Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   pettter (pettter@mastodon.acc.umu.se)'s status on Monday, 18-Nov-2024 19:35:42 JST pettter

   • Paris Marx
   • tante

   Listening to @tante talking about open source stuff on Tech Won't Save Us with @parismarx , and I have to say I take issue with the story being about a 'corporate takeover' of open source. No, OS and the OSI was always corporate. That was the whole point of extracting the politics.

   • Embed this notice
     pettter (pettter@mastodon.acc.umu.se)'s status on Monday, 18-Nov-2024 20:13:53 JST pettter

     in reply to

     • Paris Marx
     • tante

     @tante @parismarx I think you made it kiiiind of clear at various points but it wasn't entirely consistent mostly.

   • Embed this notice
     tante (tante@tldr.nettime.org)'s status on Monday, 18-Nov-2024 20:13:55 JST tante

     in reply to

     • Paris Marx

     @pettter @parismarx I do agree, we probably didn't make that clear enough.
     But for a long time many people pretended that the OSI was something different (I pointed that out in the article that sparked the conversation but I think it was way too much in the weeds for the podcast https://tante.cc/2024/10/16/does-open-source-ai-really-exist/ )

   • Embed this notice
     pettter (pettter@mastodon.acc.umu.se)'s status on Monday, 18-Nov-2024 21:35:13 JST pettter

     in reply to

     • Paris Marx
     • tante

     @tante @parismarx another nitpick about democratising software etc. 'Who understands what a GitHub issue is?' Sure, but who understands the process by which laws are made? Who can write a motion to their local or national government and not have it be thrown out? It is a tricky balance and I'm not saying that the current way is perfect, but at some level, meaningful and useful feedback requires a common language about the thing, and that's not something that just arises or you learn from no work