Today is the official release of the latest version of Ubuntu, the most popular Linux-based operating system. Someone mentioned that there had been a new release of the Windows OS recently and if you’re thinking of going with that one, we feel you should a least give Ubuntu a try. Now in its 11th official release and codenamed Karmic Koala, this version of Ubuntu continues the traditional six month development cycle by succeeding Jaunty Jackalope which was released in April of this year.
We’ve been running the beta release of Ubuntu Netbook Remix for several weeks now. It cut boot time down to between 5-10 seconds and WiFi is already connected by the time the Desktop loads. Speed isn’t the only new feature, graphics have been redesigned, there is a new app store that serves as a front end for the extensive free software repositories, and the newest kernel and software versions are included.
We’ve been using this open source operating system since its third release, Breezy Badger. We love it for the quality, convenience, and the fact that we can get our fingers into the code and hack around a bit.
“Sounds like a bunch of socialist chatter if you ask me.”
Mmm. Shameless trolling? Maybe. However…
Dear Thomas, you are wrong at so many levels, you almost deserve a prize.
First, you just committed a fallacy, in the form of an ad hominem argument (I am assuming you refer to pro-free software arguments as “socialist chatter”). Search Wikipedia to get informed.
Second, you use Socialism as an insult, which from a Fascist point of view it must be, I concede. I know many Americans (the web is not only USA, BTW) are paralyzed by fear or hatred at the sound of “Socialism”, but that’s ridiculous. One can dismiss Socialism for its many errors, but if a socialist said the sky is blue, it wouldn’t make it red, “because the socialist must be wrong”. Similarly, many socialist ideas could be beneficial. One just has to choose (as hard as it may sound, I’m proposing to actually use your brain, instead of parroting brainwashing mottos).
Third, it’s proprietary software, if any, the “Socialist” model. Free Software is about freedom, about giving power to the user. The proprietary sw industry (as all hard-core capitalist industries) is heavily communist, trying to impose a monopoly/oligopoly (totalitarian central control) on the users (citizens) and taking power away from them. They want to control what you use and how, and what you share with others. They try to be the only source of authority-sanctioned goods, depriving the users of the right to create and share anything, and specially that which goes against their (industry’s) status quo. That sounds to you like capitalism?
@Inaki: “… all hard-core capitalist industries … is heavily communist… That sounds to you like capitalism?”
I think you’re trying to redefine words to mean what you want them to mean, thus ending up with nonsense like the above.
You’re mixing up several concepts. There’s capitalism, in which economic activity is driven by the private sector, versus socialism/communism where the economy is centrally controlled by the gov’t.
There’s freedom, in which people are able to live their lives as they choose, versus totalitarianism, in which the government directs their lives.
There’s corporations, which are groups of people voluntarily working towards a common goal.
There’s contract law, where people freely choose to alter their behavior in return for something else they want.
And there’s copyright law, which is an attempt to define property rights (a concept alien to communism) on non-physical items.
Criticize one or more of these if you want. But don’t expect us to accept that the use of copyright law or contract law is totalitarian or communist, or that corporations are communist. You’re being Orwellian.
Bob,
You stir the pot Bob, with a large spoon. :)
I now use Ubuntu exclusively (as of 2 days ago) ..but I still have XP under my desk just in case.
I think its a wonderful alternative to paying for an OS. Ubuntu seems to be driven buy an enthusiastic group of people who really seem to thrive on making this system better than it was “yesterday” just because they want to.
I have to respect that.
I have even started playing around with command lines. It’s really enjoyable because I can grab my (learning curve) GUI if I need it.
I really think its just a preference as to what OS you like.
Some people drive the race car and after the race drink a beer……ahhhh sounds nice.
Some people drive the race car and then after the race work on the race car…..ahhhhh sounds nice.
……..some do both, but I digress…
What ever makes you happy ;)
I do believe that you should know how to rotate your tires,change your oil,plugs, brakes, and in extreme situations change your timing belt if necessary.
Thats how I feel about my OS and thats why I am pursuing Linux/Ubuntu. I really want to understand whats going on under the hood.
for what ever its worth thats my thought
“I think you’re trying to redefine words to mean what you want them to mean, thus ending up with nonsense like the above.
You’re mixing up several concepts. There’s capitalism, in which economic activity is driven by the private sector, versus socialism/communism where the economy is centrally controlled by the gov’t.”
I.e. “capitalism” = the best offer is used by consumers, freely (yes, you have to mix concepts. Without freedom to choose, capitalism is but a hollow word); “communism” = someone decides unilaterally, then everyone uses that. Now tell me how monopolistic corporations (e.g. MS) are not communist in their goals (re-read the previous definitions). All the corporations I know complain that the government should not control the market, because it should be free, when in fact they mean that THEY want to be the ones dominating it. Real market freedom is the *last* thing a dominating corporation wants. And show me a corporation that does not wish to become dominating.
“There’s freedom, in which people are able to live their lives as they choose, versus totalitarianism, in which the government directs their lives. ”
OK. You have separated freedom and capitalism/communism, fairly enough. Now tell me how monopolistic corporations such as MS are not totalitarian AND communist. Just because MS is not the government? That’s a moot point. The whole point of communism is that some people choose in the name of the community, for the sake of the community. Monopolistic corporations differ only in that they decide in the name of the community, for the sake of themselves (which most communist governments have done, as well).
Also, tell me how free software and its advocates can be labeled either totalitarian AND/OR communist. Maybe in some people’s eyes (Thomas above) looking for the best for the community equals communism? We should ask them.
Inaki, communism is not “someone decides unilaterally”. Communism is what Karl Marx described and/or what the USSR, China, et al implemented. Communism is implemented by a government. It uses an army and police force to implement its decisions. MS is not communist.
Does it attempt to dominate its market? Yes, indeed. But even if it succeeds, it’s not communist. Nor is it totalitarian: no one has accused MS of trying to dictate where you live, whom you associate with, whom you vote for, or anything like that.
So if you don’t like MS, that’s fine. But calling them totalitarian or communist is as silly as suggesting Obama is a Nazi.
As for calling FOSS advocates totalitarian or communist: that’s silly too. I, frankly, suspect that some FOSS advocates are communists, and that they find FOSS compatible with their beliefs. But I know for a fact that many aren’t, and in fact there are free-market arguments against copyright law, too.
“Communism is implemented by a government. It uses an army and police force to implement its decisions. MS is not communist. […] I, frankly, suspect that some FOSS advocates are communists, […]”
How could they (FOSS advocates)? Are they the government? Have they an army? Then, as MS, they are not communists. Besides, many FOSS advocates might be vegan or left-handed, and that doesn’t make the FOSS movement any less omnivore or ambidextrous.
Being a government, having a police and an army, all that is accessory. It’s a way to an end, not an end in itself. MS, and other monopolistic corporations, have found a subtler way to force their will. So what? It’s still communism. Or, at any rate, it’s the opposite of true capitalism, whatever this opposite might be.
Communism is not dictating where you live, whom you associate with or whom you vote for. All that is also accessory. Communism is an *economical* system, and only applies to economy (of course, economy being so central to society, economical systems permeate all the aspects of our life). In other words: to what is produced and how, and what is consumed and by whom. And that is what monopolistic corporations try to control.
Besides, one could argue that MS *does* coerce you to live (use an OS), associate with (share contents) and vote (use individual programs) only in a MS-sanctioned way. Once Windows is prevalent, choice of OS is made as difficult as can be, which is coercion. You can not just try, say, MacOS for 3 months, use it in equal footing, and then go back to Windows because you like it better (even paying all the licenses in the process). MS makes sure, via incompatibilities, that using anything else is as painful as they can make it. Not because their offer is better (capitalism), but because the user has no real choice (communism). About contents, they force proprietary and closed formats on their users, so as to make competition impossible. They’ve gone markedly out of their way to make, e.g., MS Office documents as closed as possible, to avoid them being read by any other software. At the same time, they’ve resisted all they have been able to to give MSO the capability to read other open formats (such as ODF), in clear damage for their users’ interests, and in their own benefit. Besides, with Treacherous Computing, an HDCP-compliant graphics card-only OS and all that crap, they bow to third parties’ interests, harming their customers’ interests again, and actually controlling (or trying to) what they see and how.
I am yet to see a definition of Communism and/or Totalitarianism that MS does not fit into. But show me one in which the FOSS movement does fit.
Inaki, this is the wrong place for this. I will make my final statement, and let you have the last word.
1) When I say some FOSS advocates are communists, I mean that they believe a Marxist society is desirable. I do not mean that they are currently in power, thus they don’t need an army to qualify as communists. It is more relevant than left-handedness or veganism because they mesh their FOSS advocacy with their positions on corporations and property rights.
2) Being a gov’t and using force is not “accessory” to communism; it is central. Karl Marx explicitly calls for the use of violence and force.
3) I never said communism dictated where you live, etc. Re-read my sentence; I start it with a reference to totalitarianism. (Of course, every communist country in history has quickly become totalitarian, but that’s another issue.)
4) When you say “one could argue that MS *does* coerce you to live (use an OS), associate with (share contents) and vote (use individual programs) only in a MS-sanctioned way.” you are redefining “live”, “associate with” and “vote”. Don’t deny it; it’s right there in your parentheses. Look “live” up in the dictionary and you’ll find no reference to operating systems. And that brings us right back, in a circle, to my posting on Nov. 30 when I said “I think you’re trying to redefine words to mean what you want them to mean”. QED.
5) Everything you accuse MS of falls under the definition of monopolistic behavior. It does not fall under the definition of communism or totalitarianism. (And BTW, I don’t agree that MS is guilty of all your accusations, but that’s an argument for another century.)
It’s bad enough that you’re using scare words unfairly to bolster your argument. But you are trivializing the horrors of true communism and totalitarianism and insulting everyone in North Korea and Iran who are dying – let me say that again DYING – BEING MURDERED – BEING TORTURED – by real communists and real totalitarians. This isn’t a friggin joke. Those words have real, horrible meaning.
So get a grip on yourself. Hate MS if you want. But until it has conquered a nation and herded Linux users into death camps, I really don’t want to hear any more of your nonsense.
Bob, I, on the contrary, don’t find your words nonsense. You do have a point, and I concede it.
When I make parallelisms between MS (and monopolies in general) with totalitarianism or communism, it turns out you make a hearty critic of my boldness. But, how come I don’t hear the same outrage when [adjective left out to avoid name calling] like Thomas above berate FOSS ideals tagging them as “Socialist”? Because there is no single argument in your fierce defense of MS that would not apply (and much more so) to FOSS, to “defend” it from being called socialist.
Also, yes I “redefine” life, association and vote. It’s a freakin’ parallelism! IT life vs “real” life. Life does have a lot of compartments. You have one life at work, another one at home, another one on the internet, another one when you go out… You have an interior life when you read a book or watch a good movie. All of them are linked, and all of them form YOU, the person. MS being dedicated to IT, it is to be expected that it acts on your IT life. Don’t tell me that being unable to contact my Bank online because their site is “For IE only” is not “real life”! Don’t tell me that it doesn’t matter that I could not read a joke a friend sent me because of stupid MSO formats, because jokes are not “real life”. My government spending MY tax money on MS licenses (probably because they get a cut), instead of using better free software, and spending the money somewhere else does certainly qualify as “real life” in my universe. Real people DIED because money spent by the government on Windows licenses didn’t go to hospitals (yes, I know it’s demagogy. As your Iran quote above). Not to mention economic harms brought by trojans, botnets and botnet-related DDoS attacks, all of them courtesy of MS Windows, your humble bug-ridden malware-friendly servant.
BTW, I reassert what I said before: being a government or having an army is accessory to Communism. Capitalist governments also have armies, and also apply the force to maintain the system. Capitalist democracies (as opposed to Communist totalitarian countries) also murder (well, not all democracies have death penalty, I concede) and torture (well, not all democracies have Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib, I concede). And millions of corporations worldwide define themselves as capitalist, and are not governments. Brute force is just a tool to implement ideals, be they Communism, Capitalism or Christianity. Using other tools (brainwashing ads and FUD or market dominion) doesn’t make Capitalism less Capitalism, or Communism less Communism.
It was nice to discuss with you, Bob. I will certainly take your points into account, and maybe I’ll see my position with a new light. Thanks.