[lbo-talk] MySQL to go public

Carrol Cox cbcox at ilstu.edu
Fri Feb 2 13:59:30 PST 2007


Andy F wrote:
>
>
> My point here is that people make a big deal out of the process of
> installing Linux. Fine, you can have somebody else do it. If your
> Windows PC gets bogged down with malware, you may very well have to
> have somebody reinstall Windows too. Happens all the time. What's
> the functional difference? What makes Linux harder for the user?
> Unless you just have to have your malware.

An example of malware? I've never been bogged down, but then Jan's work is as a systems administrator at State Farm, & she polices our home net. But in any case, that was just casual. But your point seems pointless. Which of the following are you arguing:

a) Using Linux or other open source is a political choice, and those who don't do so are in error politically

or

b) Hey you out there, you ought to try our wonderful new product and oh will you be missing out if you don't and it really is easy etc etc etc (in other words, just another ad in the sea of advertising around us)

If (a), then I think your position is reactionary, because putting that sort of burden on people turns them away from the _important_ political tasks that face us. If (b), then why should I pay any attention?

And the context for these questions is clarified in a subsequent post. If your argument is some version of (b) here, then note particularly the following sentence from the post below: "If they are not so contributing, then we are back to the fact that choice between Windows and Linux can only be based on the mere whim of the consumer."

Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> The serious quarrel between anarchists and socialists does not touch on
> the issues raised in this thread, because that quarrel concerns not the
> society we want but the _process_ by means of which we will get there.
> No one denies that there are innumerable features of the present social
> order which help envisage a future cooperative society, and the mere
> proliferation of such examples is banal.
>
> To get there we must organize huge masses of people, first for immediate
> social/political changes within the present society, then at some point
> for a more total transformation. Hence we measure present activity and
> thought by its contribution to those immediate movements. How many
> people at the Washington Demo were there because of the activity of the
> free software proponents? I am uninterested in whether or not in
> principle people should get excited about Linux; I want to know how
> Linux boosters are contributing to the anti-war movement or the
> single-payer movement or the defense of 'illegal' immigrants. If they
> are not so contributing, then we are back to the fact that choice
> between Windows and Linux can only be based on the mere whim of the
> consumer.
>
> I hate Windows, and I loved DOS -- but unless someone agrees for a
> reasonable price to come into my house, install Linux, AND all the
> programs I am now using, and guarantees that I won't have to learn
> anything about the system, I'll stick to my present OS.

And let me reemphasize: the issue is not the society of the future but which present activities help us move towards that future.

Carrol



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list