wardJun 24, 2024
I keep getting comments that Linux is more of a capitalistic organization than a corporation like MS because anyone is free to create their own version, etc... The comment is usually one that's supposed to make capitalism sound like a free market; maybe libertarians?

What did I miss? Did someone make a video essay about this or something. I am getting this comment all the time and it's nonsense.
Show threadCyberspice
@ward That’s the original definition of capitalism in economics. In economics the price is set by the market because everyone can create their own version and compete. I’ve always argued that nations like the US aren’t capitalist, they are something else.
Jun 24, 2024 at 6:21amWeb
Show threadwardJun 24, 2024
@cyberspice not really... "In a capitalist economy, capital assets—such as factories, mines, and railroads—can be privately owned and controlled, labor is purchased for money wages, capital gains accrue to private owners, and prices allocate capital and labor between competing uses"

The key thing for me is labor... labor is paid in wages. That is what makes capitalism different imo. You are not keeping the fruit of your labor, you are giving it to the one who owns the means of production... the ones who own all the capital. It's a system where the minority can control a vast majority of the people. To discuss linux in these terms is basically nonsensical imo.

Markets existed far before capitalism as well. It doesn't make sense to discuss Linux in terms of monetary systems imo.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 24, 2024
@ward Labo(u) is paid in wages. A lot of European countries would be considered socialist by US peeps but they still pay labour in wages. My company is employee owned and our labour is paid in wages. You can have non capitalist economies and still pay for peoplea’ labour in wages.
Show threadmaydayJun 26, 2024
@cyberspice @ward the difference is that the company necessarily makes a profit off your labor though. If the amount your good or service is sold for is greater than the wage you’re being paid (which it must necessarily be) you’re being stolen from. You are not getting the full value of your labor paid to you.
Show threadwardJun 26, 2024
@cyberspice so your company is employee owned... do you get bonuses, do you own shares, or are wages the only remuneration? In which case, what is the point of the company being employee owned? Also, democratic socialism is a lot better, but it's still capitalism with social programs. It isn't socialism.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 26, 2024
@ward Yes we get profit share and performance related bonuses.
Show threadwardJun 26, 2024
@cyberspice Profit share is not just a normal wage. That's how I think all companies should run.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 28, 2024
@ward I am really happy wear I work. Not the best salary but a good one, profit related pay, bonuses, medical insurance (this is the UK so that basically just speeds up treatment), pension payments by the company, 30 days vacation, paternity leave of a month (not that I need it), maternity leave of six (don’t need it either), death in service assurance, mental health support, the ability to take an unpaid sabbatical of several months and come back to your job. That’s everything I can remember.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 26, 2024

@ward “Also, democratic socialism is a lot better, but it's still capitalism with social programs. It isn't socialism.”

I think we will have to differ on that. To me socialism is not communism. You are talking about communism.

Show threadwardJun 26, 2024
@cyberspice well, I'm ok to leave it at that then. I don't know what communism would actually look like since it's never really existed. The "communist" countries so far has all had brutal authoritarian regimes... somewhat antithetical to the definition of communism. I doubt it would work on a large scale.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 28, 2024
@ward The problem with communism is it assumes everyone is altruistic. They aren’t a lot of people are greedy, power hungry and just nasty. That’s why communist countries kind of end up how they are. Social Democracy tends to sort of work because there’s a balance. At the moment the UK is out of balance but I’m hoping next Thursday we start getting back in balance.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 28, 2024
@ward After WW2 the UK nationalised (ie government bought out) the railways, the mines, the water, the electricity, the hospitals, the car industry, the aircraft industry and so. There were schemes like the railways continues to run steam trains so that the mines had customers. Unfortunately it turns out governments aren’t good at running businesses. The more owned by a government the poorer it performs. Our cars in the 70s were no better than eastern european ones and its basically why we have very little UK owned car industry. The names that remain like Bentley. Rolls Royce, Jaguar, Landrover, Mini are all owned by foreign companies now.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 24, 2024
@ward And if you say well Linux devs don’t get wages they get something else. One of the problems with Linix is that people don’t want to do the uncool roles, write documentation, unit tests, bug fixing and so on. It why we’ve had multiple sound architectures and so on. A lot of the big distris are backed by money. I’ve published open source code and it was paid for by my employer because it was good for everyone. But it was paid with money for my wages because I still have to eat, have somewhere to live and so on.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 24, 2024
@ward “ Markets existed far before capitalism as well. It doesn't make sense to discuss Linux in terms of monetary systems imo.” Those markets were still capitalist. If you have two suppliers of milk in your village. You have to select one of them based on some kind of factors, cheapness, quality. whatwver. The dairy farmers still make a profit based on how their fare in the market. And how donthe milk maids live?
Show threadwardJun 25, 2024
@cyberspice the goal of each dairy farmer was to make money, raise capital, etc. When one forks a Linux distro, the motivations are not always the same. I also do not think that there is a direct correlation when it comes to competition, because some open source projects are not designed to compete in the same way. They do not care if they take market share away from another project. They are just forking to create something they want.. again, it's nonsensical to my brain to discuss linux in this way. They aren't competing for customers and they aren't selling things. Linux is a more organic community project that doesn't fit well into these terms.
Show threadCyberspiceJun 24, 2024
@ward Oh the UK stock exchange was founded in 1571. How far do you want to go back?