So I just read Bill Gates’ 1976 Open Letter To Hobbyists, in which he whines about not making more money from his software. You know, instead of being proud of making software that people wanted to use. And then the bastard went on and made proprietary licences for software the industry standard, holding back innovation and freedom for decades. What a douche canoe.

  • anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    AI is theft in the same way that all private property theft. It isnt the piracy of media, it’s the alienation of labor from its product, and withholding it for profit.

    • 3yiyo3@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      Private property is not theft, it is exploitation. Marx already refuted this anarchist childish way of thinking

      • anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        The exploitation of private property is derived from the exclusion of labor from its product - maybe you have a different understanding of what ‘theft’ means, but it’s the principled exclusion of what labor produces from the labor producing it that is the basis of marx’s claim of ‘exploitation’

      • Aljernon@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Some people on the Left regretfully tried to redefine Private Property and split off some private property into “personal property” but since that’s not how the language works it’s caused endless miscommunication. By private property is theft he means Private Mean’s of Production with the caveat that people essentially own their owns but homes can’t be bought/sold/inherited.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          quotes a concept about property from 1850s

          Lmao sorry for not being able to take this seriously

          • KittyJynx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 days ago

            There is some disagreement between people who, for example, favor Proudhon versus those who favor Kropotkin over the ownership of personal tools that are involved in individual trade-craft. As with any ideology there are varying schools of thought but the common ideological baseline is that anything that requires capital investment should be collectively controlled and operated for the common good. A person’s personal possessions including their home and tools required for self sufficiency are not considered “property” or a “means of production” by almost anyone.

            A good real world example is the FOSS community, most of us would be quite vexed to say the least if someone started changing stuff on our personal computers but we also actively share our code, experience, and knowledge with the world for free. Same goes for the open hardware folks, permacomputing community, and the open research community.

            • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 days ago

              Yet none of that can be interpreted as “all property is theft” unless you redefine what “property” itself means which is a terrible strategy for advertising Anarchy.

          • Pika@rekabu.ru
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 days ago

            Even libertarians, who are on the exact opposite side economically, agree IP is garbage made and manipulated to enrich the few.