for those unaware, this is based from the first line from Ted Kaczynski's "Unabomber Manifesto", which starts with "The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race".
It's actually an interesting read, that is... as long as you don't feel hostility towards rebelious literature: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unab...
"Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)"
Sounds like you should agree with this petition: https://publiccode.eu (all publicly funded software must be public).
The US government did.
The government is the only organization "allowed" to use physical violence against anyone it wants to.
The author raises many valid points, but I think the logical conclusion of his points condemns the US legal system more than it does zoom.
Author: Having to agree to a contract with a private company in order to access public services is immediately objectionable.
Me: I agree! But unlike the US Government, Zoom doesn't make threats of violence against people that don't want to use it's services.
Author: Second, for the state to require use of Zoom is for it to promote and subsidize that company.
Me: I agree! The but the state wouldn't even BE ABLE to subsidize Zoom if it didn't first threaten me with violence in order to take a large fraction of my money.
The industrial revolution and all of its consequences may not have been exclusively a disaster for the human race, and I personally don’t share Bill Joy’s fears of mass extinction https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/, but proprietary software can cause serious problems for members of the human race and they should have a right to choose not to “use” it. Doesn’t the US Constitution support the Amish’s right to abstain from the power grid, etc.?
The Federal Source Code Policy should revert from requiring 20% of software written with forcibly extracted public money to be free to 100% as it was when open for public comment.
Any software that the public is forced to use, fund, or through network effects promote, the public should be able to audit and control. Windows is explicitly banned from the ISS. The lowly common people down here deserve a fraction of that privilege.