this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2021
21 points (92.0% liked)
Open Source
31066 readers
465 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's all relative and obfuscated given we're trying to place software development under definitions of social thought, and similar as to how Marxism isn't about trying to place your family's store in either the bourgeois or petit-bourgeois bucket, it makes it even harder to place specific software under definitions as well. So take this as just a fun exercise!
But I guess based off my previous examples, you could say that Signal would fall under a category of more "socialized" means of production but for the profit (in this case "profit" as Signal's dealings are murkier, this is a good read on it) in the end for someone else, or "socialized" production under a capitalist system, which is still exploitation; the closest real-world example would be co-ops. While co-ops are those specific workers technically owning the means of production for that specific company, but it still being a company working within capitalism, it doesn't change anything as it's not societal.
Cooperatives can also be formed with a revolutionary spirit and take part in broader social struggles. See also: LIP, 1336, Viome...
Enlightening, thanks!