I have found it not so simple to be able to find socialist literature regarding software and software development, and I was wondering if you had any recommendations for myself, and anyone who may find this post in the future. (And if there’s an already existing post which details various sources on the matter, that would also be appreciated).

But I mostly wanted to know if there’s any literature or any analysis on FOSS, and if that’s the best alternative we have currently under capitalism. Because I see a lot of socialist software is usually developed utilizing strong copyleft licenses such as GPL 3.0 (or later) or AGPL 3.0 (or later) (Lemmy, for example).

And I already made another post regarding the ProleWiki page on FOSS, where I asked about the possibility of including further information in order to make it easier for fellow comrades to learn more about the topic, from a socialist perspective, and not just cling to FOSS for freedom’s sake.

And maybe the possibilty of including some information regarding the views on self-hosting as a way of providing better information security for comrades, as well as include links to resources such as Codeberg for code-hosting, over GitHub, which is owned by Microsoft.

  • ☭ 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗘𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿 ☭@lemmygrad.ml
    5·
    6 days ago

    if a powerful enough corporation wanted to re-appropriate code despite its extremely well written copy-left license could they?

    Yes, they can just ignore the license; as long as the code is kept proprietary and can’t be decompiled into easily recognizable code from the copyleft project, it’d be very difficult to identify and prove in court. And if it were to be discovered, a huge company would likely get away with a relatively small fine (I don’t know if there’s any precedent, but we all know the big bourgeoisie is very rarely held accountable for anything)

    • BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.mlOP
      2·
      5 days ago

      Has the author from the wikipedia article linked in the other comment on this post written about this specifically?

      And I do see the point of organization being the true form of power, but then within the confines of software, isn’t FOSS the best way to organize and spread out to more people?

      And even if it’s stolen, just the fact that it’s licensed as strong copyleft allow some easier code and software sharing for our benefit?

      • ☭ 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗘𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿 ☭@lemmygrad.ml
        2·
        4 days ago

        Don’t know if Cockshott’s written about it.

        FOSS is certainly a way to build a community, but it’s not enough on its own. The free software movement has done good work but it’s still more or less liberal.

        Copyleft discourages companies from using it, so it’s better than permissive licenses for most nontrivial projects, but it’s far from perfect.

        • BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.mlOP
          2·
          3 days ago

          I would agree. But then, do we not have any alternatives to FOSS as socialists?

          Or would the only alternative be to change our material conditions by means or a revolution, which would allow for the ownership of the means of production and in turn liberate the proletariat from the burden of having their workforce exploited by capital?

          Idk if I’m being liberal when asking ir there’s an in-between, but…I’d love to know if there’s any “Actually Existent Socialism (AES?)” transition state which allows for better software development during the transition. As a Software Development level.

          (Bc ir you again go to the workplace level, then you get my original counterpoint; revolution, etc.)

          • ☭ 𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗘𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿 ☭@lemmygrad.ml
            2·
            3 days ago

            FOSS is the best option for us under capitalism, but it’s only a tool. The economic system is not going to change even if most software were to become open-source; the only solution is revolution.

            In a socialist country, FOSS would still be preferable in most cases (e.g. not when state secrets are involved, and some things need to be kept secret as long as imperialism remains a threat).