• Puls3@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    One great thing about about software is you don’t have to agree with or care about what the creators thoughts and beliefs are, software is at the end of the day just software.

    Doesn’t get any less political than that.

    • JasBC@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      One great thing about about software is you don’t have to agree with or care about what the creators thoughts and beliefs are, software is at the end of the day just software.

      It really isn’t though - no-one dared touch ReiserFS after the creator became a wife-murderer even though it, supposedly at the time, it was quite the piece of advanced code.

      • Puls3@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Was referring more to people trying to politicize software and push them into political movements they’re unrelated to. Open software is at is core free and as such anyone with any political leaning could use it or contribute to it and no one would know, and no one should care.

        • paaviloinen@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Now, what one considers free is political. You cannot decouple reality from politics, and the free software movement is just one very specific example how political this really is. It’s also these communities that generate politival movements that you may see as unrelated to the pieces of software in question.

        • Jonah@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Free software is, at its core, about the users having control over their own use of the software - the software isn’t controlled by some owner and licensed by the users, but instead all users have equal ability to understand and use the software. If you consider communism to be political, then free software is political, because free software is communism in its purest form.

    • Jonny@lemmy.rimkus.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I create software by myself and disagree. First it’s very political where and for whom I choose to develop software. Second, software is always made for a purpose and the purpose can be indeed (and is) very often linked to political or social cause. E.g. a software which only purpose is to harm people, say for controlling mass destruction weapons is in my point of view a very political software

      • Puls3@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        software is always made for a purpose and the purpose can be indeed (and is) very often linked to political or social cause

        Its not though, typically software exists to serve a basic function at its core, and it could be used or contributed to by anyone for any number of things.

        • Panos Alevropoulos@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You are thinking of software as if it exists in a vacuum. Software that is libre is a political statement. Software that is proprietary is also a political statement. Lemmy choosing to be decentralized/federated/interoperable is also a conscious political decision just as Apple chose to create its own proprietary ecosystem instead of caring about interoperability.

          • Ferk@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You can grow potatoes for political reasons too. Everything a human being does might be politically motivated, but that doesn’t mean potatoes are political.

            Anyone can take that same software, that was created as a particular political statement, and use it for the completelly opposite political reasons to make a completelly different political statement. Just the same way as many have used songs in contexts that are completelly politically opposite to what the original author of the song intended.

            In the end, the only thing that’s political is the goal/purpose/motivation of an action, not the result of the action. No piece of software/hardware/thing is political when you dettach the artist from the art and just see it for what it is, regardless of what the author might have wanted you to see it as.

            • bobs_guns@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              historically speaking, when you consider its domestication by indigenous people in South America, its appropriation by Spanish colonizers, its resistance to looting by marauding armies compared to grain crops, and the freaking Irish potato famine, I think it becomes quite clear that the potato is a politically relevant crop and could reasonably be considered political.