[nycbug-talk] on a 'lighter note' about cloud computing

[Miles Nordin]

>>>>> "ms" == Marc Spitzer <mspitzer at gmail.com> writes:

    ms> when he get into how the market plays into things then he
    ms> blows it as it is a religious issue with him,IMO.

``the market'' seems to be a religious issue with anyone who
incorporates it so intimately into his idealogy.  I think Stallman's
positions are better-compartmentalized than those of the typical
libertarian geek who is trying to tell me competition among peoples,
nations, companies, ideas, and software licenses is the driving engine
of all progress, and thus by ``definition'' (progress=good), Good:

 http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?p=9335059

I find the universalism and the certainty frightening, in the same way
that seriously religious people seem to crave certainty and universal
ideas are also frightening to me.  Certainty causes people to behave
drastically.  Craved certainty is likely false certainty.  Someone who
craves certainty is thus disposed to behave drastically and
mistakenly, and someone who craves the certainty of an ordered world
is likely to behave like a fascist.  so to me it feels like they are
out of control.  and FWIW, I perceive Stallman with his wild hair,
dubious hygeine, and extreme positions far outside the status-quo, as
_less_ out-of-control than the average Stephenson-reading geek
libertarian who largely agrees with the capitalist status-quo but is
just so motherfucking certain about it.

Stallman very clearly does understand that his ideal world is not the
one we live in, and he's extremely careful and deliberate about the
means he uses in trying to move from the actual world toward the one
he wishes.  He relies on convincing people with web sites, speeches,
volunteerism, and organizes through non-profits that function
primarily by offering assistance to outsiders who agree with
them---mechanisms that are accepted, mechanisms that people who
disagree with him will defend more or less universally and in many
cases vigorously.  and he's stunningly transparent about his goals,
opinions, and actions, far more so than more moderate figures who are
kind of insidious and manipulative by comparison.  In this sense, I
think he ought to be admirable on an ad-hominem level even for one who
does not admire his ideas.

I do largely agree with Stallman but would like to think
agreeing/disagreeing with an idea, and being frightened by a way of
thinking, are separate things for me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 304 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.nycbug.org:8443/pipermail/talk/attachments/20081001/55fbf1d0/attachment.bin>