Coding4Fun @ Coding4Fun @lemmy.ml

Posts

1

Comments

26

Joined

4 mo. ago

I am very curious to see how US, the fascist dog of Israel will react to that. More taxes?

Saying that USSR didn't extract wealth from other countries in the block, treating them as colonies is a huge stretch. All the political control was crntralized in Moskow, Russia promoted a vast resource extraction, specially from Ukraine, imposed language suppression, cultural assimilation and demographic engineering e.g. Holodomor.

Neither is US. The empire reference is related to the imperialist state policies. Not the same but similar to that was the policies of USSR with other countries of the Soviet block and what Kzar Putin is trying to do with th Baltic's today.

Your point of view about the Glasnost, Perestroika and consequently the dissolution seems more from the structuralist point of view (which is valid and revelvant for the dissolution), while my argument is more from the economic point of view.

In a very pragmatic way, the closed economy model of USSR imposed many of the issues that deepened the structural problems (like you mentioned) and accelerated the dissolution. Based on Gorbachev own opinion, the Chernobyl disaster was the start of the dissolution: combination of a repressive internal policy creating a fertile environment for corruption, burocracy and inneficiency, together with an outdated industry caused by isolationism.

US seems to be doing the same: closing its economy, negationism, losing diplomatic relevance, ...

Although a completely imbecile, Elon is right in one point: there is only one party in US right now, and it is not even remotely aligned with what the Americans need/desire. Same type of structural corrosion that brought the Soviet block to dissolution.

Along of it history, yes. During its dissolution, unless I am missing something, there was no fight.

Not exactly true. USSR, felt without a single drop o blood, most because it's economic opening movement started too late. US government is taking actions that are isolating US commercially, increasing its debt and losing relevance in the world's diplomacy.

After helping Israel with the Palestinian genocide. Such a great america company! I think we should trust them recording our screens to train a "personal ai".

Social media as we know.

It is not a matter to "want to hide". It is more a matter to "need to know" access to my personal information. Why government want to know where and when I buy my stuffs? And most important, who will have acces to that? US recently saw that imbecile of Elon Musk being grant access to IRS data.

Does US wants a new 9/11? Because this is how they get a new 9/11.

A clear example of a psychological damaged person.

Amém!

Although very plausible when talking about MAGA, it was not our political opinions that raised the issues. I value to travel and have different experiences over house, car, fancy clothes. I am also very concerned about the future and I prefer to be sometimes bored at home and save money than do things that I don't see as important. She has the exactly opposite opinion and we could not compromise. The things got worse when I started to wish to move abroad for a while and she didn't buy also didn't say no.

Don't get me wrong: I have my good share of things to blame, specially by being inflexible with my opinions.

Completely incompatibility between views of the world. It can sound a civilised realisation, but the process to discover that was very messy with lots of frustration that started to compromise the mutual admiration and respect along few years.

Today I only wish good things to my ex-wife and I truly don't hold any bad feeling, but equally I don't want to see her ever again in my life.

Oh! Who would ever think that such thing could be possible?

You misspelled "dog".

Sorry. I didn't mean to direct to an specific president. It applies to any US president. Trump is a bit more aggressive, but he is like this about anything.

Monsters. And while the have their dog in the white house, nothing will happen to them.

I think this is not exactly the point. I never thought that license would fight rocket. Nor I thought that an authoritarian regime would respect license.

The first point affects more countries and companies that still keep ties with those regimes.

The second point is to have a clear position. For me it is hypocritical to say "open source for a better world" at the same time that we say "how my contributions are used is not my problem".

I bet with you that commo libraries like slf4j, junit, poetry, fastapi, etc. are being used by those regimes and their associates very often. Make a license more restrictive would create legal problems for any legitimate foreign entity to buy from those regimes. If they opt to re-inplement those libraries, it's fine as well: tons of resources and money expended by those jerks.

Even commercial licenses are problematic to enforce, I know. But send a clear message seems a point where our hands can reach and worth to pursue.

Amnesty International is a good start point to evaluate if a government is violent, authoritarian or perpetrating crimes against human rights.

You don't deal with extremists. Dialog only works with who is willing to dialog.

Radicals maybe not wrong about their claimings but are wrong about heir methods.

I replied another comment about enforcing the licenses is not the only thing to consider. Secondary effects like making impossible to sell product to other countries that do respect the license, make it difficult to distribut the software to de "sanctioned" countries and even stop to offer support are some consequences that the community can impose.

A good start to define an authoritarian government is recognizing what Amnesty International says. It is credible.

For a totalitarian government, there is no law enforcement. And I would say that you are absolutely right saying that no license will stop the usage in this case.

But there are other implications that could come from a restrictive licensing like make the distribution hard in that country, make it impossible to sell solutions with unlawful licensing to countries that are not totalitarian, make it hard or impossible to obtain support for that.

But in essence, more than everything, is the open source community sending a clear message that we don't collaborate with monsters.