I watched a very interesting promotional video from the early 80s in which the now-famous developers at Bell Labs discussed the benefits of the Unix OS. This led to a bit of a rabbit-hole, but my...
What’s needed, then, is a leap of faith: from feeling gratitude towards corporations for funding open-source projects to questioning why we allow these corporations to amass the wealth that enables them to do so in the first place. What’s needed is a movement to resist the commodification of information in all its forms—whether that’s software, content, or using personal data to increase product sales through targeted advertising—and diminishing the power of these corporate giants in the process.
The open-source movement could—and should—be more than just another way to develop code. Fulfilling its radical potential will involve expanding the scope of the movement by linking it with a broader struggle for decommodification. This will require a massive political battle, challenging not just individual corporations and institutions but the neoliberal state itself.
I watched a very interesting promotional video from the early 80s in which the now-famous developers at Bell Labs discussed the benefits of the Unix OS. This led to a bit of a rabbit-hole, but my takeaway was that Bell Labs was a regulated monopoly, and it was a "gift" that they funded research through their guaranteed income of nationwide telecomms. The quoted point feels like a 40-year old circle, where we are oh so grateful that monopolistic corporations are supporting open source.
My dear friends have heard me explain ad nauseam the need that our software is liberated and de-commodified, as well as the free expression of academic knowledge, the removal of DRM on books, and the abolition of targeted ads through metadata. This is a great article.
I watched a very interesting promotional video from the early 80s in which the now-famous developers at Bell Labs discussed the benefits of the Unix OS. This led to a bit of a rabbit-hole, but my takeaway was that Bell Labs was a regulated monopoly, and it was a "gift" that they funded research through their guaranteed income of nationwide telecomms. The quoted point feels like a 40-year old circle, where we are oh so grateful that monopolistic corporations are supporting open source.
My dear friends have heard me explain ad nauseam the need that our software is liberated and de-commodified, as well as the free expression of academic knowledge, the removal of DRM on books, and the abolition of targeted ads through metadata. This is a great article.