Message 01627 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT01623 Message: 3/129 L2 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: Documentation Standards was Re: [ox-en] UserLinux

On Saturday 06 December 2003 00:03, Niall Douglas wrote:
Some programmers, who regrettably appear to be concentrated within
certain parts of the free software movement, take the view that
computer programming should be returned to a medieval tradecraft
whereby the tradesperson holds all of their skill in memory and
experience and form guilds to maintain it not becoming public
knowledge. Needless to say, anything approaching reasonable
documentation is a distinct no-no.

This strikes me as a very interesting point. For some time I have had in the 
back of mind that all the talk about free and the source is fine if you 
belong to the technically elite - the new class that along with its allies in 
legal academia are fast becoming one layer of law/control within the net.

It seems that free as speech as in FLOSS then really means free within that 
elite - and that those who are not within the elite (who are not technically 
minded) are beholden to the closed knowledge kept in the new monastries of 

Echoes of The Name of the Rose and digital poison for those that transgress 
upon that sacred knowledge and power?


ps but of course I am bening difficult again beacuse as we all know 
information wants to be free (pass em a bucket someone)

its all about power and who holds ita nd who is beholden - is it not?

"Mind you, I am not asking you to bear witness to what you believe false, 
which would be a sin, but to testify falsely to what you believe true - which 
is a virtuous act because it compensates for lack of proof of something 
that certainly exists or happened." Bishop Otto to Baudolino in Umberto Eco's 


Thread: oxenT01623 Message: 3/129 L2 [In index]
Message 01627 [Homepage] [Navigation]