[pp.int.general] Subject: Re: International Pirates Day

[Andrew Norton]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Andrew Robinson
<a.robinson at pirateparty.org.uk> wrote:
> 2009/11/11 Andrew Norton <ktetch at gmail.com>:
>> What I don't get it giving out copies of Linux. For an Open Source
>> movement, yes. But the use of linux does not actively match with any
>> of our policies.
>
> I find Linux to be a very useful example of successful alternate
> business model that thrives because the unit cost of duplication is
> zero.. especially in the context of IBM's heavy involvement in Linux.

Which would be great in a seminar of business models, or during a
media interview, but it's hardly effective in a mass public arena,

If you have to explain that
a) this is a successful alternate business model that
b) depends on a low cost of duplication that (either)
c1) is being threatened by opposition to our position (or)
c2) is supported by our policies
you've lost the follower. Too many steps means you've lost the
immadiacy of the guesture.

And ther's still the problem that a lot of Linux isn't accessable to
the general public. I just took Ubuntu off my system, because it was
very hard to get anything done with it easily, and documentation was
poor. I'm not exactly a computer lightweight either (I have emergency
copies of knoppix in my DVD bags though, just in case, but as a
mainstream OS it just doesn't work for me) but unlike most people here
(it seems) I'm not a software guy (I'm a hardware/robotics guy that
has avoided writing code for almost 13 years) so it doesn't gell with
me.

>
> When asked by the mainstream media if I personally share files, I get
> quite a few gasps when I say yes, and I then get to explain that I
> share the latest Ubuntu distro, and move on to talk about the whole
> idea of adapting to new business models. I bring in the fact that IBM
> jumped the right way when typewriters were replaced by word
> processors, and they have already jumped from paid software to free
> software.
>
> This places whoever I'm arguing against in the position of not arguing
> against a little-known political party's poistion, but against the
> position of one of the world's biggest and most successful companies.

 And If you asked those people to name computer companies, I'm sure
they won't say IBM (even though yes its the 28th biggest company by
Forbe's 09 listing, and the next company in their sector is Microsoft
at 49, siemons is at 35 and HP is at 36) they'll say Dell, or HP.
Also, some of those 27 companies ahead of IBM include ExxonMobile
(exxonValdiz), JP Morgan Chase (didn't they sorta start this whole
banking collapse), AT&T (they're the ones that had been doing illegal
wiretaps, and lobbied hard for retroactive immunity last year) Verizon
(likewise) and walmart (loves nothing more than illegal personal
searchs, and devestating whole local economies) Do we think all
decisions these companies make are equally good because they are also
some of the world's biggest and most successful companies. And let's
not forget O/S2 when we talk about IBM and their 'good decisions'. IBM
also supplied Germany with computing machines in the late 30's aimed
at making it easy to track down the Jewish population. So it may
backfire, as IBM has a history of making really BAD decisions as well.

These things can backfire.

>
> - Andrew
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>