top | item 13724561

(no title)

magicmu | 9 years ago

On one hand it's always cool to see increased adoption of open source, but it strikes me as more than a little subversive for the DoD to adopt an open source methodology. I can't help but see the appropriation of an inherently equitable and socialist means of sharing innovation (FOSS) by a violent, exclusionary, and globally oppressive regime to be a step in a very wrong direction.

discuss

order

curuinor|9 years ago

I mean, by the nature of being an army they gotta do controlled violence, but they're the largest organization in America with single-payer health care (Tricare), so I don't know about calling them not socialist

(really flat top/bottom pay ratio too: private E1 gets paid $19k/yr top generals max out at $180k base - I've heard of grads fresh out of master's getting more than that at Google)

magicmu|9 years ago

I had no idea about the details of Tricare, that's pretty interesting. I suppose it makes sense for a government to be very invested in the healthcare of its armed forces.I was thinking more about the United States army's particular global role as the primary means of the violent perpetuation of capitalism and Western hegemony. You make a great point; I think the main difference in our perspectives could be approaching the question domestically versus globally.

fauigerzigerk|9 years ago

I get the "violent, exclusionary, and globally oppressive" part, but why "socialist"? Open source strikes me as rather ideology neutral. If anything it's perhaps a bit anarchic.

Socialism is all about reducing the effect that direct actions and agreements between individuals can have on society as a whole.

Open source is all about direct action and the unplanned dynamics that may unfold as a result.

niels_olson|9 years ago

I believe socialism has a pretty specific definition: government ownership and control of the means of production. Which is easy to grasp for steel mills, power plants, and hospitals. A bit trickier in the creative economy and the gig economy.

magicmu|9 years ago

That's an interesting definition of socialism; I didn't intend it in that way. Open source seems "socialist" to me by virtue of the pretty much the same attributes that you're (I think correctly) describing as anarchic. It's a broad term, I think we're saying the same thing :)