Re: [ox-en] Spreading the word
- From: johan soderberg <soderbergjohan yahoo.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 05:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
You should post this to the German list too...
I'm afraid my German is not sufficient. Could someone
else do that?
What is the advantage to having it recognised by the
ivory towers? do you have any strong
arguments why it would be good if it were?)
I take it for granted that we do want the GNU/Marxism
perspective to become part of a general discussion
outside of the hacker community. If so, it is of
significance if the subject gets 'accredited' by
having been published in the real reality. A
publication would give opportunity to catch the
attention in media (reviews, etc.) and thus reach
people that would otherwise not have found out about
GNU, or at least not our point of view on it.
Currently, hacking is defined by the OpenSource
movement. The distinction between free software and
opensource is deliberately blurred to satisfy the
needs of IBM-Netscape-Oracle. Every time a compendium
on 'history/ethics/practice of hacking' is written by
Raymond & co, the radical critisism of FSF is further
marginalised. Both in the eyes of the outside and in
the constellation of hacking community itself.
Finally, sooner or later Empire-inspired academics
will attend to software, Tiziana Terranova and Jamie
King has already opened up the subject as a legitimate
field for marxists to study. They will more likely
than not get it wrong. I totally agree with your
criticism of Hardt/Negri-Deleuze/Guattari axis, the
closed code-language and their tendency to estrange
allies (Lessig, May etc). Again, it is a question of
who defines GNU/hacking.
The impact of a book-publishing is open-ended
(depending on how we manage it). But these are
rationales for such an attempt.
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More