• 0 Posts
  • 53 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle


  • I immediately dislike calling it commerce for 3 reasons:

    1. Most people will not know what I mean so I will have to explain every time
    2. Commerce is an existing word that means something different so it will still be confusing in a different direction
    3. I, on principle, don’t like abandoning words because some dumb group(s) appropriate them and try to change their meaning

    I think I will try saying “regulated capitalism” from now on and see if it works better.




  • CGP gray very specifically refers to democracies as well and explains how things like farm subsidies are used to buy votes. Maybe re-watch the videos.

    And yes, CGP gray also indirectly explains why Marxists kept pumping resources into the government, police and bureaucracy. (Clarification: CGP Gray never mentions Marxists specifically, he just explains why leaders have to funnel resources to areas that help them stay in power.) It is inevitable in a system where you concentrate power in a limited group of people.

    That is why distributing power between large number of independent capitalists and voters is the system that so far worked best, although still very far from perfect.

    As long as humans behave like humans and are in charge, the utopian communism is as realistic as wizards in flying castles.


  • It is the opposite. In capitalism, there is at least a chance a good person has some power because power is distributed, not only held by governments. There are multiple examples in the main post. Even better examples are European countries where the government and businesses hold each other in check instead of govt being bought off legally like in the US.

    In communism, the way power is distributed ensures corrupt people raise to the top. See an amazing video “rule for rulers” by CGP gray for a simplified explanation how that corruption works and why a good person can’t hold power.












  • I disagree. Sure, for some larger crucial projects, companies would pay. But for the majority of (small) projects, we would just handwrite an inferior solution from scratch rather than handle the bureaucracy. The result would be wasted additional effort, inferior features and more bugs.

    And even if that was not the case and bureaucracy was not an issue, the question is how much better would the paid for “professional” FOSS software be compared to the free one. If it was so much better, that it justified the price, it would outcompete the free one anyway. And if it is not, then by definition it is better we use the free one.