[OS:N:] RE: open-source-now-list digest, Vol 1 #537 - 7 msgs

["Bartram, Chris" <c j bartram wlv ac uk>]

-----Original Message-----
From: open-source-now-list-request redhat com
[mailto:open-source-now-list-request redhat com]
Sent: 19 March 2003 01:42
To: open-source-now-list redhat com
Subject: open-source-now-list digest, Vol 1 #537 - 7 msgs


Send open-source-now-list mailing list submissions to
	open-source-now-list redhat com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	open-source-now-list-request redhat com

You can reach the person managing the list at
	open-source-now-list-admin redhat com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of open-source-now-list digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. The meaning of life (or of mailing lists) [META] (charles macdonald hrdc-drhc gc ca)
   2. Using Open Source Instant Messaging (Jonathan Moore)
   3. RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism? (Paul Fitz)
   4. Re: RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism? (Anil Srivastava)
   5. Re: RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism? (Anil Srivastava)
   6. RE: RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism? (Paul Fitz)
   7. Re:  Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism? (Brendan Scott)

--__--__--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 12:04:46 -0500
To: <open-source-now-list redhat com>
From: <charles macdonald hrdc-drhc gc ca>
Subject: [OS:N:] The meaning of life (or of mailing lists) [META]
Reply-To: open-source-now-list redhat com

Ed, Ed indeed, I would guess that to Troll is human..

In another life, I publish a document, about a topic that holds my own 
interest..(or at least did at one time)  The rec.sport.skate discussion 
groups...

You can find a recent version at 
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/sports/skating/welcome/

That document contains following paragraphs (written by the former maintainer):
"Many Usenet FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions answer lists) usually begin 
with several paragraphs on netiquette, i.e., proper behaviour on posting to 
newsgroups. Rather than do that here, I will just recommend that if you have 
not already done so, you should *immediately* read the posting titled "A 
Primer on How to Work With the Usenet Community" The document may be obtained 
from  http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1/ or you will find it 
posted in the newsgroup 
http://groups.google.com/groups?group=news.announce.newusers  . After you 
have read the article, please read it again. 
"

Substitute mailing lists for USENET groups and you will have a good 
beginning..And remember that all the 700 or so folks reading this are 
primarily looking for ideas and suggestions on how one can get the public 
sector, particularly educational institutions to adopt open source software 
including Linux.

The comments about the difficulty that folks were having in expressing their 
need to a major vendor were right on topic.. They were hilighting a barrier 
that they were facing in achieving the goal of the list.

While many folks may be concerned with what the US is planning in the middle 
east, it is no more on topic on this list than my talking about what would be 
a good skate blade to buy, or the History of the  6SN7GTB Octal Dual triode 
(to name a couple of subjects that I put information up on the web about)

I am free to Join discussion groups that cover all those topics (and more) 
without having to have skaters read about Tubes, or tube fans to read about 
old cars, or or or.....

Yes if you are interested in more than one topic you have to read more than 
one group.  I helped split rec.sport.skating.ice into two groups so that the 
recreational folks would not have to deal with the semi-pro hopefuls and the 
folks in the stands would not have to hear the nittly-gritty of what socks to 
wear on the ice..Yet folks who are interested in both can enjoy both.

I apologize for using topics far from the list, but I pick them for the very 
reason that it shows how boring the world would be in we did not have 
filtering to keep information "clumped" on reasonably coherent topics.

AS I said before, I fear I am just fanning a troll...   Ed Please go away, 
and come back when you want to share how you managed to have 
Linux/Opensourse/OpenOffice.org accepted as a solution by your 
Council/club/school whatever.  I understand that the world would be more 
conveient if you could just set the rules to suit yourself, but the rules and 
conventions of Mail lists and newsgroups have been developed over the last 
twenty or so years because they work for the majority.  Please read the FAQ 
at http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1/
Particularly the part about "Think about your audience"

Anyway, I promise that I will Henceforth ignore Ed.. And in fact ask others 
to do the same.  (its hard)



Charles MacDonald - Labour Information Management
< My own Opinion unless Otherwise Credited >




--__--__--

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:54:01 -0600
From: Jonathan Moore <moorejon usd465 com>
To: open-source-now-list redhat com
Subject: [OS:N:] Using Open Source Instant Messaging
Reply-To: open-source-now-list redhat com

18 months ago I attended the Technology and Learning Conference in Atlanta. One
of the presenters, the Tech Director for Georgia Tech U mentioned the idea of
integrating a schools student information system with instant messaging. The
idea would be that each student would automatically have a "buddy list" of all
the students in each class. I have been researching how on might go about doing
this and as a result discovered http://www.jabber.org. It allows you to run your
own open source IM server and has clients for pretty much every platform. There
are even some gatewaying options to talk to users of other IM systems.

1. Is anyone running a Jabber server and clients? If so what has your
experience been?

2. Has anyone used this as proposed by the Georgia Tech director to integrate
for student use? If so how has this gone?

3. Even if you haven't done either what do you think of the possible educational
applications for Instant Messaging (esp in regards to using open source software)?


-- 
Jonathan Moore
Director of Technology
Winfield Public Schools
Office 620.221.5100
Fax 620.221.0508

Visit Winfield Public Schools at http://usd465.com
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/




--__--__--

Message: 3
From: "Paul Fitz" <pfitz dodo com au>
To: <open-source-now-list redhat com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 10:22:32 +1000
Subject: [OS:N:] RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism?
Reply-To: open-source-now-list redhat com


Hi everyone,

I'm writing a paper at university anout the philosophy behind the creation
of open source material.  It's actually a case study, using linux as the
primary case in question.

The main idea is that the Open source community is actually a mini
anarch-communist community existing within the Internet - for a number of
reasons - please read below.

I'd like to hear some thoughts/feedback if anyone has time.

My main reasoning is -

Anarcho-communism disregards Lockean concepts of private property, which
Open source does (to an extent) by opposing intellectual copyright -
copyleft instead of copyright.

Open sourcers reject capitalist ideology of supply-demand economics, open
source programmers actively give their Intellectual property away - to 1 or
10'000'000 people.

Anarcho-communism places a great emphasis on the workers owning the means of
production.  In the case of the Internet, this would be the networks, and
software running on them (OS's - Linux, servers - apache, languages - php,
perl etc., databases -postgres mysql etc)  Open source shares the belief
that the users should own the electornic means of production, as oposed to a
corporation owning the networks and software to access them.

Communist belief endorsing Good of the all over the few - All can benefit
from open source product, only relatively affluent can afford to even use
microsoft and even then, the source code is copyrighted intellectual
property

In ideal anarchist communities, the collective creates enough material to be
independent from the states, open source is actively creating enough
electronic material to be free of capitalist endorsed proprietary software.

However, open source communities are also technocracies (to an extent -
governed by technicians: a social system in which scientists, engineers, and
technicians have high social  standing and political power).

The open source commnity appears to be a 'gift economy' - where giving away
code/ideas/advice is highly desirable and valuable. The more code and
information the user creates/reproduces and gives to others, the more valued
they are in the community.

It seems that, if the open source community is a mini-anarcho-communist
community, it co-exists within a larger capitalist owned structure called
the Internet.  It actually depends on it for it's existence to an extent -
would Linux be where it is today without the Internet?  It is unlikely - the
net has allowed hundreds of thousands of motivated programmers/testers/users
to help develop and refine many forms of open source software.

Pretty basic thoughts at this stage, just curious to see what others think.
Disagree/agree whatever, it's all useful :)

Cheers,
Paul






--__--__--

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:27:14 -0800
Subject: Re: [OS:N:] RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism?
Cc: Anil Srivastava <anil acrossworld com>
To: open-source-now-list redhat com
From: Anil Srivastava <anil acrossworld com>
Reply-To: open-source-now-list redhat com


On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 04:22  PM, Paul Fitz wrote:

>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm writing a paper at university anout the philosophy behind the 
> creation
> of open source material.  It's actually a case study, using linux as 
> the
> primary case in question.
>
> The main idea is that the Open source community is actually a mini
> anarch-communist community existing within the Internet - for a number 
> of
> reasons - please read below.
>
> I'd like to hear some thoughts/feedback if anyone has time.
>
> My main reasoning is -
>
> Anarcho-communism disregards Lockean concepts of private property, 
> which
> Open source does (to an extent) by opposing intellectual copyright -
> copyleft instead of copyright.
>
> Open sourcers reject capitalist ideology of supply-demand economics, 
> open
> source programmers actively give their Intellectual property away - to 
> 1 or
> 10'000'000 people.
>
> Anarcho-communism places a great emphasis on the workers owning the 
> means of
> production.  In the case of the Internet, this would be the networks, 
> and
> software running on them (OS's - Linux, servers - apache, languages - 
> php,
> perl etc., databases -postgres mysql etc)  Open source shares the 
> belief
> that the users should own the electornic means of production, as 
> oposed to a
> corporation owning the networks and software to access them.
>
> Communist belief endorsing Good of the all over the few - All can 
> benefit
> from open source product, only relatively affluent can afford to even 
> use
> microsoft and even then, the source code is copyrighted intellectual
> property
>
> In ideal anarchist communities, the collective creates enough material 
> to be
> independent from the states, open source is actively creating enough
> electronic material to be free of capitalist endorsed proprietary 
> software.
>
> However, open source communities are also technocracies (to an extent -
> governed by technicians: a social system in which scientists, 
> engineers, and
> technicians have high social  standing and political power).
>
> The open source commnity appears to be a 'gift economy' - where giving 
> away
> code/ideas/advice is highly desirable and valuable. The more code and
> information the user creates/reproduces and gives to others, the more 
> valued
> they are in the community.
>
> It seems that, if the open source community is a mini-anarcho-communist
> community, it co-exists within a larger capitalist owned structure 
> called
> the Internet.  It actually depends on it for it's existence to an 
> extent -
> would Linux be where it is today without the Internet?  It is unlikely 
> - the
> net has allowed hundreds of thousands of motivated 
> programmers/testers/users
> to help develop and refine many forms of open source software.
>
> Pretty basic thoughts at this stage, just curious to see what others 
> think.
> Disagree/agree whatever, it's all useful :)
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Subscription and Archive: 
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list/
> -
> For K12OS technical help join K12OSN:
> <https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn>
>
>




--__--__--

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:33:54 -0800
Subject: Re: [OS:N:] RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism?
Cc: Anil Srivastava <anil acrossworld com>,
	"Paul Fitz" <pfitz dodo com au>
To: open-source-now-list redhat com
From: Anil Srivastava <anil acrossworld com>
Reply-To: open-source-now-list redhat com

Hi,

I look forward to Paul's paper on philosophy behind open source but 
find it difficult to accept his statement  "... larger capitalist owned 
structure called the Internet" because I believe that one of the great 
attributes of Internet is that it is a common property where everybody 
contributes and shares.

This is an important discourse.

Regards, Anil

On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 04:22  PM, Paul Fitz wrote:

>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm writing a paper at university anout the philosophy behind the 
> creation
> of open source material.  It's actually a case study, using linux as 
> the
> primary case in question.
>
> The main idea is that the Open source community is actually a mini
> anarch-communist community existing within the Internet - for a number 
> of
> reasons - please read below.
>
> I'd like to hear some thoughts/feedback if anyone has time.
>
> My main reasoning is -
>
> Anarcho-communism disregards Lockean concepts of private property, 
> which
> Open source does (to an extent) by opposing intellectual copyright -
> copyleft instead of copyright.
>
> Open sourcers reject capitalist ideology of supply-demand economics, 
> open
> source programmers actively give their Intellectual property away - to 
> 1 or
> 10'000'000 people.
>
> Anarcho-communism places a great emphasis on the workers owning the 
> means of
> production.  In the case of the Internet, this would be the networks, 
> and
> software running on them (OS's - Linux, servers - apache, languages - 
> php,
> perl etc., databases -postgres mysql etc)  Open source shares the 
> belief
> that the users should own the electornic means of production, as 
> oposed to a
> corporation owning the networks and software to access them.
>
> Communist belief endorsing Good of the all over the few - All can 
> benefit
> from open source product, only relatively affluent can afford to even 
> use
> microsoft and even then, the source code is copyrighted intellectual
> property
>
> In ideal anarchist communities, the collective creates enough material 
> to be
> independent from the states, open source is actively creating enough
> electronic material to be free of capitalist endorsed proprietary 
> software.
>
> However, open source communities are also technocracies (to an extent -
> governed by technicians: a social system in which scientists, 
> engineers, and
> technicians have high social  standing and political power).
>
> The open source commnity appears to be a 'gift economy' - where giving 
> away
> code/ideas/advice is highly desirable and valuable. The more code and
> information the user creates/reproduces and gives to others, the more 
> valued
> they are in the community.
>
> It seems that, if the open source community is a mini-anarcho-communist
> community, it co-exists within a larger capitalist owned structure 
> called
> the Internet.  It actually depends on it for it's existence to an 
> extent -
> would Linux be where it is today without the Internet?  It is unlikely 
> - the
> net has allowed hundreds of thousands of motivated 
> programmers/testers/users
> to help develop and refine many forms of open source software.
>
> Pretty basic thoughts at this stage, just curious to see what others 
> think.
> Disagree/agree whatever, it's all useful :)
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Subscription and Archive: 
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list/
> -
> For K12OS technical help join K12OSN:
> <https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn>
>
>




--__--__--

Message: 6
From: "Paul Fitz" <pfitz dodo com au>
To: <open-source-now-list redhat com>
Subject: RE: [OS:N:] RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism?
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:07:28 +1000
Reply-To: open-source-now-list redhat com


Hi Anil,

Thanks for the feedback  :)

In regards to "capitalist structure called the Internet" I suppose I was
refferring to the structure from which it was created, that being the
capitalist/democratic government of the United states.  A vast majority of
the funding for the infrastructure of the Internet originally came from
universities and government sources.  Commercial interests now also own a
fair amount of the Internet's infrastrucure, in Australia (where I'm from)
one telco virtually owns the entire telecommunications system which the
Internet is running on (and they charge like they know it too)  I think
commercial interests are trying determine the direction the net is going
through censorship, content restriction and banning selected IP addresses
(china do this very well, banning unsavoury content).

When it comes down to it, I have to pay a corporate entity $30 a month to
access the internet - we are charged to access the information resource of
the www.  So at this stage in it's evolution, I think the Internet is a
common property to people who are relatively affluent (generally first
world, middle class users make up the majority).  I think Open source will
help to remedy this situation, at least making it possible to use software
of high quality for little or no cost. :)

So I was mainly really refering to the entities that allow us to access the
Internet. btw, I agree, I think that is the greatest attribute of the
Internet as well, everybody being able to contribute and share knowledge :)

Cheers,
Paul







-----Original Message-----
From: open-source-now-list-admin redhat com
[mailto:open-source-now-list-admin redhat com]On Behalf Of Anil
Srivastava
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:34 AM
To: open-source-now-list redhat com
Cc: Anil Srivastava; Paul Fitz
Subject: Re: [OS:N:] RE: N:] Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism?


Hi,

I look forward to Paul's paper on philosophy behind open source but
find it difficult to accept his statement  "... larger capitalist owned
structure called the Internet" because I believe that one of the great
attributes of Internet is that it is a common property where everybody
contributes and shares.

This is an important discourse.

Regards, Anil

On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 04:22  PM, Paul Fitz wrote:

>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm writing a paper at university anout the philosophy behind the
> creation
> of open source material.  It's actually a case study, using linux as
> the
> primary case in question.
>
> The main idea is that the Open source community is actually a mini
> anarch-communist community existing within the Internet - for a number
> of
> reasons - please read below.
>
> I'd like to hear some thoughts/feedback if anyone has time.
>
> My main reasoning is -
>
> Anarcho-communism disregards Lockean concepts of private property,
> which
> Open source does (to an extent) by opposing intellectual copyright -
> copyleft instead of copyright.
>
> Open sourcers reject capitalist ideology of supply-demand economics,
> open
> source programmers actively give their Intellectual property away - to
> 1 or
> 10'000'000 people.
>
> Anarcho-communism places a great emphasis on the workers owning the
> means of
> production.  In the case of the Internet, this would be the networks,
> and
> software running on them (OS's - Linux, servers - apache, languages -
> php,
> perl etc., databases -postgres mysql etc)  Open source shares the
> belief
> that the users should own the electornic means of production, as
> oposed to a
> corporation owning the networks and software to access them.
>
> Communist belief endorsing Good of the all over the few - All can
> benefit
> from open source product, only relatively affluent can afford to even
> use
> microsoft and even then, the source code is copyrighted intellectual
> property
>
> In ideal anarchist communities, the collective creates enough material
> to be
> independent from the states, open source is actively creating enough
> electronic material to be free of capitalist endorsed proprietary
> software.
>
> However, open source communities are also technocracies (to an extent -
> governed by technicians: a social system in which scientists,
> engineers, and
> technicians have high social  standing and political power).
>
> The open source commnity appears to be a 'gift economy' - where giving
> away
> code/ideas/advice is highly desirable and valuable. The more code and
> information the user creates/reproduces and gives to others, the more
> valued
> they are in the community.
>
> It seems that, if the open source community is a mini-anarcho-communist
> community, it co-exists within a larger capitalist owned structure
> called
> the Internet.  It actually depends on it for it's existence to an
> extent -
> would Linux be where it is today without the Internet?  It is unlikely
> - the
> net has allowed hundreds of thousands of motivated
> programmers/testers/users
> to help develop and refine many forms of open source software.
>
> Pretty basic thoughts at this stage, just curious to see what others
> think.
> Disagree/agree whatever, it's all useful :)
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Subscription and Archive:
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list/
> -
> For K12OS technical help join K12OSN:
> <https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn>
>
>



_______________________________________________
Subscription and Archive:
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list/
-
For K12OS technical help join K12OSN:
<https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn>





--__--__--

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:37:19 +1100
From: Brendan Scott <bscott gtlaw com au>
To: open-source-now-list redhat com
Subject: Re: [OS:N:]  Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism?
Reply-To: open-source-now-list redhat com



Paul Fitz wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I'm writing a paper at university anout the philosophy behind the creation
> of open source material.  It's actually a case study, using linux as the
> primary case in question.
> 
> The main idea is that the Open source community is actually a mini
> anarch-communist community existing within the Internet - for a number of
> reasons - please read below.

For the reasons I set out below I think the open source community is more capitalist than communist. Primarily because 
they (effectively) oppose government intervention in the software market.

> 
> I'd like to hear some thoughts/feedback if anyone has time.
> 
> My main reasoning is -
> 
> Anarcho-communism disregards Lockean concepts of private property, which
> Open source does (to an extent) by opposing intellectual copyright -
> copyleft instead of copyright.

The fundamental problem with your reasoning is that you assume there is some relevant "property", which there isn't. 
It's one thing to say there's no property in a hammer, it's another to say there's no property in speech.  In the first 
there is a long history of common usage and precedent.  That history is absent in the second. As long ago as the 1800s 
the (US) Supreme Court stated categorically that there is no such thing as copyright within US commmon law (Wheaton v 
Peters). "Intellectual Property" is a political term which has been invented to justify non monetary subsidies to 
specific industries, in the absence of property rhetoric copyright protectionism would have gone the way of other 
government market intervention over the past 20 years.

See also Machlup and Penrose in the ?50s? Journal of Ecomonic History? on patents.

> Open sourcers reject capitalist ideology of supply-demand economics, open
> source programmers actively give their Intellectual property away - to 1 or
> 10'000'000 people.

Again, what they give away is the result of their programming.  To say they give away "intellectual property" implies 
that there is property to give away in the first place.

> Anarcho-communism places a great emphasis on the workers owning the means of
> production.  In the case of the Internet, this would be the networks, and
> software running on them (OS's - Linux, servers - apache, languages - php,
> perl etc., databases -postgres mysql etc)  Open source shares the belief
> that the users should own the electornic means of production, as oposed to a
> corporation owning the networks and software to access them.
> 
> Communist belief endorsing Good of the all over the few - All can benefit
> from open source product, only relatively affluent can afford to even use
> microsoft and even then, the source code is copyrighted intellectual
> property
> 
> In ideal anarchist communities, the collective creates enough material to be
> independent from the states, open source is actively creating enough
> electronic material to be free of capitalist endorsed proprietary software.
> 
> However, open source communities are also technocracies (to an extent -
> governed by technicians: a social system in which scientists, engineers, and
> technicians have high social  standing and political power).
> 
> The open source commnity appears to be a 'gift economy' - where giving away
> code/ideas/advice is highly desirable and valuable. The more code and
> information the user creates/reproduces and gives to others, the more valued
> they are in the community.

I think the "gift economy" is comparatively old philosophy these days.  Copyright is a legislative monopoly. 
Legislative monopolies are ananthema to Chicago school economists/economic rationalists. By attempting to neutralise the 
anti-competitive elements of copyright you can characterise the community as opposing government intervention in the 
content/software industries. On this analysis they're not communist, they're capitalist - and extremely so. Effectively 
  open source/free software says that competition in the software industry ought to be services based competition 
without any government intervention, not product based competition running off the back of government non monetary 
subsidies (ie the copyright monopoly).

> It seems that, if the open source community is a mini-anarcho-communist
> community, it co-exists within a larger capitalist owned structure called
> the Internet.  It actually depends on it for it's existence to an extent -
> would Linux be where it is today without the Internet?  It is unlikely - the
> net has allowed hundreds of thousands of motivated programmers/testers/users
> to help develop and refine many forms of open source software.
> 
> Pretty basic thoughts at this stage, just curious to see what others think.
> Disagree/agree whatever, it's all useful :)

I think you need to think about it more.

Brendan

> 
> Cheers,
> Paul
> 





--__--__--

_______________________________________________
open-source-now-list mailing list
open-source-now-list redhat com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list


End of open-source-now-list Digest