratic nazis, wandering when /g/ would finally go 1488 from bullshit like pic related (yes i saved the pic from their post).
The pajeet meme is a clear indicator of /pol/'s influence, hopefully /pol/ and its fantastic bullshit can keep the rustfags and traps at bay...
>>
>>64129203
>get rid of artificial government entitlements
mind expanding on your idea here? i like where you're going but specifics could be useful.
>>
>ITT anons flounder trying to explain how open source software isn't like communism instead of just accepting that it is and that it's a good thing
>>
>>64123646
Literally no one on /g/ connects Linux with communism.
If anything FOSS is right-wing nowadays.
>>
>>64130326
>In essence you're creating a central point of control with total power over the legislature in case of bribery, corruption, or political bias.
Fuck.

>>64130326
>"proportional representation"
but if it were possible i would op for proportional position instead. I don't want two-faced politicians who flip their views on a dime just to get re-elected, i want seats according to the popularity of views held by the populous then by who can fool the populous the best.
Shit, i want to vote for people who stand for something, not fucking niggers who manage to trick the dumb plebs all the time.
>>
>>64130481
But it simply isn't.
>>
>>64130354
>/g/
>lefty
Are you unironically this new?
>>
>>64129702
How ignorant of you to shit on something you don't understand. Read your Mises.

>>64130389
There's not much to expand on. The crux of the idea is not to give anyone special treatment. For example, during England's industrial era it was a smoggy shit hole because of "muh clean coal". Many MANY citizens filed lawsuits against companies that burned coal stating that they were polluting the air which made them sick.

Completely valid argument! Everyone needs clean air. But the government had decided that the people couldn't sue these companies for the sake of progress. So the state essentially gave these companies the ability to pollute with little to no repercussions.

That's a big problem. When a company can take huge risks with no consequences then the company may act foolishly even to the point of causing harm. If an individual is responsible for his actions then why not a business, which is nothing more than a collection of individuals acting towards a common goal?

LLC = Limited Liability Company. The government ARTIFICIALLY limits their liability so they can only be sued in court for so much money.

Bear in mind that these are REGULATIONS. When leftists talk about the evils of capitalism this is the kind of shit they talk about. What they don't realize is that these are constructs of the state.

You can't have a truly free market if some actors in the market have privileges that no one else has. Neither can things be truly fair if you have so many regulations that you need to hire a law firm to flip through all 80,000 pages and ensure that you haven't done anything illegal.

Regulation = greater complexity that increases the barrier to entry for small businesses.
Entitlements means that companies can take risks that they would have never taken before and they are almost immune from consequences.

That's the thing about taking risks. They are a limiting factor to a company's growth and the threat of legal action forces a company to behave.
>>
>>64130549
What i mean is that there are cancerous people on /g/ who subscribe to very left-leaning bullshit like gommunism.
>>
>>64130665
This sound like a good plan.
It's simple, efficient, elegant.
My only question is, how would one implement this so that tycoons could not just bribe politicians to reinstate an LLC?
>>
>>64129670
Why hate on ancaps? Anarcho-capitalism is just one form of a voluntary society. Ancaps wouldn't force you to be an ancap so why hate them? Not all anarchists have to be pseudo-commies. Market anarchism is a thing too.

At the very least it gives libertarians a framework where they can discuss theoretical ideas that would be impossible in any other society.

>>64130818
One way would be a constitutional amendment. Make it the law of the land that no law be made to define how a business is structured. Neither shall a law be made to limit a company's liability or otherwise give them special treatment. You will necessarily need term limits in congress for this to work though. Those old fucks are some of the biggest vultures of them all.

Its elegant because free market capitalism is elegant. Imagine a restaurant that refuses to serve you because you're white/black/asian/space alien. They just lost your business. You know what businesses become the most profitable? The ones that cater to everyone! That doesn't mean you won't have some backwoods Nazi only serving skinheads but then again you don't live in backwoods Naziland so why the fuck would you even care?

Let people live the way they choose to live as long as they don't damage or take your property or cause harm to your person. That's all that matters. And you'll see that far fewer people are in prison and police departments all of a sudden aren't broke.
>>
File: FB_IMG_1514981821914.jpg (73 KB, 1190x720)
73 KB
73 KB JPG
>communism is bad, mmmkay?
The real question is how can /g/ possibly justify even remotely connecting free software with capitalism when it's not and has never been about greed.
>>
File: 1513808008062.png (343 KB, 671x1047)
343 KB
343 KB PNG
>>64123646
well not Linux solely, but GPL exploits workers labour value for free just like communism while claiming it is in workers best interest, just like communism again, and has absolute retards defending it for what it claims to be instead of what it really is, just like communists
>>
Because the GPL only benefits China?

American businesses can't use GPL code because of our strict copyright laws, but Chinese businesses don't give a fuck.

Inform yourself, OP.
>>
>>64131068
>backwood nazis
i just realized that sjw's could be used as a tool to "take it down goy".
Think about it: WWII, hitler just lost (his head ;)) and now people want nazi blood. So they take to the streets demanding that government stop nazi bussinesses at once! Or they riot and start selectively attacking bussinesses that do not align to their political standard.
>>
>>64126053
get a real job, Stallman
>>
>>64123646

Literally why would anyone smart enough to be one of the core devs for a major Linux distro work for free, it fucking baffles me. Unless it’s just to pad their resumes.
>>
>>64132177
Believe it or not, sometimes there is more to doing things than money, Anon.
You'll learn once you graduate from high school.
>>
>>64132248
and then you graduate from college and realize you were wrong, end up as sad little piece of shit and try to convince others to repeat your mistake
>>
>>64125410
>China
>actually communist
>>
>>64132312
t. neet
>>
>>64132312
>going to college
>>
>>64127476
They keep us safe from the “Uh, racist much?” crowd
>>
>>64132338
China has never claimed to be communist. It has always claimed it is building socialism with communism as a end goal. They have entire departments dedicated to scientific socialism with Chinese characters.

Go ahead, bring up some of their theoretical papers and argue how they are NOT building socialism contra arguments they are presenting.

Oh yeah, you are just a dumb berniebot who lacks all the theoretical background and think socialism=all that is good, capitalism=all that is bad.

Disgusting 白左. Jump into trash and stay there.
>>
>>64123646
because GPL is communism and Linus got suckered into it as a teenager while living with his parents.
>>
>>64132451
are you one of the yellows?
What is that 白左 mean?




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.