this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2025
14 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

305 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to the Lemmygrad programming community! This is a space where programmers of all levels can discuss programming, ask for help with problems, and share their personal programming projects with others.

Rules

  1. Respect all users, regardless of their level of knowledge in programming. We're here to learn and help each other improve.
  2. Keep posts relevant to programming and related topics.
  3. Respect people's personal preferences. If you disagree with someone's choice of programming language, method of formatting code, or anything else, don't attack the poster. Genuine criticism is fine, but personal attacks are not.
  4. In order to promote breaks from typing, all code snippets must be photos of code written on paper.
    Just kidding :), please use proper markdown code blocks.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Elara@lemmygrad.ml
14
Socialist Literature on Software (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 2 months ago by BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml to c/programming@lemmygrad.ml
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I have found it not so simple to be able to find socialist literature regarding software and software development, and I was wondering if you had any recommendations for myself, and anyone who may find this post in the future. (And if there's an already existing post which details various sources on the matter, that would also be appreciated).

But I mostly wanted to know if there's any literature or any analysis on FOSS, and if that's the best alternative we have currently under capitalism. Because I see a lot of socialist software is usually developed utilizing strong copyleft licenses such as GPL 3.0 (or later) or AGPL 3.0 (or later) (Lemmy, for example).

And I already made another post regarding the ProleWiki page on FOSS, where I asked about the possibility of including further information in order to make it easier for fellow comrades to learn more about the topic, from a socialist perspective, and not just cling to FOSS for freedom's sake.

And maybe the possibilty of including some information regarding the views on self-hosting as a way of providing better information security for comrades, as well as include links to resources such as Codeberg for code-hosting, over GitHub, which is owned by Microsoft.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

FOSS under capitalism allows a potential degree of freedom against capital but is tolerated because capital considers it free labour that they can re-appropriate.

Under a socialist state software development can take a different character because there even the proprietory software taken as a whole ultimately serve the working classes; the private sector tends to reflect the socialist state as opposed to capitalist countries where the public sector tends toward reflecting capital (the deteriorating NHS in the UK for example, and ample use of overpriced dysfunctional non-compatible competing software they lease - to echo the theme you raised).

[–] FuckBigTech347@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Proprietary Software would eventually cease to exist under a Socialist state, because Proprietary Software is inherently Capitalist.
The only reason to keep Source Code behind lock and key is because the Owner(s) want to use it as a means to make profit.
Proprietary Software is just another attempt at commodifying knowledge.

[–] BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago

I would assume that it could be useful in a transition state? Idk what China is doing, for example, with their source code to guard it from the west.

[–] BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Caital considers it free labor they can re-appropriate.

I fail to see how this is the case with strong copy-left licenses, where there is no way for you to make proprietary software from it. (I think that's the whole point. Right?)

Maybe by relicensing (can you do that?) Or by being the ones in control of the hardware, even if the software is free? So

You could self-host...but it's gonna' cost you, and you can't afford that.

Same freedom as with:

You could just not work. But then you'd starve.

Hence freedom is only negative (normative), not positive?

[–] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I fail to see how this is the case with strong copy-left licenses, where there is no way for you to make proprietary software from it. (I think that’s the whole point. Right?)

That presumes that bourgoisie as a class are subject to de jure rules for the proleteriat rather than de facto rules of how their class operates. The power is in organisation not in how well one can play within bourgoisie rules.

Put it another way: if a powerful enough corporation wanted to re-appropriate code despite its extremely well written copy-left license could they? What that leverage is maybe what separates say a Proudhonist from an ML.

[–] GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

if a powerful enough corporation wanted to re-appropriate code despite its extremely well written copy-left license could they?

Yes, they can just ignore the license; as long as the code is kept proprietary and can't be decompiled into easily recognizable code from the copyleft project, it'd be very difficult to identify and prove in court. And if it were to be discovered, a huge company would likely get away with a relatively small fine (I don't know if there's any precedent, but we all know the big bourgeoisie is very rarely held accountable for anything)

[–] BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Has the author from the wikipedia article linked in the other comment on this post written about this specifically?

And I do see the point of organization being the true form of power, but then within the confines of software, isn't FOSS the best way to organize and spread out to more people?

And even if it's stolen, just the fact that it's licensed as strong copyleft allow some easier code and software sharing for our benefit?

[–] GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Don't know if Cockshott's written about it.

FOSS is certainly a way to build a community, but it's not enough on its own. The free software movement has done good work but it's still more or less liberal.

Copyleft discourages companies from using it, so it's better than permissive licenses for most nontrivial projects, but it's far from perfect.

[–] BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I would agree. But then, do we not have any alternatives to FOSS as socialists?

Or would the only alternative be to change our material conditions by means or a revolution, which would allow for the ownership of the means of production and in turn liberate the proletariat from the burden of having their workforce exploited by capital?

Idk if I'm being liberal when asking ir there's an in-between, but...I'd love to know if there's any "Actually Existent Socialism (AES?)" transition state which allows for better software development during the transition. As a Software Development level.

(Bc ir you again go to the workplace level, then you get my original counterpoint; revolution, etc.)

[–] GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

FOSS is the best option for us under capitalism, but it's only a tool. The economic system is not going to change even if most software were to become open-source; the only solution is revolution.

In a socialist country, FOSS would still be preferable in most cases (e.g. not when state secrets are involved, and some things need to be kept secret as long as imperialism remains a threat).

[–] BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I would agree with that sentiment.

Do you think something of the sort could / should be added to the ProleWiki? Or is it said anywhere currently? (This is a /c/ProleWiki question, but I guess worth asking here)

[–] GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There is an article that can be expanded.

[–] BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah, I guess. I kinda hinted at that idea too in my earlier comment on a previous post on /c/ProleWiki. (I don't know how to properly link to them using Jerboa)

Thank you for your comments either way

[–] VibeCoder@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

@PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net had a good take on this a few years ago. Have any resources, comrade?

[–] Vampire@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cockshott#Published_works

[–] BassedWarrior@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago

Oh, I think I'd encountered his works in the past. Thank you for the reminder. Any personal recommendations?