Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by c1sc0 8 days ago
Maybe these things should be utilities that can be swapped out at will and shouldn’t even be privately owned at all? Heresy, I know!
1 comments

Having a five-year plan dictating which publicly owned b2b SaaS AI service you will be provisioned sure sounds like a dream of mine. I wonder what could go wrong.
Open source is as opposite as state ownership as it is to private ownership.
Open Source comes out of Anarchist philosophy not Communist State owned type ideas. There is no direct ownership, its a project built as a common good, and owned by "the public". Its a community garden that people are free to plant and harvest as they see fit.
The concept of a common-pool resource has nothing to do with awkward radical political ideologies.
I am the furthest thing from an Anarchist, but to deny that Anarchism influenced the ideas of Open Source Software is factually wrong.
> I am the furthest thing from an Anarchist

I know this is beside the point but I'm quite amused by this statement. Are you saying you're a totalitarian? I'm not trying to poke at you here; I'm genuinely interested what you consider the furthest thing from an anarchist to be?

From an Anarchist perspective isn't any state necessarily totalitarian? But I do believe there aught to be a strong, patriarchal, centralized state with strict laws and severe punishments. I think Singapore is close to an ideal.
The concept of common-pool resource is the basis of the commons, the default state of mankind since its inception to recent times, and the philosophy of commons is called COMMUNism for a reason. In English, it should have been translated more correctly as COMMONism, from the COMMONS.
Correct. It is therefore COMMUNist with the correct term. That's what communism is - the philosophy of the commons. Except note that the running of that commons, which everyone uses, requires socialist practices (what you mistakenly call communist).