FOSS is not the same thing as "everything digital should be free". They are not the same people/movements, though I will admit that there is some overlap.

It's absolutely true that a vast majority of crypto projects revolve around the idea of artificial scarcity, leading to a disgusting commodification of absolutely everything. However, and ironically enough, code is the one thing that crypto cannot commodify, which is what FOSS cares about.

> There is a much deeper contradiction between cryptocurrency and the free software movement of which LWN is an outpost.

i agree. but for many in this community there’s also a contradiction to physical enforcement of some external value system onto someone operating in this open space.

if the surface of FOSS is something like “freedom to use, inspect, and modify the code you interact with”, then below that iceberg is many different thoughts on how that’s preserved. at the very least, there’s a camp that thinks freedom of association underpins this. “FOSS as a community and ideology can exist because its members are free to pursue that own goal of theirs. cryptocurrency isn’t contradictory to the underpinnings of FOSS, because the people who freely participate in FOSS for ideological reasons will freely choose to not embrace cryptocurrencies.” — is one possible voicing from under that iceberg.

here on the net we’ve enjoyed quite a few years of being able to build whatever we want, largely free from the forces felt in whatever physical society we come from. yes, there’s been things like the arms control of RSA, the DVD decryption key being made illegal to spread, and so on. those also came with plenty of meta-discussions like this one, and since then we’ve enjoyed a good decade where most of us really do feel free to build.

FOSS exists, among many other communities, because we’re operating within a larger sphere which doesn’t impose any one universal set of values. my worry is that we see an external value system be imposed on this underlying fabric. what are the odds this system will share my values? or be compatible with the values from which FOSS may emerge, for that matter? where then will i go but back underground?

When you say "artificial digital scarcity" are you referring to bitcoin's supply limit, or are you making a general statement about cryptocurrencies?

The general idea is that for something to have monetary value, it has to be scarce. Why would you ever trade a loaf of bread for something that you have an infinite supply of in the first place?

Cryptocurrencies are fundamentally a means of creating a decentralised digital scarce resource, and the Bitcoin blockchain is a rough proof of concept that it is theoretically achievable, albeit using a spectacularly inefficient method.

Artificial digital scarcity is the whole point.

Scarcity is a hard requirement for something to be money.

Since we as a society require money to transfer and preserve value, the money being open-source, decentralized artificial scarcity(like Bitcoin) does not contradict with FOSS ideals. On the contrary, it widens them from a technological sphere to economics.

ideological nonsense. money has to have scarcity. implementing scarce money with free open source software is not an affront to anything about it. FOSS only takes away the advantage of intellectual property. FOSS is not a magical weapon against the menace of capitalism or anything like that. it doesn't tarnish when you use it to make fancy accounting software or other things people may not like. your notion that FOSS has pure and impure uses is an affront to the purpose of FOSS. you don't get to decide what people should do with it.

> The goal is to keep software free of the bonds of scarcity inherent in physical goods. Because digital goods are virtually free to copy, they can only be limited by typical systems of ownership when artificially forced to. Software spread openly is better able to help everyone rather than just a few capitalists. Private industry has fought against this in its drive to grind profit out of everything it can.

No it isn't. You are describing the 'Open Source' movement which is the scam that the tech bros ran with to popularise and to get around the issues in the free software movement; which the latter has been a total and abject failure.

As soon as their own tools have been used by scammers, criminals, etc have always turned out to be for the ideals that they have fighting against; which is against the development of opaque, non-free surveillance software used against the general public created by governments, big tech, and the like. Both the free software and open source movement have hand in hand made no difference in stopping the surveillance and spyware that is proliferating today.

> The people driving the spread of crypto are zealous advocates of a system inherently opposed to FOSS ideals. Like many before them, they will push software freedom to the extent that it helps them and then relentlessly pursue its enclosure when it doesn't.

Yes. This is exactly the reason why 'free software' is a total failure and did nothing to stop the rise of cryptocurrencies which will advance more surveillance.