![Libertarianism vs Socialism [720x557 - 65KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/LhUVRj.jpg){kind=link}
Troll?? How fragile are you that you can’t even handle a little rebuttal? You throw in the towel so quickly? I think you realize the Star Trek idea is completely fantasy and would never work.
Ok so I looked up why linus made Linux:
In early 1991, unhappy with MS-DOS and MINIX, Torvalds wanted to buy a UNIX system. Luckily for us, he didn't have enough money. So he decided to make his own clone of UNIX, from scratch.
So he created it because he got something out of it. An operating system. Same reason people grow their own food, they get something out of it. That’s my point.
What does your example space trucker get from moving cargo around the same route ad infinitum?
You don't come across as serious. As a kernel, python, and postgresql contributor I never made money on it. You also don't seem to understand the things you're saying now. Your rebuttal, frankly, doesn't make sense. Perhaps my fault here is is assuming you actually understand the things you're offering in rebuttal.
It's not that I'm fragile, but you appear to be spraying BS. But maybe you don't understand. That's why I assumed you're a troll. If you're serious, I'll happily continue.
As an example, your logic is people who grow vegetables for themselves never grew them for themselves because the might also sell the excess? Even though they commonly give away surplus. It's the same with open source. If you know anything of it, then you know there are millions of projects from which they do not directly benefit financially. That's the point.
Humans have an itch and they scratch it. Europeans tend to share these. If it also benefits in income, then so be it. That is capitalism at all.
You don't come across as serious. As a kernel, python, and postgresql contributor I never made money on it. You also don't seem to understand the things you're saying now. Your rebuttal, frankly, doesn't make sense. Perhaps my fault here is is assuming you actually understand the things you're offering in rebuttal.
It's the same with open source. If you know anything of it, then you know there are millions of projects from which they do not directly benefit financially. That's the point.
You don't directly earn money, but it helps you greatly indirectly. As a developer it is a big career booster to program these things on your spare time. Not only are you practicing your skillset and taking it to the next level, you also add the projects to your resume which can help you land a more senior or higher paying job to further your career.
As an example, your logic is people who grow vegetables for themselves never grew them for themselves because the might also sell the excess? Even though they commonly give away surplus. It's the same with open source. If you know anything of it, then you know there are millions of projects from which they do not directly benefit financially. That's the point.
No I never said that, people grow their food for two reasons: To eat it, to sell it. In both situations they get something of value.
The star trek fantasy that people will just volunteer to do shitty jobs for no benefit to themselves is unrealistic and will never happen. It would make sense if you said people may volunteer to create art and music, and that happens even today. But they do that because it is a fun hobby for them, or a pastime. There is nothing fun about labor, driving back and forth for 40 years on the same trade line moving things from point A to point B is not a hobby, nobody will do that for fun. That is just work.
Humans have an itch and they scratch it. Europeans tend to share these. If it also benefits in income, then so be it. That is capitalism at all.
There is a difference between a hobby and work. One is fun, the other sucks. People work for money to survive, not because they enjoy it.
I don't think you actually understand what has been stated. It's not that I don't understand your point. But you also misrepresent my point. Which confirms you don't understand it.
For example, as a contributor, I could spend my time doing just about anything. But I didn't. You're not wrong, about some of your comments. But it doesn't change you fail to understand the underlying point. As I have repeatedly stated, since no such society exists, speculation is required when this is your setting. Feel free to pretend this hasn't repeatedly been stated. And feel free to tear it up. It is imaginary after all. But at the end of the day, some of your own conjecture, based on what is currently known, is already known to be wrong.
To each his own.
What does your example space trucker get from moving cargo around the same route ad infinitum?
If post- scarcity actually existed, we would know. As I said at the very top, they speculate. Your speculation is as good as any. But the point I made is that humans like to find purpose. Space trucking is certainly more honorable and purposeful than doing nothing, waiting for death.
Just as people grow plants they can't consume, build with wood, write, make art, and never profit.
humans like to find purpose. Space trucking is certainly more honorable and purposeful than doing nothing, waiting for death.
Idk man the majority of people (including me) are perfectly fine just doing leisure activities everyday. You underestimate how hedonistic people can be.
I encourage you to read about the rat utopia. In such a society, that's your fate - death. People without purpose in a utopia wither and die. While I'm sure there would be exceptions, eventually your kind is much more likely to self sort, exclude themselves from breeding, and die out. Either way, short term or long term, that's more than likely your fate in such a society.
Random video. I didn't watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgGLFozNM2o
(post is archived)