not sure why this isn't under \tech\ but, oh well, whatever. you bring up some fundamental failings of democracy. it only works if people are informed, and being informed is not a passive activity it takes work. and a system that requires the active good will of all to work, doesn't. thus they turn almost immediately toward despotism. foss at least forces a groundwork where any sufficiently motivated individual can try to turn their little ship somewhat. of course as 2 says this is ideally done with a simpler ship. that's why there are at least a couple people on here who keep saying plan9. it at least gives you /all/ the code, and all the documentation you need to attempt an understanding. the codebase is also quite small compared to the bsds and god forbid the linuxes. this is also why the terry davis zealots exist. for all it's failings templeos is miniscule compared to modern corporate garbage.
and yes most people don't care. no one can ever make them care. as a the noose tightens further and further they won't see what's happened until far too late. some sense of superiority to those may be inherit to the prospect of caring about freedom at all. latex isn't the foss equivalent to word btw 2, it's troff. but see that's "superiority" and what's worse is it's pointless. I still have to run my "much more readable code" on silicon i can not by any means audit. I still have to adhere to standards I have no say in to transmit these characters to your display.
3's implication is that C is unchangeable, and this is wrong. it is. you just have to know it. knowing it is a fair bit easier with C to begin with, but does lack some of the more abstracted ease of lisp at the high end, but again, if you aren't reading those abstracted details then you've set yourself to fall into the trap of control again. live modification to a system is a nice ideal, but im not convinced this can only be accomplished through the likes of lisp and forth. so we need to compile things to change them? so what?
There is this idea that computer's were intended to benefit normans that i just don't think tracks, except in some trickle down economy nonsense way. has the proliferation of pocket sized mainframes benefited anyone? so they can post a 100 times filtered video clip to others, and see the 100 times filtered videos of nearly everyone else. so what? how is this a benefit other than some shiny new thing to market and drive profits? the current zeitgeist contains an active counter current to this on the very basis that it isn't useful, and\or accepting it's limited utility maintaining an aggression toward the control it costs.
you bring up some fundamental failings of democracy. it only works if people are informed, and being informed is not a passive activity it takes work. and a system that requires the active good will of all to work, doesn't. thus they turn almost immediately toward despotism.
foss at least forces a groundwork where any sufficiently motivated individual can try to turn their little ship somewhat. of course as 2 says this is ideally done with a simpler ship. that's why there are at least a couple people on here who keep saying plan9. it at least gives you /all/ the code, and all the documentation you need to attempt an understanding. the codebase is also quite small compared to the bsds and god forbid the linuxes. this is also why the terry davis zealots exist. for all it's failings templeos is miniscule compared to modern corporate garbage.
and yes most people don't care. no one can ever make them care. as a the noose tightens further and further they won't see what's happened until far too late. some sense of superiority to those may be inherit to the prospect of caring about freedom at all.
latex isn't the foss equivalent to word btw 2, it's troff.
but see that's "superiority" and what's worse is it's pointless.
I still have to run my "much more readable code" on silicon i can not by any means audit. I still have to adhere to standards I have no say in to transmit these characters to your display.
3's implication is that C is unchangeable, and this is wrong. it is. you just have to know it. knowing it is a fair bit easier with C to begin with, but does lack some of the more abstracted ease of lisp at the high end, but again, if you aren't reading those abstracted details then you've set yourself to fall into the trap of control again.
live modification to a system is a nice ideal, but im not convinced this can only be accomplished through the likes of lisp and forth. so we need to compile things to change them? so what?
There is this idea that computer's were intended to benefit normans that i just don't think tracks, except in some trickle down economy nonsense way. has the proliferation of pocket sized mainframes benefited anyone? so they can post a 100 times filtered video clip to others, and see the 100 times filtered videos of nearly everyone else. so what? how is this a benefit other than some shiny new thing to market and drive profits? the current zeitgeist contains an active counter current to this on the very basis that it isn't useful, and\or accepting it's limited utility maintaining an aggression toward the control it costs.