• NateNate60@lemmy.world
    0·
    7 months ago

    This has some serious “only landowners should be allowed to vote” vibes

    I will say directly that this model of governance is incompatible with the tenets of free software.

    • abessman@lemmy.world
      0·
      7 months ago

      I will say directly that this model of governance is incompatible with the tenets of free software.

      Which of the four freedoms does it fall short of?

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        1·
        7 months ago

        2, and by extension 3 and 4

        Hell depending on what this capital class votes for even 1 might be out the window.

          • orrk@lemmy.world
            1·
            7 months ago

            because having some capital class dictate the project is entirely antithetical to having the choice to contribute, even the AI stuff is just being contributed by a few large companies who want it

            • abessman@lemmy.world
              1·
              7 months ago

              because having some capital class dictate the project is entirely antithetical to having the choice to contribute

              Why?

              the AI stuff is just being contributed by a few large companies who want it

              Contributing something because you want it is how free software works.

              • orrk@lemmy.world
                1·
                7 months ago

                yes, and having a subscription based shareholder system is antithetical to this

                • abessman@lemmy.world
                  1·
                  7 months ago

                  Repeating it doesn’t make it true. As long as the code is released under a FOSS license, the development model doesn’t matter.