Daewoo (Official)
Joshua BarrettoIt occurred to me today that the social value of the open-source work I do in my free time has probably been an order of magnitude more useful to the world than everything I've ever done as a paid employee. Needing to seek a wage almost certainly makes me a less productive member of society than I would otherwise be.
The number of boosts this is getting implies that a lot of folk feel similar, and that's sad.
Cassandrich@jsbarretto It's normal (but not okay). There's very little paid work that benefits humanity at large, and when there is, most often it also involves enclosing that benefit to limit who can have it (like with things like medical research).
David Zaslavsky@jsbarretto That's true, but I bet there are also a lot of people who don't feel similarly and thus are not reacting to this post. Obviously I can only guess at the real numbers, but I would imagine that among programmers (or writers, organizers, etc) who have worked on #opensource projects, only a small fraction of them have had a meaningful impact on the world through those contributions.
@diazona I guess that depends on your definition of 'meaningful'. An extreme definition might be "is on the critical path to a human being receiving sustenance or shelter" but I'm of the view that there are more indirect or immaterial ways for things to be meaningful.
Aaron@diazona @jsbarretto I bet their open source work is probably still more positively impactful than their day jobs.
@hosford42 @jsbarretto That's what I'm saying, I don't think so, at least not for most of them.
@diazona @hosford42 The problem is that it's extremely difficult to measure the value of FOSS work. As an example, I maintain a variety of libraries in the Rust ecosystem. I had no idea who was using them, and still mostly don't. When I got my current job, I found to my surprise that several of them were already in their dependency tree. (1/2)
@diazona @hosford42 (2/2) Unbeknownst to me, I'd already been generating value for them (be it relatively marginal) before I even got the job. Because the value of FOSS is smeared across many social contexts, its value is much more difficult to measure than the financial output of a company.
Matija Nalis@jsbarretto
might be related to the fact that worryingly ever increasing amount of jobs have no humanity-improving purpose whatsoever, and are only there to for improve one company short-term position in profit-driven econony rat-race over others. E.g. someone works most of their career improving click-through rate of some company ad campaigns? Or helps increase "engagement" numbers in some social network? Talk about sad
might be related to the fact that worryingly ever increasing amount of jobs have no humanity-improving purpose whatsoever, and are only there to for improve one company short-term position in profit-driven econony rat-race over others. E.g. someone works most of their career improving click-through rate of some company ad campaigns? Or helps increase "engagement" numbers in some social network? Talk about sad
drbrain@jsbarretto I’m certain I volunteered at least millions of dollars in unpaid economic impact during a maintainership period of around five years, much more with interest
My indirect compensation I’ve received through employment and salary has been wonderful, but that doesn’t stop me from feeling jaded about returning to maintership of even a hobby-only project
meejah@jsbarretto I am extremely glad I've had the opportunity to get paid to work on nearly-exclusively free/open software in the last bunch of years.
It also has definitely paid less than other more soul-crushing opportunities, which I'm totally fine with.
There's so many neat things from "the before times" I _wish_ I could have shared .... "but, proprietary" :(
It also has definitely paid less than other more soul-crushing opportunities, which I'm totally fine with.
There's so many neat things from "the before times" I _wish_ I could have shared .... "but, proprietary" :(
alcinnz@jsbarretto I feel that way sometimes too...
@alcinnz It's kind of soul-destroying. Although I like my current employer, I'm constantly harassed by the hunch that very little of what I've produced in my career has been useful or even used by actual human beings. I just want to grow food, build furniture, and write open-source software.
Jenny Z., This Puzzle PieceAs a retired technical writer, I think of how short-lived the usefulness of my work was. It no longer has any value at all.
The community building work I am doing now without a paycheck, though, can potentially stay useful well beyond my lifetime because of the ripple effect of building supportive relationships.
potpie@jsbarretto @alcinnz open source software is poetry in Machinese
Amin Girasol@jsbarretto @alcinnz There was a period earlier in my career working for commercial closed-source software development houses when fully fifty percent of what I was involved in building never made it to production. I got paid a salary and reinvested it into my community. The VCs who funded those companies took a haircut.
@fluidlogic @alcinnz 50% is good innings by today's standards!
HistoPol (#HP) 🏴 🇺🇸 🏴a perfect case in point for #UBI (Universal Basic income)
tshepang@HistoPol @jsbarretto that and universal basic services
@tshepang
I would need to give this idea some more thought.
You see, if a service does not cost anything at all, there tends to be waste and abuse.
If everyone is given a basic income to cover their (basic) needs, this would solve that problem too, don't you think?
In any event, public goods should be held by a (non-corrupt) state and not by private citizens or corporations (e.g. water rights).
@HistoPol @tshepang I think this is a common misnomer. When it comes to basic services, it's rare that they're abused. In the UK, healthcare is free at the point of use but nobody goes for a jolly down to the local hospital. Similarly, almost nobody does the same for food banks, social benefits, etc. without good reason. I don't think that humans actually behave like classical economics would suggest (i.e: as cynical min-maxers who will readily take over the needs of others).
@HistoPol @tshepang And this is *especially* true in societies with strong social cohesion, trust, and less inequality. One of the most striking things to me about visiting the Scandinavian nations was how much everybody cares for public and communal resources (at least, compared to the UK). Folks genuinely seem to understand the value of respecting and maintaining that stuff because everybody feels like they have a stake in it and that they're benefiting from it.
Interesting thoughts.
Apart from health care (where I tend to disagree, as the inflation rate, including innovation had been 12-15%, depending on the country, even before the Pandemic . The #NHS is in a huge crisis and even in non-Oil countries, maintaining it open for all is gigantic and access must be limited for the system not to break. - Limited regarding the scope of the services, not regarding nationals and residents.)
...which universal basic services do you see?
@HistoPol @tshepang What do you mean by 'see' exactly? I think food/healthcare/housing/water/heating/internet connection are all pretty essential for living in today's world, so I'd rather see their provision to all citizens be a statutory requirement placed upon both local and national governments.
@jsbarretto @HistoPol I would extend that to all, not just citizens, for it would be very sad to be denied such basic things for being born in the "wrong" place
@tshepang
In order for a state to take care of its citizens and (legal) residents who have to foot the bill, NO system can ever be open to all comers, as there are always limited resources.
Just have a look at the millions of war #refugees that had to be accommodated in the #EU.
Many low-income citizens and residents are already crowded out of an extremely tight housing market. Right-wing governments are already in place or might be soon. Asking for freedom...
...of movement for any human being a desirable as this may be, would simply lead to a breakdown of virtually all services provided by the state.
A case in point: the Lebanon, virtually a failed state.
No, a somewhat just solution would be that the old industrialized nations pay #ClimateReparations to the former #colonial countries, as the University of #Leeds recently suggested.
@HistoPol @jsbarretto does not have to be... modern states have great wealth, and can accommodate more than they already are, only it happens such resources are not efficiently distributed. I also would not view refugees as a burden... they too can bring value to the new society.
I strongly disagree with the "wealth" statement. Several G7 countries are greatly in debt and live on bortowed time. Many cannot even finance all that would be necessary to achieve the 1.5°C target.
Yes, of course immigrants bring new skillsets to a country. The problem arises when they become too many; just ask any surviving indigenous people of the Americas. 😉
I completely agree with the uneven wealth-distribution problem, however. In particular, the earth...
...cannot afford billionaires.
Capital markets
Here is an overview of the G20's and several NICa' state debts, customarily in % of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP, BIP in German.)
It shows, for how many years a country would have to use the complete monetary value of all of its goods and services generated in a year to repay their debts.
(Alas, it is in German, but most country names should be known from the Olympics.)
https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/684061/umfrage/staatsverschuldung-in-den-g20-staaten/
@HistoPol @tshepang You're not answering the question though, and answering it is critical. Who are they in debt *to*?
The answer is: their own private sector. And, further, these debts actually provide value to their host economies through stable government bonds.
Government debt is not the demon it's been made out to be and doesn't really have much bearing on the ability of an economy to support people.
@jsbarretto @tshepang
My knowledge as to the specific creditors is limited.
However, if you have read the Panama Papers, I seem to remember that e.g. Africa's wealth seems to be controlled chiefly by 3 families. (Don't quote me on that, it's been some years.)
But looking, selectively, at Russia, the US, Latin America, and many Arab countries, for instance, I'd hazard a guess: international #oligarchs.
@HistoPol @tshepang ...who only accrue the wealth that they do because the very governments that owe debt to them allow them to acquire said wealth. When you zoom out and look at economies on the scale of nations, debt ceases to be of interest (and even more so if those economies control their currency). Only productive capacity matters.
(1/2)
Interesting thought, but alas, no, not quite IMO.
You can only cancel out things within one mathematical term.
The oligarchs and the corporatists that control these debts are "extra-national," often holding several passports, and are NOT under the control of national governments (maybe with the partial exception of #Russia--different story.)
They, in turn, control Western democracies through their lobbyists and the...
(2/2)
...politicians on their payroll. The US have become a clear plutocracy since #CitizensUnitedVsFEC (see thread.)
A pars pro toto, #Elon: he controls 50% of global satellite 🛰 internet communications, and hardly any government can risk to alienate.
So, no, they do not factor out. Different groups/entities.
Here are some links regarding lobbyists, if needed:
https://mstdn.social/@corporateeurope/110513996813840660
https://newsie.social/@nbcnews/110433183224846421
https://mastodon.social/@HistoPol/110663430156794308
https://mstdn.social/@corporateeurope/110514000647075242
//
Corporate Europe Observatory (@[email protected])
🚨 BREAKING: 🚨 new research from @corporateeurope & @stopcorpabuse exposes how the Big 5 oil & gas majors have brought 400+ lobbyists to the U.N. climate talks since the signing of the Paris Agreement. #KickBigPollutersOut 🧵👇 https://kickbigpollutersout.org/articles/new-figures-show-big-oil-gas-flooding-un-climate-talks-paris-agreement
@HistoPol @jsbarretto yet those refugees have overall a better life in those crowded places, which is worth the reduced comfort for those who happen to be born in the "right" place
@tshepang @jsbarretto
I can totally understand that.
I have been to such countries.
I have also been to several of the EU and all N-American countries. You underestimate the power of the right-wing movements. They recruit a lot of their followers from what might be derisively called "white trash."
People, in other words, often with a low educational background and on the losing end of the looming Age of LLMs. In many countries, more crowding out on a massive scale is simply not socially tenable
I can totally understand that.
I have been to such countries.
I have also been to several of the EU and all N-American countries. You underestimate the power of the right-wing movements. They recruit a lot of their followers from what might be derisively called "white trash."
People, in other words, often with a low educational background and on the losing end of the looming Age of LLMs. In many countries, more crowding out on a massive scale is simply not socially tenable
@jsbarretto @HistoPol was thinking what if food was free at the shop, where you just go and take what you need (because am a dreamer): there would perhaps be what looks like looting for some time, then people would quickly realize that's not needed, because they would go back and see the shop is still stocked
@tshepang @HistoPol There's a gardening club where I live that I've just joined, based around the local park. The vegetable garden is communal and everybody is free to plant and take whatever they like. I planted some peas and lettuce the other day and brought home a red cabbage for dinner. Even though the vegetables are square in the centre of the park, in the middle of the city, nobody abuses it. People take what they need when it's ready, but make sure to leave plenty for others.
Fantastic. Not saying it can't work for smaller groups.
Yes, but obviously not poverty stricken and much smaller than any Scandinavian country. 😉
And again: great.
@tshepang
@HistoPol @jsbarretto institutions managing such services could be corrupt indeed, but there are solutions to that, like reducing movement of money (where, for example, governments would not contract private companies to do the work)
(1/n)
Very interesting. You thought of corruption by administrators (and rightly so, see my posts, e.g., about Nestlé and water-rights abuses, e.g., in the US and elsewhere.)
I thought more of abuse by citizens. People tend to value services that are free of charge low.
Regarding the showcase of #Scandinavian countries, they cannot be the benchmark. I'm no #anthropologist but I'd suspect that the following factors influence this result:
1) relatively...
(2/n)
small, and until recently, a fairly
homogeneous population.
2) Rich and highly educated populations.
3) Centuries of common enterprise (e.g. #Viking raids.) Mist other countries lack such characteristics.
Very different: Native American tribes.
There might be other factors.
People, generally, tend to be ill-disciplined in huge crowds where individual stakeholdership and malfeasance don't lead to ostracism, as in ancient times. (My hypothesis)
Therefore,...
(3/3)
...even public goods must have a monetary, and not just an intrinsic value. This can be offset by #UBI.
It's a zero-sum game, really, but leads to significantly different results, IMHO.
//
Daniel Lakeland@HistoPol
To augment this thought, making people pay for stuff tends towards making apparent how important that stuff is. If you give a UBI and then charge park admissions for example you could find out how much people prefer the beach park to the garden park... Or whatever. When you provide a variety of free services there isn't a way for the public to vote "a lot more of this and less of that"
@tshepang @jsbarretto
To augment this thought, making people pay for stuff tends towards making apparent how important that stuff is. If you give a UBI and then charge park admissions for example you could find out how much people prefer the beach park to the garden park... Or whatever. When you provide a variety of free services there isn't a way for the public to vote "a lot more of this and less of that"
@tshepang @jsbarretto
@HistoPol
With an appropriate UBI we get a lot more efficient use of resources. Because money has been so corrupted by political power people tend to forget that it's purpose is actually *communication* it's an information transfer medium
@tshepang @jsbarretto
With an appropriate UBI we get a lot more efficient use of resources. Because money has been so corrupted by political power people tend to forget that it's purpose is actually *communication* it's an information transfer medium
@tshepang @jsbarretto
@dlakelan
Thank you, my thinking.
I see it the same way, you put it more succinctly.
@dlakelan @HistoPol @jsbarretto you could simply witness what people prefer, no need for money exchange
@tshepang @HistoPol @jsbarretto
You can't witness the degree of preference though. Suppose you have two beaches, one has better surfing. On any given day 1000 people go to both beaches. Both beaches are "equally good" right? What if I told you that the 1000 surfers would pay $40 to park there, but the 1000 other beach goers would only pay $5. It's not enough to see how many people go where to give you good information about how to allocate resources.
@dlakelan @HistoPol @jsbarretto to help clarify, what information does this give (about where to allocate more resources)
@tshepang
My impression would be that it generates more resources, as more money is generated.
@dlakelan @jsbarretto
I have to head out. Was great chatting with you all. 😀
I will check back to this convo. Have a nice eve.
@tshepang @HistoPol @jsbarretto
For example it might tell you to allocate resources to a special bus that goes to the surfing beach that can take surfboards, where you can board the bus a few miles away in some kind of parking structure, enabling more people to surf the beach without requiring us to build parking next to the beach. Just as an example.
@dlakelan @HistoPol @jsbarretto it's not clear to me why having both parks free stops you from getting information on what to do where
@tshepang @HistoPol @jsbarretto
In general there are other ways you can gain information, but money transactions makes for a single comparable measuring stick between any goods and services, do you enhance the beach, or have more concerts in the park, or have more bus transport or plant more fish in lakes or provide more educational opportunities for kids or ... having a way to compare everything (price) is vastly superior to a hodgepodge of surveys and whatnot.