mikegerwitz
/
online-freedom
1
0
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity

timeblock (culture): continued gutting to 4.5m

master
Mike Gerwitz 2016-03-19 20:23:58 -04:00
parent 558bac1f39
commit ca89244e51
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: F22BB8158EE30EAB
1 changed files with 27 additions and 160 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

187
talk.tex
View File

@ -606,7 +606,7 @@
%%%=== BEGIN TIMEBLOCK 7.5m ==============================================
%%%=== BEGIN TIMEBLOCK 4.5m ==============================================
\begin{frame}{The Web Is Easy}
\lecture{Let's explore another aspect of why the Web is so appealing for
@ -615,17 +615,15 @@
\begin{itemize}
\item Low Barrier To Entry
\lecture{Most everyone has a web browser, and every very major browser
comes with excellent debugging and inspection tools. This is
\emph{great} for a free Web---it encourages studying and
tinkering. And when users start writing software, they can
see it in the familiar environment that is their web
browser.}
comes with excellent debugging and inspection tools, which is
great, because it encourages studying and tinkering. And
when users start writing software, they can see it in the
familiar environment that is their web browser.}
\item Huge number of libraries and tools for web development
\lecture{Because of that, the number of libraries focused on web
development is crazy, and steadily growing. And most of
these popular libraries are free software. The most daunting
task for new web developers is often what library to pick.}
these popular libraries are free software.}
\item Even server/desktop software [substitutes] using web libraries
\lecture{And then we have software like Node.js that allows running
@ -648,8 +646,7 @@
software!}
\only<2>{But we have a problem.}
\lecture{...but we have a problem. Well, another in the \emph{web} of
problems, I suppose.}
\lecture{...but we have a problem.}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
@ -668,77 +665,22 @@
\item<2-> Permissive licensing \emph{enables} proprietary software
\lecture{but most of it is licensed under permissive licenses---one
of the most popular being the MIT~Expat license, which allows
for non-free derivatives. What this means is that
proprietary software authors have a relatively easy time
developing software that denies users their
freedoms. Writing software is expensive---it takes time, and
time is money. Any time that can be saved using free
software libraries is money that they can divert toward
adding attractive features, releasing early, and implementing
ways to screw over the user.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
%% this frame: 3--3.5m
\begin{frame}{Philosophy/Culture Problem}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> ``Open source almost everything''---Tom Preston-Werner (GitHub)
\lecture{If you've listened to any in-depth criticism about licensing
practices of the modern web development community, then
you've probably heard of Tom Preston-Werner's post entitled
``Open source almost everything''. Some of what you are
about to see may shock and confuse you. Viewer discretion is
advised.}
for non-free derivatives. Writing software is expensive; any
time that can be saved using free software libraries is money
that they can divert toward adding attractive features,
releasing early, and implementing ways to screw over the
user.}
\end{itemize}
\only<2>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}If you do it right, open sourcing~[sic] code is
\textbf{great advertising} for you and your company. [...] we like to
talk publicly about libraries and systems we've written that are still
closed [sic] but destined to become open source~[sic]. [...] It helps
determine what to open source~[sic] [...] This translates into
goodwill for GitHub and more superfans than ever before.'' (Emphasis
\emph{not} mine.)
\end{quote}
\lecture{This is an excellent example of why we should reject ``open
source''---as a development methodology, it ignores users' freedoms
entirely. While we're talking about users' freedoms, Tom's talking
about liberating code for advertising and building suspense over a
project to produce ``superfans''. And he determines what to liberate
based on input from that suspense. Not because it's the ethical thing
to do.}
}
\only<3>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}When you open source~[sic] useful code, you \textbf{attract
talent}. Every time a talented developer cracks open the code to one
of your projects, you win.'' (Emphasis \emph{not} mine.)
\end{quote}
\lecture{In other words---liberated code is used in a predatory manner
to lure free software hackers into a position of developing
proprietary software.}
}
\only<4>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}Ok, then what shouldn't I open source~[sic]? That's
easy. Don't open source~[sic] anything that represents core business
value.''
\end{quote}
\lecture{But what about the stuff that the free software community needs
to compete with this ever-growing proprietary world? You
keep it hidden. And you suggest that others do the same.}
}
\lecture{How many of you saw Bradley Kuhn's presentation yesterday? I was
originally going to talk a lot more on this topic, but it's one
of the things I gutted, so I recommend watching his.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{The Web Scene}
\lecture{Tom's philosophy is pervasive throughout the modern web
development community. His post even encourages it. And, if we
take a look at the community, we can see why:}
\lecture{This philosophy is pervasive throughout the modern web
development community.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> Startups (e.g. YCombinator-funded)
@ -769,11 +711,7 @@
\item<2-> ``Copyleft'' is a dirty word
\lecture{``Copyleft'' is a dirty word: if you want to be accepted
by your peers, you'd better license your libraries
permissively. If you don't, someone's either going to
ask you to relicense so that they can use it in their own
proprietary software, and tell you how copyleft restricts
their freedom as a developer, or your project will be
shunned.}
permissively.}
\end{itemize}
\item<3-> Peer pressure
@ -783,90 +721,19 @@
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
Unconscious propagation and consciously manipulative leaders
\lecture{Anti-copyleft activists have the benefit of being able to
focus on the practical arguments---which are easy---and
avoiding or even trying to degrade philosophical
arguments---which are hard, because they involve
confrontation. It's therefore trivial to push ``open
source'' and permissive licensing with the end goal of
fighting copyleft, without actually bringing up the issue,
thereby creating a large community that works against
copyleft without actually \emph{thinking} about
copyleft. This is very dangerous, and this is the culture
driving the web.}
\end{center}
\lecture{And as of last month, we even have a term describing this broad
issue!}
\end{frame}
%%%=== END TIMEBLOCK 7.5m ==============================================
%%%=== BEGIN TIMEBLOCK 3m ==============================================
\begin{frame}
\lecture{Kuhn's paradox!}
\begin{center}
Kuhn's Paradox
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Kuhn's Paradox}
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}For some time now, this paradoxical principle appears to
hold: each day, more lines of freely licensed code exist than ever
before in human history; yet, it also becomes increasingly more
difficult each day for users to successfully avoid proprietary software
while completing their necessary work on a computer.''
\end{quote}
\lecture{(Read Kuhn's Paradox)}
\lecture{Bradley Kuhn has talked a lot about some of these
issues---I~recommend his talks and writings.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Culture of ``Open Source''}
\begin{itemize}
\lecture{This is the culture of ``Open Source''.}
\item<1-> ``Open Source'' devalues freedom
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> When freedom is inessential, proprietary ``features'' or
derivatives aren't bad
\lecture{So when freedom isn't valued, then these extra
proprietary features or derivatives on top of all the
excellent free software and libraries isn't seen as a bad
thing.}
\item<2-> ``Open Core''
\lecture{And this model of having a free base with proprietary
extensions is often called ``Open Core''. We thought ``Open
Source'' was dangerous---this ``Open Core'' philosophy not
only devlaues freedom, but it deligitimizes it through some
twisted logic!}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
Partial freedom isn't freedom!
\end{center}
\lecture{But partial freedom isn't freedom! It doesn't matter if
\emph{part} of your software is free---if even a byte of it robs
me of any of my four freedoms, then I can't ethically use it! I
would have to concede that your website is worth surrendering my
freedoms for. It's probably not.}
\lecture{So what you get is this dangerous ``open core'' concept, where
you have a lot of free software, but you build all the goodies
that people want on top of it, and make it proprietary. Partial
freedom isn't freedom! It doesn't matter if \emph{part} of your
software is free---if even a byte of it robs me of any of my four
freedoms, then I can't ethically use it! I would have to concede
that your website is worth surrendering my freedoms for. It's
probably not.}
\end{frame}
@ -929,7 +796,7 @@
\end{center}
\end{frame}
%%%=== END TIMEBLOCK 3m ==============================================
%%%=== END TIMEBLOCK 4.5m ==============================================
%%%=== BEGIN TIMEBLOCK 6m ==============================================