@OpenTech_AUC If you own an iphone, you're not resisting capitalism, but immersing yourself in it. The peasants who killed their feudal lord didn't buy the fucking pitchforks: they just took them and didn't even ask for permission.
@mangeurdenuage @OpenTech_AUC If a significant portion of your life depends on having any piece of technology on you at all times, you're a slave. But if, on top of that, you have to pay for it, you're doubly so. Free software has nothing to do with this particular problem, I'm afraid.
@mangeurdenuage I'm not talking about complexity. I'm talking about how certain pieces of technology are made indispensable by capitalism. Cars were made indispensable by selling them as, basically, “freedom on wheels.” The same happens with mobile phones today: you need one to operate with your bank, you need it for work, most of your life is inside it. You should be able to interact with technology on your own terms, but it's getting more and more difficult. That's what I meant by “if a significant portion of your life depends on having any piece of technology on you at all times, you're a slave.” I love technology, but I want to be able to walk away from it whenever I feel like it.
@mangeurdenuage @josemanuel You want tech that doesn't increase the GDP
> If a significant portion of your life depends on having any piece of technology on you at all times, you're a slave
Complexity is what it is.
I had that discussion with my brother about water heating for example.
I was talking how one could combine various heatpump technology with vacuum solar heater for AC/water-heating/drying etc...
And he told me "well all that is complex" and I said, well the complexity is there either you like it or not.
If you want heat you're dependent on electricity which is either nuclear or any of the other fossil fuels and all that are their own logistic complexity and process.
You're just moving complexity from one place to other, the main difference is that in one you are directly involved and the other you aren't.
>But if, on top of that, you have to pay for it, you're doubly so
I think we disagree on that because we have different definitions.
Cost of anything is constant for everything, because at some point in time you need to maintain it.
Computing, current computing, needs high amounts of maintenance, because of bad design, some intentionally some not and some because history.
The fact that one has to pay by either, investing your time, or asking someone else to invest their time has nothing to do with slavery.
I was treated as slave labor for a large portion of my life so I have a good reference for the definition of that.
To me slavery/serfdom in the context of computing comes when you cannot own the devices. And you cannot invest yourself or someone else's time to maintain your device.
The moment one is artificially stopped from doing anything in what you do with your digital tool then that defines proprietary software/hardware. The only exception to that is the recursive rule of you are forbidden to forbid to avoid all of that being useless over time.
>Free software has nothing to do with this particular problem
:cat_stare: