Who wants another Silicon Valley? Their model is foundationally based on "moving fast and breaking things".
What about focusing on responsible, organic stewardship and community over growth at any cost? If no one's making any real money, we don't have to hitch our cart to the capitalist horse which has resulted in our current situation.
taiidan
joined 2 years ago
Very nice!
Stunning!
That's a great point. I hadn't thought about it quite that way before. Thanks.
I had to think about this a bit. Ultimately, I still can't think of any historical precedents where a people reacted proactively to a threat with relatively unknown consequences (to the individual). Maybe I'm missing something.
While it does no harm (and in fact probably makes sense) to invest in multiple strategies to fight climate change as a society, I have to admit that I don't think attempting to change people's minds regarding climate change is the most effectual. Consider that not only do you have to convince the "Western" world (which already has a high standard of living) to reduce emissions, you also have to somewhat repress development of nations which are striving to industrialize and will almost certainly be emitting more greenhouse and toxic gases in the future. See China, India, Africa, etc.
I agree that blaming consumers is counter-productive to the goal of convincing society to be more sustainable, but given the limited time we have, technologies like carbon capture, fusion, massive solar/wind, should be the core strategy in ameliorating the effects of climate change.
Slowing/stopping/reversing climate change could be achieved much more readily if "people" (in general or specifically activists) were willing to accept some sacrifice, which is to say decrease in their standard of living.
However, I think that's a third rail that no one wants to touch. See "veganism is too hard", "biking takes too long", "I'm really busy, I have to use plastic water bottles", etc. There are of course people for which it really is not possible, but also many where they are just unwilling to sacrifice.
Therefore, the only way to maintain our current standard of living while ameliorating climate change is through rapid technological advancement. I'm not hopeful.
I wholeheartedly agree, though I will need to look up the XNU kernel and the relevance of licensing to Elasticsearch and Terraform. I develop and use R packages and am happy to see that the majority (70%) of those packages are GPL. Not core linux infrastructure, but I an at least happy in my small corner of the OSS community.
Thank for the reply!
I definitely understand your preference for copyleft licenses.
This is off-topic but are there any recent media that have strengthened your views for GPL or even AGPL (outside of Stallman) over MIT/ISC?
I have been using Zotero for a while and syncing my library directory with Syncthing, even though they say not to (no problem in 7 years including PhD and job).
If you want something even more minimalist, it is possible with the command line too, , which is the approximate setup I'm currently using in my pharma job.
Look at the European, having to only stock metric screw sizes, so lucky. Kidding!
I'm definitely going to try this out. Looks great!
I don't support the .NET Framework which is a dependency of most (all?) of the -arr suite. It's a fairly divisive and niche argument so I didn't bring it up initially, but I try to reduce my reliance on proprietary software and hardware as much as possible.
Irrelevant. You can sublicense MIT to GPL by forking if you're so inclined.