perro
/
perrotuerto.blog
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Publicación de 6

This commit is contained in:
perro tuerto 2020-04-08 05:52:28 -05:00
parent 24dfc366cd
commit 4fc0e8595b
5 changed files with 2342 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

94
content/html/en/006_copyleft-pandemic.html Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<title>The Copyleft Pandemic</title>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<meta name="application-name" content="Publishing is Coding: Change My Mind">
<meta name="description" content="Blog about free culture, free software and free publishing.">
<meta name="keywords" content="publishing, blog, book, ebook, methodology, foss, libre-software, format, markdown, html, epub, pdf, mobi, latex, tex, culture, free culture, philosophy">
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, user-scalable=0">
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="../../../icon.png">
<link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://perrotuerto.blog/feed/" title="Publishing is Coding: Change My Mind">
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="../../../css/styles.css">
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="../../../css/extra.css">
<script type="application/javascript" src="../../../js/functions.js"></script>
</head>
<body>
<header>
<h1><a href="https://perrotuerto.blog/content/html/en/">Publishing is Coding: Change My Mind</a></h1>
<nav> <p> <a href="../../../content/html/en/_links.html">Links</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/en/_about.html">About</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/en/_contact.html">Contact</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/en/_fork.html">Fork</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/en/_donate.html">Donate</a> </p>
</nav>
</header>
<div id="controllers">
<a onclick="zoom(true)">+</a>
<a onclick="zoom(false)">−</a>
<a onclick="mode(this)">N</a>
</div>
<section>
<h1 id="the-copyleft-pandemic">The Copyleft Pandemic</h1>
<blockquote class="published">
<p>Published: 2020/04/08, 6:00</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It seems that we needed a global pandemic for publishers to finally give open access. I guess we should say… thanks?</p>
<p>In my opinion it was a good <span class="smallcap">PR</span> maneuver, who doesn't like companies when they do <i>good</i>? This pandemic has shown its capacity to fortify public and private institutions, no matter how poorly they have done their job and how these new policies are normalizing surveillance. But who cares, I can barely make a living publishing books and I have never been involved in government work.</p>
<p>An interesting side effect about this “kind” and <i>temporal</i> openness is about authorship. One of the most relevant arguments in favor of intellectual property (<span class="smallcap">IP</span>) is the defense of authors' rights to make a living with their work. The utilitarian and labor justifications of <span class="smallcap">IP</span> are very clear in that sense. For the former, <span class="smallcap">IP</span> laws confer an incentive for cultural production and, thus, for the so-called creation of wealth. For the latter, author's “labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his.”</p>
<p>But also in personal-based justifications the author is a primordial subject for <span class="smallcap">IP</span> laws. Actually, this justification wouldn't exist if the author didn't have an intimate and qualitatively distinctive relationship with her own work. Without some metaphysics or theological conceptions about cultural production, this special relation is difficult to prove—but that is another story.</p>
<figure>
<img src="../../../img/p006_i001_en.jpg" alt="Locke and Hegel drinking tea while discussing several topics on Nothingland…"/>
<figcaption>
Locke and Hegel drinking tea while discussing several topics on Nothingland…
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>From copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft movements, a lot of people have argued that this argument hides the fact that most authors can't make a living, whereas publishers and distributors profit a lot. Some critics claim governments should give more power to “creators” instead of allowing “reproducers” to do whatever they want. I am not a fan of this way of doing things because I don't think anyone should have more power—including authors—but than to distribute, and also because in my world government is synonymous with corruption and death. But diversity of opinions is important, I just hope not all governments are like that.</p>
<p>So between copyright, copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft defenders there is usually a mysterious assent about producer relevance. The disagreement comes with how this overview about cultural production is or should translate into policies, legislation and political organization.</p>
<p>In times of emergency and crisis we are seeing how easily it is to “pause” those discussions and laws—or fast track <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/06/us-internet-bill-seen-as-opening-shot-against-end-to-end-encryption">other ones</a>. On the side of governments this again shows how copyright and authors' rights aren't natural laws nor are they grounded beyond our political and economic systems. From the side of copyright defenders, this phenomena makes it clear that authorship is an argument that doesn't rely on the actual producers, cultural phenomena or world issues… And it also shows that there are <a href="https://blog.archive.org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-responds-why-we-released-the-national-emergency-library">librarians</a> and <a href="https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-03-03/covid-19-open-science">researchers</a> fighting in favor of public interests; <span class="smallcap">AKA</span>, how important libraries and open access are today and how they can't be replaced by (online) bookstores or subscription-based research.</p>
<p>I find it very pretentious that <a href="https://www.authorsguild.org/industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending">some authors</a> and <a href="https://publishers.org/news/comment-from-aap-president-and-ceo-maria-pallante-on-the-internet-archives-national-emergency-library">some publishers</a> didn't agree with this <i>temporal</i> openness of their work. But let's not miss the point: this global pandemic has shown how easily it is for publishers and distributors to opt for openness or paywalls—who cares about the authors?… So next time you defend copyright as authors' rights to make a living, think twice, only few have been able to earn a livelihood, and while you think you are helping them, you are actually making third parties richer.</p>
<p>In the end the copyright holders are not the only ones who defend their interests by addressing the importance of people—in their case the authors, but more generally and secularly the producers. The copyleft holders—a kind of “cool” copyright holder that hacked copyright laws—also defends their interest in a similar way, but instead of authors, they talk about users and instead of profits, they supposedly defend freedom.</p>
<p>There is a huge difference between each of them, but I just want to denote how they talk about people in order to defend their interests. I wouldn't put them in the same sack if it wasn't because of these two issues.</p>
<p>Some copyleft holders were so annoying in defending Stallman. <i>Dudes</i>, at least from here we don't reduce the free software movement to one person, no matter if he's the founder or how smart or important he is or was. Criticizing his actions wasn't synonymous with throwing away what this movement has done—what we have done!—, as a lot of you tried to mitigate the issue: “Oh, but he is not the movement, we shouldn't have made a big issue about that.” His and your attitude is the fucking issue. Together you have made it very clear how narrow both views are. Stallman fucked it up and was behaving very immaturely by thinking the movement is or was thanks to him—we also have our own stories about his behavior—, why don't we just accept that?</p>
<p>But I don't really care about him. For me and the people I work with, the free software movement is a wildcard that joins efforts related to technology, politics and culture for better worlds. Nevertheless, the <span class="smallcap">FSF</span>, the <span class="smallcap">OSI</span>, <span class="smallcap">CC</span>, and other big copyleft institutions don't seem to realize that a plurality of worlds implies a diversity of conceptions about freedom. And even worse, they have made a very common mistake when we talk about freedom: they forgot that “freedom wants to be free.”</p>
<p>Instead, they have tried to give formal definitions of software freedom. Don't get me wrong, definitions are a good way to plan and understand a phenomenon. But besides its formality, it is problematic to bind others to your own definitions, mainly when you say the movement is about and for them.</p>
<p>Among all concepts, freedom is actually very tricky to define. How can you delimit an idea in a definition when the concept itself claims the inability of, perhaps, any restraint? It is not that freedom can't be defined—I am actually assuming a definition of freedom—, but about how general and static it could be. If the world changes, if people change, if the world is actually an array of worlds and if people sometimes behave one way or the other, of course the notion of freedom is gonna vary.</p>
<p>With freedom's different meanings we could try to reduce its diversity so it could be embedded in any context or we could try something else. I dunno, maybe we could make software freedom an interoperable concept that fits each of our worlds or we could just stop trying to get a common principle.</p>
<p>The copyleft institutions I mentioned and many other companies that are proud to support the copyleft movement tend to be blind about this. I am talking from my experiences, my battles and my struggles when I decided to use copyfarleft licenses in most parts of my work. Instead of receiving support from institutional representatives, I first received warnings: “That freedom you are talking about isn't freedom.” Afterwards, when I sought infrastructure support, I got refusals: “You are invited to use our code in your server, but we can't provide you hosting because your licenses aren't free.” Dawgs, if I could, I wouldn't look for your help in the first place, duh.</p>
<p>Thanks to a lot of Latin American hackers and pirates, I am little by little building my and our own infrastructure. But I know this help is actually a privilege: for many years I couldn't execute many projects or ideas only because I didn't have access to the technology or tuition. And even worse, I wasn't able to look to a wider and more complex horizon without all this learning.</p>
<p>(There is a pedagogical deficiency in the free software movement that makes people think that writing documentation and praising self-taught learning is enough. From my point of view, it is more about the production of a self-image in how a hacker or a pirate <i>should be</i>. Plus, it's fucking scary when you realize how manly, hierarchical and meritocratic this movement could be).</p>
<p>According to copyleft folks, my notion of software freedom isn't free because copyfarleft licenses prevents <i>people</i> from using software. This is a very common criticism of any copyfarleft license. And it is also a very paradoxical one.</p>
<p>Between the free software movement and open source initiative, there has been a disagreement about who ought to inherit the same type of license, like the General Public License. For the free software movement, this clause ensures that software will always be free. According to the open source initiative, this clause is actually a counter-freedom because it doesn't allow people to decide which license to use and it also isn't very attractive for enterprise entrepreneurship. Let's not forget that the institutions of both sides agree that the market is essential for technology development.</p>
<p>Free software supporters tend to vanish the discussion by declaring that open source defenders don't understand the social implication of this hereditary clause or that they have different interests and ways to change technology development. So it's kind of paradoxical that these folks see the anti-capitalist clause of copyfarleft licenses as a counter-freedom. Or they don't understand its implications nor perceive that copyfarleft doesn't talk about technology development in its insolation, but in its relationship with politics, society and economy.</p>
<p>I won't defend copyfarleft against those criticisms. First, I don't think I should defend anything because I am not saying everyone should grasp our notion of freedom. Second, I have a strong opinion against the usual legal reductionism among this debate. Third, I think we should focus on the ways we can work together, instead of paying attention to what could divide us. Finally, I don't think these criticisms are wrong, but incomplete: the definition of software freedom has inherited the philosophical problem of how we define and what the definition of freedom implies.</p>
<p>That doesn't mean I don't care about this discussion. Actually, it's a topic I'm very familiar with. Copyright has locked me out with paywalls for technology and knowledge access, while copyleft has kept me away with “licensewalls” with the same effects. So let's take a moment to see how free the freedom is that the copyleft institutions are preaching.</p>
<p>According to <i>Open Source Software &#38; The Department of Defense</i> (<span class="smallcap">DoD</span>), The <span class="smallcap">U.S. DoD</span> is one of the biggest consumers of open source. To put it in perspective, all tactical vehicles of the <span class="smallcap">U.S.</span> Army employs at least one piece of open source software in its programming. Other examples are <i>the use</i> of Android to direct airstrikes or <i>the use</i> of Linux for the ground stations that operates military drones like the Predator and Reaper.</p>
<figure>
<img src="../../../img/p006_i002_en.png" alt="Reaper drones incorrectly bombarding civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and Yemen in order to deliver U.S. DoD notion of freedom."/>
<figcaption>
Reaper drones incorrectly bombarding civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and Yemen in order to deliver <span class="smallcap">U.S. DoD</span> notion of freedom.
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Before you argue that this is a problem about open source software and not free software, you should check out the <span class="smallcap">DoD</span> <a href="https://dodcio.defense.gov/Open-Source-Software-FAQ"><span class="smallcap">FAQ</span> section</a>. There, they define open source software as “software for which the human-readable source code is available for use, study, re-use, modification, enhancement, and re-distribution by the users of that software.” Does that sound familiar? Of course!, they include <span class="smallcap">GPL</span> as an open software license and they even rule that “an open source software license must also meet the <span class="smallcap">GNU</span> Free Software Definition.”</p>
<p>This report was published in 2016 by the Center for a New American Security (<span class="smallcap">CNAS</span>), a right-wing think tank which <a href="https://www.cnas.org/mission">mission and agenda</a> is “designed to shape the choices of leaders in the <span class="smallcap">U.S.</span> government, the private sector, and society to advance <span class="smallcap">U.S.</span> interests and strategy.”</p>
<p>I found this report after I read about how the <span class="smallcap">U.S.</span> Army <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-army-scraps-1b-iron-dome-project-after-israel-refuses-to-provide-key-codes">scrapped</a> one billion dollars for its “Iron Dome” after Israel refused to share key codes. I found it interesting that even the so-called most powerful army in the world was disabled by copyright laws—a potential resource for asymmetric warfare. To my surprise, this isn't an anomaly.</p>
<p>The intention of <span class="smallcap">CNAS</span> report is to convince <span class="smallcap">DoD</span> to adopt more open source software because its “generally better than their proprietary counterparts […] because they can <i>take advantage</i> of the <i>brainpower</i> of larger teams, which leads to faster innovation, higher quality, and superior security for <i>a fraction of the cost</i>.” This report has its origins by the “justifiably” concern “about the erosion of <span class="smallcap">U.S.</span> military technical superiority.”</p>
<p>Who would think that this could happen to <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span>? Well, all of us from this part of the world have been saying that the type of freedom endorsed by many copyleft institutions is too wide, counterproductive for its own objectives and, of course, inapplicable for our context because that liberal notion of software freedom relies on strong institutions and the capacity of own property or capitalize knowledge. The same ones which have been trying to explain that the economic models they try to “teach” us don't work or we doubt them because of their side effects. Crowdfunding isn't easy here because our cultural production is heavily dependent on government aids and policies, instead of the private or public sectors. And donations aren't a good idea because of the hidden interests they could have and the economic dependence they generate.</p>
<p>But I guess it has to burst their bubble in order to get the point across. For example, the Epstein controversial donations to <span class="smallcap">MIT</span> Media Lab and his friendship with some folks of <span class="smallcap">CC</span>; or the use of open source software by the <span class="smallcap">U.S.</span> Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While for decades <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> has been a mechanism to facilitate the murder of “Global South” citizens; a tool for Chinese labor exploitation denounced by the anti-996 movement; a licensewall for technological and knowledge access for people who can't afford infrastructure and the learning it triggers, even though the code is “free” <i>to use</i>; or a police of software freedom that denies Latin America and other regions their right to self-determinate its freedom, its software policies and its economic models.</p>
<p>Those copyleft institutions that care so much about “user freedoms” actually haven't been explicit about how <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> is helping shape a world where a lot of us don't fit in. It had to be right-wing think tanks, the ones that declare the relevance of <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> for warfare, intelligence, security and authoritarian regimes, while these institutions have been making many efforts in justifying its way of understanding cultural production as a commodification of its political capacity. They have shown that in their pursuit of government and corporate adoption of <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span>, when it favors their interests, they talk about “software user freedoms” but actually refer to “freedom of use software,” no matter who the user is or what it has been used for.</p>
<p>There is a sort of cognitive dissonance that influences many copyleft supporters to treat others—those who just want some aid—harshly by the argument over which license or product is free or not. But in the meantime, they don't defy, and some of them even embrace, the adoption of <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> for any kind of corporation, it doesn't matter if it exploits its employees, surveils its users, helps to undermine democratic institutions or is part of a killing machine.</p>
<p>In my opinion, the term “use” is one of the key concepts that dilutes political capacity of <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> into the aestheticization of its activity. The spine of software freedom relies in its four freedoms: the freedoms of <i>run</i>, <i>study</i>, <i>redistribute</i> and <i>improve</i> the program. Even though Stallman, his followers, the <span class="smallcap">FSF</span>, the <span class="smallcap">OSI</span>, <span class="smallcap">CC</span> and so on always indicate the relevance of “user freedoms,” these four freedoms aren't directly related to users. Instead, they are four different use cases.</p>
<p>The difference isn't a minor thing. A <i>use case</i> neutralizes and reifies the subject of the action. In its dilution the interest of the subject becomes irrelevant. The four freedoms don't ban the use of a program for selfish, slayer or authoritarian uses. Neither do they encourage them. By the romantic idea of a common good, it is easy to think that the freedoms of run, study, redistribute and improve a program are synonymous with a mechanism that improves welfare and democracy. But because these four freedoms don't relate to any user interest and instead talk about the interest of using software and the adoption of an “open” cultural production, it hides the fact that the freedom of use sometimes goes against and uses subjects.</p>
<p>So the argument that copyfarleft denies people the use of software only makes sense between two misconceptions. First, the personification of institutions—like the ones that feed authoritarian regimes, perpetuate labor exploitation or surveil its users—and their policies that sometimes restrict freedom or access <i>to people</i>. Second, the assumption that freedoms over software use cases is equal to the freedom of its users.</p>
<p>Actually, if your “open” economic model requires software use cases freedoms over users freedoms, we are far beyond the typical discussions about cultural production. I find it very hard to defend my support of freedom if my work enables some uses that could go against others' freedoms. This is of course a freedom dilemma related to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance">paradox of tolerance</a>. But my main conflict is when copyleft supporters boast about their defense of users freedoms while they micromanage others' software freedom definitions and, in the meantime, they turn their backs to the gray, dark or red areas of what is implicit in the freedom they safeguard. Or they don't care about us or their privileges don't allow them to have empathy.</p>
<p>Since the <i><span class="smallcap">GNU</span> Manifesto</i> the relevance of industry among software developers is clear. I don't have a reply that could calm them down. It is becoming more clear that technology isn't just a broker that can be used or abused. Technology, or at least its development, is a kind of political praxis. The inability of legislation for law enforcement and the possibility of new technologies to hold and help the <i>statu quo</i> express this political capacity of information and communications technologies.</p>
<p>So as copyleft hacked copyright law, with copyfarleft we could help disarticulate structural power or we could induce civil disobedience. By prohibiting our work from being used by military, police or oligarchic institutions, we could force them to stop <i>taking advantage</i> and increase their maintenance costs. They could even reach a point where they couldn't operate anymore or at least they couldn't be as affective as our communities.</p>
<p>I know it sounds like a utopia because in practice we need the effort of a lot of people involved in technology development. But we already did it once: we used copyright law against itself and we introduced a new model of workforce distribution and means of production. We could again use copyright for our benefit, but now against the structures of power that surveils, exploits and kills people. These institutions need our “brainpower,” we can try by refusing their <i>use</i>. Some explorations could be software licenses that explicitly ban surveillance, exploitation or murder.</p>
<p>We could also make it difficult for them to thieve our technology development and deny access to our communication networks. Nowadays <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> distribution models have confused open economy with gift economy. Another think tank—Centre of Economics and Foreign Policy Studies—published a report—<i>Digital Open Source Intelligence Security: A Primer</i>—where it states that open sources constitutes “at least 90%” of all intelligence activities. That includes our published open production and the open standards we develop for transparency. It is why end-to-end encryption is important and why we should extend its use instead of allowing governments to ban it.</p>
<p>Copyleft could be a global pandemic if we don't go against its incorporation inside virulent technologies of destruction. We need more organization so that the software we are developing is “free as in social freedom, not only as in free individual.”</p>
<script type="text/javascript" src="../../../hashover/comments.php"></script>
</section>
<footer>
<p class="left no-indent">Texts and images are under <a href="../../../content/html/en/_fork.html">Open and Free Publishing License (<span class="smallcap">LEAL</span>)</a>.</p>
<p class="left no-indent">Code is under <a target="_blank" href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html"><span class="smallcap">GNU</span> General Public License (<span class="smallcap">GPL</span>v3)</a>.</p>
<p class="left no-indent">Last build of this page: 2020/04/08, 05:51.</p>
<p class="left no-indent"><span class="smallcap"><a target="_blank" href="https://perrotuerto.blog/feed/en/rss.xml">RSS</a></span> | <a href="../../../content/html/en/006_copyleft-pandemic.html"><span class="versalita">EN</span></a> | <a href="../../../content/html/es/006_copyleft-pandemic.html"><span class="versalita">ES</span></a></p>
</footer>
</body>
</html>

94
content/html/es/006_copyleft-pandemic.html Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="es">
<head>
<title>La pandemia del copyleft</title>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<meta name="application-name" content="Publishing is Coding: Change My Mind">
<meta name="description" content="Blog about free culture, free software and free publishing.">
<meta name="keywords" content="publishing, blog, book, ebook, methodology, foss, libre-software, format, markdown, html, epub, pdf, mobi, latex, tex, culture, free culture, philosophy">
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, user-scalable=0">
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="../../../icon.png">
<link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://perrotuerto.blog/feed/" title="Publishing is Coding: Change My Mind">
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="../../../css/styles.css">
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="../../../css/extra.css">
<script type="application/javascript" src="../../../js/functions.js"></script>
</head>
<body>
<header>
<h1><a href="https://perrotuerto.blog/content/html/es/">Publishing is Coding: Change My Mind</a></h1>
<nav> <p> <a href="../../../content/html/es/_links.html">Enlaces</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/es/_about.html">Acerca</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/es/_contact.html">Contacto</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/es/_fork.html">Bifurca</a> | <a href="../../../content/html/es/_donate.html">Dona</a> </p>
</nav>
</header>
<div id="controllers">
<a onclick="zoom(true)">+</a>
<a onclick="zoom(false)">−</a>
<a onclick="mode(this)">N</a>
</div>
<section>
<h1 id="la-pandemia-del-copyleft">La pandemia del <i>copyleft</i></h1>
<blockquote class="published">
<p>Publicado: 2020/04/08, 6:00</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Al parecer necesitábamos una pandemia global para que finalmente los editores otorgaran acceso abierto a obras. Supongo que deberíamos decir… ¿gracias?</p>
<p>En mi opinión fue una buena maniobra de relaciones públicas, ¿a quién no le agradan las compañías cuando hacer <i>el bien</i>? Esta pandemia ha evidenciado su capacidad para fortalecer instituciones públicas o privadas, sin importar qué tan pobre han realizado su trabajo o cómo estas nuevas políticas están normalizando la vigilancia. Pero qué importa, con trabajos puedo vivir de la edición de libros y nunca he estado involucrado en trabajo gubernamental.</p>
<p>Un interesante efecto secundario de esta «amable» y <i>temporal</i> apertura es en torno a la autoría. Uno de los argumentos más relevantes a favor de la propiedad intelectual (<span class="smallcap">PI</span>) es la defensa de los derechos de los autores a vivir de su trabajo. Las justificaciones utilitaristas o laboristas de la <span class="smallcap">PI</span> son muy claras en este sentido. Para la primera, las leyes de <span class="smallcap">PI</span> confieren un incentivo para la producción cultural y, por tanto, para la así llamada generación de riqueza. Para la última, los autores y «[e]l trabajo de su cuerpo y la labor producida por sus manos podemos decir que son suyos».</p>
<p>Pero para las justificaciones personalistas también el autor es el sujeto primordial para las leyes de <span class="smallcap">PI</span>. De hecho, esta justificación no existiría si la autoría no tuviera una relación íntima y cualitativamente distintiva con su trabajo. Sin algunas concepciones metafísicas o teológicas sobre la producción cultural, esta relación especial sería difícil de probar —pero esa es otra historia—.</p>
<figure>
<img src="../../../img/p006_i001_es.jpg" alt="Locke y Hegel bebiendo el té mientras discuten diversos temas en Nadalandia…"/>
<figcaption>
Locke y Hegel bebiendo el té mientras discuten diversos temas en Nadalandia…
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Desde los movimientos del <i>copyfight</i>, <i>copyleft</i> y <i>copyfarleft</i>, mucha gente ha discutido que este argumento oculta el hecho de que la mayoría de los autores no pueden vivir de su trabajo, mientras que los editores y los distribuidores ganan bastante. Algunos críticos demandan que los gobiernos deberían dar más poder a los «creadores» en lugar de permitir que los «reproductores» hagan lo que quieran. No soy fan de esa manera de hacer las cosas porque no pienso que nadie debiera tener más poder —incluyendo a los autores— sino distribuirlo, y debido a que en mi mundo el gobierno es sinónimo de corrupción y muerte. Pero la diversidad de opiniones es importante, solo espero que no todos los gobiernos sean así.</p>
<p>Así que entre los defensores del <i>copyright</i>, <i>copyfight</i>, <i>copyleft</i> y <i>copyfarleft</i> de manera usual hay un misterioso consentimiento acerca de la relevancia del productor. El desacuerdo subyace en cómo este panorama sobre la producción cultural se traduce o debería verterse en políticas, legislaciones u organización política.</p>
<p>En tiempos de emergencia y de crisis estamos viendo qué tan fácil es hacer una «pausa» sobre estas discusiones y leyes —o acelerar <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/06/us-internet-bill-seen-as-opening-shot-against-end-to-end-encryption">otras</a>—. Del lado de los gobiernos de nuevo se muestra cómo el <i>copyright</i> y los derechos de autor no son leyes naturales ni se apoyan más allá de los sistemas políticos y económicos. Del lado de los defensores de estos derechos, el fenómeno pone en claro que la autoría es un argumento que no depende de los productores de carne y hueso, el fenómeno cultural y cuestiones globales… Y también evidencia que hay <a href="https://blog.archive.org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-responds-why-we-released-the-national-emergency-library">bibliotecarios</a> e <a href="https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-03-03/covid-19-open-science">investigadores</a> luchando a favor de intereses públicos; es decir, cuán importantes hoy en día son las bibliotecas y el acceso abierto y cómo no pueden ser resplazados por las librerías (en línea) o la investigación por suscripción.</p>
<p>Me parece muy pretencioso que ciertos <a href="https://www.authorsguild.org/industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending">autores</a> y <a href="https://publishers.org/news/comment-from-aap-president-and-ceo-maria-pallante-on-the-internet-archives-national-emergency-library">editores</a> no estuvieran de acuerdo con esta apertura <i>temporal</i> de su trabajo. Pero no perdamos el punto: esta pandemia global ha demostrado qué tan sencillo es para los editores y los distribuidores optar por la apertura o los muros de pago —¿a quién le importa los autores?—… Así que la próxima ves que defiendas el <i>copyright</i> o los derechos de los autores a vivir de su trabajo, piénsalo dos veces, solo unos pocos han sido capaces de tener un sustento de vida y, mientras piensas que los estás ayudando, en realidad estás haciendo más ricos a terceros.</p>
<p>Al final los titulares de los derechos reservados no son los únicos que defienden sus intereses al hablar de la importancia de la gente —en su caso los autores, pero de manera más general y secular sobre los productores—. Los titulares de obras con <i>copyleft</i> —una versión «chida» de titulares de derechos que hackearon las leyes de <i>copyright</i>— también defienden sus intereses de manera similar pero, en lugar de autores, hablan sobre los usuarios y, en lugar de ganancias, ellos supuestamente defienden la libertad.</p>
<p>Existe una enorme diferencia entre cada posición, pero solo quiero denotar cómo hablan de la gente para defender sus intereses. No los pondría en el mismo saco si no fuera por dos cuestiones.</p>
<p>Algunos titulares de <i>copyleft</i> fueron muy fastidiosos al defender a Stallman. <i>Weyes</i>, al menos desde aquí no reducimos el movimiento del <i>software</i> libre a una persona, sin importar si es el fundador o cuán inteligente o importante ha sido o alguna vez fue. La crítica a sus acciones no es sinónimo de tirar a la basura lo que este movimiento ha hecho —¡lo que hemos logrado!—, como muchos de ustedes trataron de mitigar el asunto al indicar: «Oh, pero él no es el movimiento, no deberíamos hacer un gran problema sobre ello». Su actitud y la tuya son el pinche problema. Ambas dejan en claro lo estrecho de sus miras. Stallman la cagó y se estaba comportando de una manera muy inmadura al pensar que el movimiento es gracias a él o que alguna vez lo fue —nosotros también tenemos nuestras propias historias sobre su comportamiento—, ¿por qué simplemente no lo aceptamos?</p>
<p>Pero en realidad no me importa. Para mí y las personas con las que trabajo, el movimiento del <i>software</i> libre es un comodín en donde se reúnen los esfuerzos relativos a la tecnología, política y cultura para mejores mundos. Sin embargo, la <span class="smallcap">FSF</span>, la <span class="smallcap">OSI</span>, <span class="smallcap">CC</span> y otras instituciones grandes dentro del <i>copyleft</i> no parecen darse cuenta que una pluralidad de mundos implica una diversidad de concepciones acerca de la libertad. O peor aún, han cometido el común error cuando hablamos acerca de la libertad: olvidan que «la libertad quiere ser libre».</p>
<p>En su lugar, han tratado de dar definiciones formales a la libertad del <i>software</i>. No lo tomes a mal, las definiciones son un buen camino para planear y entender un fenómeno. Pero además de su formalización, es problemático atar a otros a tus propias definiciones, principalmente cuando dices que el movimiento es acerca de ellos y para sus necesidades.</p>
<p>Entre todos los conceptos, la libertad es muy truculenta de definir. ¿Cómo puedes delimitar una idea en una definición cuando el concepto en sí llama a la incapacidad, quizá, de cualquier atadura? No es que la libertad no pueda ser definida —de hecho estoy asumiendo una definición de esta—, pero sobre cuán general y estática puede ser. Si el mundo muta, si las personas cambian, si el mundo es en realidad un conjunto de mundos y si la gente se comporta de una manera y a veces de otra, por supuesto que la noción de libertad va a variar.</p>
<p>Podríamos intentar reducir la diversidad de los diferentes significados de la libertad para que pueda ser empotrado en cualquier contexto o podríamos intentar otra cosa. No lo sé, tal vez pudiéramos hacer de la libertad del <i>software</i> un concepto interoperativo que se adecúe a cada uno de nuestros mundos o simplemente podríamos dejar de intentar tener un mismo principio.</p>
<p>Las instituciones del <i>copyleft</i> que mencioné y demás compañías que se enorgullecen de apoyar al movimiento tienden a no ver esto. Hablo desde mis experiencias, mis luchas y mis angustias cuando decidí usar licencias <i>copyfarleft</i> en la mayoría de mi trabajo. En lugar de recibir apoyo de los representantes de estas instituciones, primero recibí advertencias: «La libertad de la que hablas no es libertad». Después, cuando busqué su apoyo para infraestructura, obtuve rechazos: «Estás invitado a usar nuestro código en tu servidor, pero no podemos hospedarte porque tus licencias no son libres». Compas, no hubiera buscado su ayuda en primer lugar si pudiera, dah.</p>
<p>Gracias a muchos hackers y piratas latinoamericanos, poco a poco estoy construyendo mi infraestructura junto con estas personas. Pero sé que esta ayuda es más bien un privilegio: por muchos años no pude ejecutar proyectos o ideas solo porque no tenía acceso a la tecnología o a tutores. Y peor aún, no tenía capacidad de observar desde un horizonte más amplio y complejo sin todo este aprendizaje.</p>
<p>(Existe una deficiencia pedagógica en el movimiento del <i>software</i> libre que induce a las personas a pensar que es suficiente con escribir documentación y elogiar el aprendizaje autodidacta. Desde mi punto de vista, es más bien la producción de una autoimagen sobre cómo <i>debe ser</i> un hacker o pirata. Además, da mucho pinche miedo cuando te das cuenta que tan masculino, jerárquico y meritocrático puede llegar a ser este movimiento).</p>
<p>Según los compas del <i>copyleft</i>, mi noción de libertad del <i>software</i> no es libre porque las licencias <i>copyfarleft</i> impiden a <i>las personas</i> usar el <i>software</i>. Esta es una crítica común para cualquier licencia <i>copyfarleft</i>. Y también es una muy paradójica.</p>
<p>Entre el movimiento del <i>software</i> libre y la iniciativa del código abierto ha existido un desacuerdo acerca de si se debería heredar el mismo tipo de licencia, como la Licencia Pública General. Para el movimiento del <i>software</i> libre esta cláusula asegura que el <i>software</i> siempre será libre. Según la iniciativa del código abierto esta cláusula en realidad es una contralibertad porque no permite a las personas decidir el tipo de licencia a usar y debido a que es poco atractiva para el emprendimiento empresarial. No olvidemos que las instituciones de ambos lados asienten con el carácter esencial del mercado para el desarrollo tecnológico.</p>
<p>Las personas que apoyan el movimiento del <i>software</i> libre tienden a desvanecer la discusión al declarar que los defensores del código abierto no entienden las implicaciones sociales de la cláusula hereditaria o que tienen diferentes intereses y maneras de cambiar el desarrollo tecnológico. Así que es un tanto paradójico que estos compas vean la cláusula anticapitalista de las licencias <i>copyfarleft</i> como una contralibertad. O no entienden sus implicaciones o no perciben que el <i>copyfarleft</i> no habla del desarrollo tecnológico en su insolación, sino en sus relaciones políticas, sociales y económicas.</p>
<p>No voy a defender al <i>copyfarleft</i> de este criticismo. Primero, no pienso que he de hacer una defensa porque no estoy diciendo que deberían asir esta noción de libertad. Segundo, tengo una dura opinión en contra del usual reduccionismo jurídico de este debate. Tercero, pienso que deberíamos enfocarnos en las maneras en como podemos trabajar en conjunto, en lugar de poner atención a lo que nos divide. Por último, no pienso que esta crítica sea incorrecta sino incompleta: la definición de la libertad del <i>software</i> ha heredado el problema filosófico de cómo definir la libertad y lo que esta definición implica.</p>
<p>Esto no quiero decir que me desinteresa esta discusión. Se trata de un tema que me es familiar. El <i>copyright</i> me ha bloqueado el acceso a la tecnología y el conocimiento con sus muros de pago, mientras que el <i>copyleft</i> con los mismos efectos me ha puesto un embargo con sus «muros de licencias». Así que tomemos un momento para ver qué tan libre es la libertad que predican las instituciones del <i>copyleft</i>.</p>
<p>Según <i>Open Source Software &#38; The Department of Defense</i> (<i>Programas de código abierto y el Departamento de Defensa</i>; <span class="smallcap">DoD</span> por sus siglas en inglés), el <span class="smallcap">DoD</span> estadunidense es uno de los más grandes consumidores de código abierto. Para ponerlo en perspectiva, todos los vehículos tácticos del ejército estadunidense usa al menos una pedazo de <i>software</i> de código abierto en su programación. Otros ejemplos puede ser <i>el uso</i> de Android para dirigir ataques aéreos o <i>el uso</i> de Linux en las estaciones terrestres que operan los drones militares como el Predator o el Reaper —«<i>predator</i>» de «predador» y «<i>reaper</i>» también quiere decir «parca» en inglés—.</p>
<figure>
<img src="../../../img/p006_i002_es.png" alt="Drones Reaper bombardeando de manera incorrecta a civiles en Afganistán, Irak, Pakistán, Siria y Yemen para repartir la noción de libertad del Departamento de Defensa de Estados Unidos."/>
<figcaption>
Drones Reaper bombardeando de manera incorrecta a civiles en Afganistán, Irak, Pakistán, Siria y Yemen para repartir la noción de libertad del Departamento de Defensa de Estados Unidos.
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Antes de que argumentes que este es un problema del <i>software</i> de código abierto y no del <i>software</i> libre, deberías revisar la <a href="https://dodcio.defense.gov/Open-Source-Software-FAQ">sección de preguntas frecuentes</a> del <span class="smallcap">DoD</span> estadunidense. Ahí ellos definen al <i>software</i> de código abierto como «un programa cuyo código fuente legible por humanos está disponible para su uso, estudio, reuso, modificación, mejoramiento y redistribución por los usuarios de ese programa». ¿Acaso te suena familiar? ¡Por supuesto!, ellos incluyen la <span class="smallcap">GPL</span> como una licencia de <i>software</i> abierto y hasta establecen que «un programa de código abierto también debe satisfacer la definición de <i>software</i> libre del proyecto <span class="smallcap">GNU</span>».</p>
<p>Este reporte fue publicado en 2016 por el Centro para una Nueva Seguridad Americana (<span class="smallcap">CNAS</span>, por sus siglas en inglés), un instituto de investigación de derecha cuya <a href="https://www.cnas.org/mission">misión y agenda</a> está «diseñada para dar forma a las decisiones de los líderes del gobierno estadunidense, el sector privado y la sociedad en pos de los intereses y estrategia de Estados Unidos».</p>
<p>Encontré este reporte después de leer sobre cómo el ejército estadunidense <a href="https://israelnoticias.com/militar/estados-unidos-cupula-hierro-defensa">dio un pasó atrás</a> al acuerdo por un millardo de dólares para la adquisición de la «Cúpula de Hierro» después de que Israel se rehusó a compartir su código (<a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-army-scraps-1b-iron-dome-project-after-israel-refuses-to-provide-key-codes">fuente en inglés</a>). Me pareció interesante que incluso el autodenominado ejército más poderoso del mundo quedó deshabilitado por cuestiones de leyes de <i>copyright</i> —un potencial recurso para guerras asimétricas—. Para mi sorpresa, esta no es una anormalidad.</p>
<p>La intención del reporte hecho por el <span class="smallcap">CNAS</span> es convencer al <span class="smallcap">DoD</span> estadunidense ha adoptar más <i>software</i> de código abierto porque «de manera general es mejor que su contraparte propietaria […] debido a que pueden <i>tomar ventaja</i> del <i>poder mental</i> de grandes equipos, lo que conlleva a una innovación más rápida, a una mejor calidad y a una superior seguridad por <i>una fracción del costo</i>». Este reporte tiene sus orígenes en la «justificada» preocupación «acerca de la erosión de la superioridad técnica del ejército de Estados Unidos».</p>
<p>¿Quién habría de pensar que esto le podría ocurrir al <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span>? Bueno, a todos nosotros que desde esta parte del mundo hemos estado diciendo que el tipo de libertad avalada por muchas instituciones del <i>copyleft</i> es muy amplia, contraproducente para sus propios objetivos y, por supuesto, inaplicable para nuestro contexto, porque esa noción liberal de la libertad del <i>software</i> depende de instituciones con legitimidad y de la capacidad de que cada quien tenga propiedad o pueda capitalizar su conocimiento. Ellos son los mismos que han tratado de explicarnos los modelos económicos que tratan de «enseñarnos» pero que no funcionan aquí o de los que dudamos debido a sus efectos secundarios. El micromecenazgo no es fácil de llevar a cabo aquí porque nuestra producción cultural depende demasiado de apoyos gubernamentales y sus políticas, en lugar de vincularse con los sectores privado o público. Y las donaciones no son buena idea por los intereses ocultos que pueden tener, así como la dependencia económica que generan.</p>
<p>Pero supongo que su burbuja tiene que rasgarse para que entiendan el punto. Por ejemplo, las donaciones controversiales realizadas por Epstein al <span class="smallcap">MIT</span> Media Lab o su amistad con algunas personas de <span class="smallcap">CC</span>; o el uso del <i>software</i> de código abierto por el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de los Estados Unidos. Mientras que por décadas el <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> ha sido un mecanismo que facilita el asesinato de los ciudadanos del «sur global»; una herramienta para la explotación laboral china denunciada por el movimiento anti-996; un muro de licencias para el acceso a la tecnología y el conocimiento de personas que no pueden costearse infraestructura y el aprendizaje que desata, sin importar que el código es «libre» <i>de usar</i>, o la policía de la libertad del <i>software</i> que niega a América Latina y otras regiones su derecho a autodeterminar su libertad, sus políticas sobre el <i>software</i> y sus modelos económicos.</p>
<p>Esas instituciones del <i>copyleft</i> que tanto les importan las «libertades de los usuarios» en realidad no han sido explícitas acerca de cómo el <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> está ayudando a dar forma a un mundo donde muchos de nosotros no tenemos cabida. Tuvieron que ser centros de investigación de derecha los que declararon la relevancia del <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> para el arte de la guerra, la inteligencia, la seguridad y los regímenes autoritarios, mientras que estas instituciones se han esforzado en justificar su comprensión de la producción cultural como la mercantilización de su capacidad política. En su búsqueda para que gobiernos y corporaciones adopten el <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> han hecho evidente que, cuando favorece a sus intereses, hablan de «libertad de los usuarios de <i>software</i>» aunque más bien se refieran a la «libertad de uso del <i>software</i>», sin importar quién es su usuario ni para qué ha sido usado.</p>
<p>Existe una disonancia cognitiva entre quienes apoyan el <i>copyleft</i> que los hace ser muy duros con otros —los que solo quieren alguna ayuda— bajo el argumento sobre si una licencia o un producto es libre o no. Mientras tanto, no desafían la adopción del <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> hecha por cualquier corporación, e incluso la acogen, sin importar que explote a sus empleados, vigile a sus usuarios, ayude a dinamitar instituciones democráticas o forme parte de una máquina de matar.</p>
<p>En mi opinión el término «uso» es uno de los conceptos centrales que diluye la capacidad política del <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> hacia una estetización de su actividad. La espina de las libertades del <i>software</i> recaen en sus cuatro libertades: las de <i>ejecución</i>, <i>estudio</i>, <i>redistribución</i> y<i>mejora</i> del programa de cómputo. Aunque Stallman, sus pupilos, la <span class="smallcap">FSF</span>, la <span class="smallcap">OSI</span>, <span class="smallcap">CC</span> y más siempre indiquen la relevancia de las «libertades del usuario», estas cuatro libertades no están directamente relacionadas a sus usuarios. En su lugar, estas son cuatro distintos casos de uso.</p>
<p>La diferencia no es minúscula. Un <i>caso de uso</i> neutraliza y reifica al sujeto de su acción. Cuando se diluyen sus intereses, el sujeto se vuelve irrelevante. Las cuatro libertades no prohíben que un programa se use de manera egoísta, asesina o autoritaria. Aunque tampoco las fomentan. Mediante la idea romantizada de un bien común es fácil pensar que las libertades de ejecución, estudio, redistribución o mejora de un programa son sinónimos de un mecanismo que aumenta el bienestar y la democracia. Pero debido a que estas cuatro libertades no se relacionan a ningún interés del usuario y en su lugar hablan sobre los intereses de uso de <i>software</i> y la adopción de una producción cultural «abierta», esta oculta el hecho de que la libertad de uso en ciertas ocasiones va en contra de los sujetos, incluso hasta utilizarlos.</p>
<p>Entonces, el argumento que señala cómo el <i>copyfarleft</i> niega a las personas el uso de <i>software</i> solo tiene sentido entre dos equívocos. Primero, la personificación de las instituciones —como aquelas que alimentan regímenes autoritarios, perpetúan la explotación laboral o vigilan a sus usuarios— y sus términos de uso que en ocasiones constriñen la libertad de <i>las personas</i> o el acceso a su tecnología. Segundo, el supuesto de que las libertades sobre los casos de uso es igual a la libertad de sus usuarios.</p>
<p>Más bien, si tu modelo económico «abierto» requiere de las libertades de los casos de uso del <i>software</i> en lugar de las libertades de sus usuarios, estamos ya muy lejos de la típica discusión sobre la producción cultural. Me parece muy difícil defender mi apuesta por la libertad si mi trabajo permite ciertos usos que podrían ir en contra de la libertad de otros. Por supuesto este es un dilema de la libertad relativa a la <a href="https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoja_de_la_tolerancia">paradoja de la tolerancia</a>. Pero mi principal conflicto es cuando las personas que apoyan el <i>copyleft</i> se jactan sobre su defensa a la libertad de los usuarios mientras hacen <i>micromanagement</i> en torno a las definiciones de la libertad de <i>software</i> de otros y, al mismo tiempo, dan su espalda a las zonas grises, oscuras o rojas sobre las implicaciones de la libertad que tanto cuidan. O no les importamos o sus privilegios les impiden tener empatía.</p>
<p>Desde <i>El manifiesto de <span class="smallcap">GNU</span></i> queda clara la relevancia que tiene la industria entre los desarrolladores de <i>software</i>. No cuento con una respuesta que podría tranquilizarlos. Cada vez se está volviendo más claro que la tecnología no es un mero instrumento que pueda ser usado o abusado. La tecnología, o al menos su desarrollo, es un tipo de praxis política. La incapacidad de la legislación para hacer valer las leyes mientras que las posibilidades de las nuevas tecnologías permiten mantener al <i>statu quo</i>, así como recurren a su auxilio, expresan la capacidad política que tienen estas tecnologías de la comunicación y la información.</p>
<p>Así como el <i>copyleft</i> hackeó la ley de <i>copyright</i>, con el <i>copyfarleft</i> podríamos ayudar a desarticular las estructuras del poder o podríamos inducir a la desobediencia civil. Al prohibir que nuestro trabajo sea usado con fines militares, policiacos u oligárquicos, podríamos forzarlos a que dejen de <i>tomar ventaja</i> y a aumentar sus costos de mantenimiento. Estas instituciones podrían incluso alcanzar el punto donde no puedan operar más o les sea imposible ser tan efectivas como nuestras comunidades.</p>
<p>Sé que suena como a una utopía porque en la práctica necesitamos el esfuerzo de muchas personas involucradas en el desarrollo tecnológico. Pero ya lo hicimos una vez: usamos la ley de <i>copyright</i> en contra de sí misma e introducimos un nuevo modelo de distribución de la fuerza de trabajo y los medios de producción. De nueva cuenta podríamos usar el <i>copyright</i> para nuestro beneficio, pero ahora en contra de las estructuras de poder que vigilan, explotan o matan personas. Estas instituciones necesitan nuestro «poder mental», podemos intentar con rehusárselo. Algunas exploraciones podrían ser licencias de <i>software</i> que de manera explícita prohíban la vigilancia, la explotación o el asesinato.</p>
<p>También podríamos dificultarles el robo de nuestro desarrollo tecnológico y negarles el acceso a nuestras redes de comunicación. Hoy en día los modelos de distribución del <span class="smallcap">FOSS</span> han confundido una economía abierta con una economía del regalo. Otro instituto —el Centro de Investigación de Economía y Política Exterior (<span class="smallcap">EDAM</span>, por sus siglas en inglés)— publicó un reporte —<i>Digital Open Source Intelligence Security: A Primer</i> (<i>Inteligencia de seguridad digital con fuentes abiertas: una introducción</i>)— donde indica que las fuentes abiertas constituyen «al menos un 90%» de todas las actividades de inteligencia. Esto incluye nuestra producción publicada de manera abierta y los estándares abiertos que desarrollamos en pos de la transparencia. Por este motivo la encriptación punto a punto es importante y por eso deberíamos extender su uso en lugar de permitir que los gobiernos la prohíban.</p>
<p>El <i>copyleft</i> podría ser una pandemia global si no hacemos algo en contra de su incorporación dentro de las virulentas tecnologías de la destrucción. Necesitamos una mayor organización para que el <i>software</i> que desarrollamos sea «libre como en libertad social y no solo como individuo libre».</p>
<script type="text/javascript" src="../../../hashover/comments.php"></script>
</section>
<footer>
<p class="left no-indent">Los textos y las imágenes están bajo <a href="../../../content/html/es/_fork.html">Licencia Editorial Abierta y Libre (<span class="smallcap">LEAL</span>)</a>.</p>
<p class="left no-indent">El código está bajo <a target="_blank" href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.es.html">Licencia Pública General de <span class="smallcap">GNU</span> (<span class="smallcap">GPL</span>v3)</a>.</p>
<p class="left no-indent">Última modificación de esta página: 2020/04/08, 05:51.</p>
<p class="left no-indent"><span class="smallcap"><a target="_blank" href="https://perrotuerto.blog/feed/es/rss.xml">RSS</a></span> | <a href="../../../content/html/en/006_copyleft-pandemic.html"><span class="versalita">EN</span></a> | <a href="../../../content/html/es/006_copyleft-pandemic.html"><span class="versalita">ES</span></a></p>
</footer>
</body>
</html>

808
content/po/en/006_copyleft-pandemic.po Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,808 @@
msgid ""
msgstr ""
"Project-Id-Version: 006_copyleft-pandemic 1.0\n"
"Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: Nika Zhenya <nika.zhenya@cliteratu.re>\n"
"POT-Creation-Date: 2020-04-08 00:02-0500\n"
"Last-Translator: Automatically generated\n"
"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
"PO-Revision-Date: 2020-04-08 05:51-0500\n"
"Language-Team: none\n"
"Language: en\n"
"Plural-Forms: nplurals=2; plural=(n != 1);\n"
"X-Generator: Poedit 2.3\n"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:1
msgid "# The Copyleft Pandemic"
msgstr ""
"# The Copyleft Pandemic\n"
"\n"
"> @published 2020/04/08, 6:00 {.published}"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:2
msgid ""
"It seems that we needed a global pandemic for publishers to finally give "
"open access. I guess we should say… thanks?"
msgstr ""
"It seems that we needed a global pandemic for publishers to finally give "
"open access. I guess we should say… thanks?"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:4
msgid ""
"In my opinion it was a good +++PR+++ maneuver, who doesn't like companies "
"when they do _good_? This pandemic has shown its capacity to fortify public "
"and private institutions, no matter how poorly they have done their job and "
"how these new policies are normalizing surveillance. But who cares, I can "
"barely make a living publishing books and I have never been involved in "
"government work."
msgstr ""
"In my opinion it was a good +++PR+++ maneuver, who doesn't like companies "
"when they do _good_? This pandemic has shown its capacity to fortify public "
"and private institutions, no matter how poorly they have done their job and "
"how these new policies are normalizing surveillance. But who cares, I can "
"barely make a living publishing books and I have never been involved in "
"government work."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:10
msgid ""
"An interesting side effect about this “kind” and _temporal_ openness is "
"about authorship. One of the most relevant arguments in favor of "
"intellectual property (+++IP+++) is the defense of authors' rights to make a "
"living with their work. The utilitarian and labor justifications of +++IP+++ "
"are very clear in that sense. For the former, +++IP+++ laws confer an "
"incentive for cultural production and, thus, for the so-called creation of "
"wealth. For the latter, author's “labour of his body, and the work of his "
"hands, we may say, are properly his.”"
msgstr ""
"An interesting side effect about this “kind” and _temporal_ openness is "
"about authorship. One of the most relevant arguments in favor of "
"intellectual property (+++IP+++) is the defense of authors' rights to make a "
"living with their work. The utilitarian and labor justifications of +++IP+++ "
"are very clear in that sense. For the former, +++IP+++ laws confer an "
"incentive for cultural production and, thus, for the so-called creation of "
"wealth. For the latter, author's “labour of his body, and the work of his "
"hands, we may say, are properly his.”"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:19
msgid ""
"But also in personal-based justifications the author is a primordial subject "
"for +++IP+++ laws. Actually, this justification wouldn't exist if the author "
"didn't have an intimate and qualitatively distinctive relationship with her "
"own work. Without some metaphysics or theological conceptions about cultural "
"production, this special relation is difficult to prove---but that is "
"another story."
msgstr ""
"But also in personal-based justifications the author is a primordial subject "
"for +++IP+++ laws. Actually, this justification wouldn't exist if the author "
"didn't have an intimate and qualitatively distinctive relationship with her "
"own work. Without some metaphysics or theological conceptions about cultural "
"production, this special relation is difficult to prove---but that is "
"another story."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:25
msgid ""
"![Locke and Hegel drinking tea while discussing several topics on "
"Nothingland…](../../../img/p006_i001.png)"
msgstr ""
"![Locke and Hegel drinking tea while discussing several topics on "
"Nothingland…](../../../img/p006_i001_en.jpg)"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:26
msgid ""
"From copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft movements, a lot of people have "
"argued that this argument hides the fact that most authors can't make a "
"living, whereas publishers and distributors profit a lot. Some critics claim "
"governments should give more power to “creators” instead of allowing "
"“reproducers” to do whatever they want. I am not a fan of this way of doing "
"things because I don't think anyone should have more power, including "
"authors, and also because in my world government is synonymous with "
"corruption and death. But diversity of opinions is important, I just hope "
"not all governments are like that."
msgstr ""
"From copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft movements, a lot of people have "
"argued that this argument hides the fact that most authors can't make a "
"living, whereas publishers and distributors profit a lot. Some critics claim "
"governments should give more power to “creators” instead of allowing "
"“reproducers” to do whatever they want. I am not a fan of this way of doing "
"things because I don't think anyone should have more power---including "
"authors---but than to distribute, and also because in my world government is "
"synonymous with corruption and death. But diversity of opinions is "
"important, I just hope not all governments are like that."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:36
msgid ""
"So between copyright, copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft defenders there is "
"usually a mysterious assent about producer relevance. The disagreement comes "
"with how this overview about cultural production is or should translate into "
"policies and legislation."
msgstr ""
"So between copyright, copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft defenders there is "
"usually a mysterious assent about producer relevance. The disagreement comes "
"with how this overview about cultural production is or should translate into "
"policies, legislation and political organization."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:40
msgid ""
"In times of emergency and crisis we are seeing how easily it is to “pause” "
"those discussions and laws---or fast track [other ones](https://www."
"theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/06/us-internet-bill-seen-as-opening-shot-"
"against-end-to-end-encryption). On the side of governments this again shows "
"how copyright and authors' rights aren't natural laws nor are they grounded "
"beyond our political and economic systems. From the side of copyright "
"defenders, this phenomena makes it clear that authorship is an argument that "
"doesn't rely on the actual producers, cultural phenomena or world issues… "
"And it also shows that there are [librarians](https://blog.archive."
"org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-responds-why-we-released-the-national-"
"emergency-library) and [researchers](https://www.latimes.com/business/"
"story/2020-03-03/covid-19-open-science) fighting in favor of public "
"interests; +++AKA+++, how important libraries and open access are today and "
"how they can't be replaced by (online) bookstores or subscription-based "
"research."
msgstr ""
"In times of emergency and crisis we are seeing how easily it is to “pause” "
"those discussions and laws---or fast track [other ones](https://www."
"theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/06/us-internet-bill-seen-as-opening-shot-"
"against-end-to-end-encryption). On the side of governments this again shows "
"how copyright and authors' rights aren't natural laws nor are they grounded "
"beyond our political and economic systems. From the side of copyright "
"defenders, this phenomena makes it clear that authorship is an argument that "
"doesn't rely on the actual producers, cultural phenomena or world issues… "
"And it also shows that there are [librarians](https://blog.archive."
"org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-responds-why-we-released-the-national-"
"emergency-library) and [researchers](https://www.latimes.com/business/"
"story/2020-03-03/covid-19-open-science) fighting in favor of public "
"interests; +++AKA+++, how important libraries and open access are today and "
"how they can't be replaced by (online) bookstores or subscription-based "
"research."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:53
msgid ""
"I would find it very pretentious if [some authors](https://www.authorsguild."
"org/industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending) and "
"[some publishers](https://publishers.org/news/comment-from-aap-president-and-"
"ceo-maria-pallante-on-the-internet-archives-national-emergency-library) "
"didn't agree with this _temporal_ openness of their work. But let's not miss "
"the point: this global pandemic has shown how easily it is for publishers "
"and distributors to opt for openness or paywalls---who cares about the "
"authors?… So next time you defend copyright as authors' rights to make a "
"living, think twice, only few have been able to earn a livelihood, and while "
"you think you are helping them, you are actually making third parties richer."
msgstr ""
"I find it very pretentious that [some authors](https://www.authorsguild.org/"
"industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending) and [some "
"publishers](https://publishers.org/news/comment-from-aap-president-and-ceo-"
"maria-pallante-on-the-internet-archives-national-emergency-library) didn't "
"agree with this _temporal_ openness of their work. But let's not miss the "
"point: this global pandemic has shown how easily it is for publishers and "
"distributors to opt for openness or paywalls---who cares about the authors?… "
"So next time you defend copyright as authors' rights to make a living, think "
"twice, only few have been able to earn a livelihood, and while you think you "
"are helping them, you are actually making third parties richer."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:62
msgid ""
"In the end the copyright holders are not the only ones who defend their "
"interests by addressing the importance of people---in their case the "
"authors, but more generally and secularly the producers. The copyleft "
"holders---a kind of cool copyright holder that hacked copyright laws---also "
"defends their interest in a similar way, but instead of authors, they talk "
"about users and instead of profits, they supposedly defend freedom."
msgstr ""
"In the end the copyright holders are not the only ones who defend their "
"interests by addressing the importance of people---in their case the "
"authors, but more generally and secularly the producers. The copyleft "
"holders---a kind of “cool” copyright holder that hacked copyright laws---"
"also defends their interest in a similar way, but instead of authors, they "
"talk about users and instead of profits, they supposedly defend freedom."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:69
msgid ""
"There is a huge difference between each of them, but I just want to denote "
"how they talk about people in order to defend their interests. I wouldn't "
"put them in the same sack if it wasn't because of these two issues."
msgstr ""
"There is a huge difference between each of them, but I just want to denote "
"how they talk about people in order to defend their interests. I wouldn't "
"put them in the same sack if it wasn't because of these two issues."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:73
msgid ""
"Some copyleft holders were so annoying in defending Stallman. _Dudes_, at "
"least from here we don't reduce the free software movement to one person, no "
"matter if he's the founder or how smart or important he is or was. "
"Criticizing his actions wasn't synonymous with throwing away what this "
"movement has done---what we have done!---, as a lot of you tried to mitigate "
"the issue: “Oh, but he is not the movement, we shouldn't have made a big "
"issue about that.” His and your attitude is the fucking issue. Together you "
"have made it very clear how narrow both views are. Stallman fucked it up and "
"was behaving very immaturely by thinking the movement is or was thanks to "
"him---we also have our own stories about his behavior---, why don't we just "
"accept that?"
msgstr ""
"Some copyleft holders were so annoying in defending Stallman. _Dudes_, at "
"least from here we don't reduce the free software movement to one person, no "
"matter if he's the founder or how smart or important he is or was. "
"Criticizing his actions wasn't synonymous with throwing away what this "
"movement has done---what we have done!---, as a lot of you tried to mitigate "
"the issue: “Oh, but he is not the movement, we shouldn't have made a big "
"issue about that.” His and your attitude is the fucking issue. Together you "
"have made it very clear how narrow both views are. Stallman fucked it up and "
"was behaving very immaturely by thinking the movement is or was thanks to "
"him---we also have our own stories about his behavior---, why don't we just "
"accept that?"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:85
msgid ""
"But I don't really care about him. For me and the people I work with, the "
"free software movement is a wildcard that joins efforts related to "
"technology, politics and culture for better worlds. Nevertheless, the +++FSF+"
"++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++, and other big copyleft institutions don't seem "
"to realize that a plurality of worlds implies a diversity of conceptions "
"about freedom. And even worse, they have made a very common mistake when we "
"talk about freedom: they forgot that “freedom wants to be free.”"
msgstr ""
"But I don't really care about him. For me and the people I work with, the "
"free software movement is a wildcard that joins efforts related to "
"technology, politics and culture for better worlds. Nevertheless, the +++FSF+"
"++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++, and other big copyleft institutions don't seem "
"to realize that a plurality of worlds implies a diversity of conceptions "
"about freedom. And even worse, they have made a very common mistake when we "
"talk about freedom: they forgot that “freedom wants to be free.”"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:93
msgid ""
"Instead, they have tried to give formal definitions of software freedom. "
"Don't get me wrong, definitions are a good way to plan and understand a "
"phenomenon. But besides its formality, it is problematic to bind others to "
"your own definitions, mainly when you say the movement is about and for them."
msgstr ""
"Instead, they have tried to give formal definitions of software freedom. "
"Don't get me wrong, definitions are a good way to plan and understand a "
"phenomenon. But besides its formality, it is problematic to bind others to "
"your own definitions, mainly when you say the movement is about and for them."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:98
msgid ""
"Among all concepts, freedom is actually very tricky to define. How can you "
"delimit a concept in a definition when the concept itself claims the "
"inability of, perhaps, any restraint? It is not that freedom can't be "
"defined---I am actually assuming a definition of freedom---, but about how "
"general and static it could be. If the world changes, if people change, if "
"the world is actually an array of worlds and if people sometimes behave one "
"way or the other, of course the notion of freedom is gonna vary."
msgstr ""
"Among all concepts, freedom is actually very tricky to define. How can you "
"delimit an idea in a definition when the concept itself claims the inability "
"of, perhaps, any restraint? It is not that freedom can't be defined---I am "
"actually assuming a definition of freedom---, but about how general and "
"static it could be. If the world changes, if people change, if the world is "
"actually an array of worlds and if people sometimes behave one way or the "
"other, of course the notion of freedom is gonna vary."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:107
msgid ""
"With freedom's different meanings we could try to reduce its diversity so it "
"could be embedded in any context or we could try something else. I dunno, "
"maybe we could make software freedom an interoperable concept that fits each "
"of our worlds or we could just stop trying to get a common principle."
msgstr ""
"With freedom's different meanings we could try to reduce its diversity so it "
"could be embedded in any context or we could try something else. I dunno, "
"maybe we could make software freedom an interoperable concept that fits each "
"of our worlds or we could just stop trying to get a common principle."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:112
msgid ""
"The copyleft institutions I mentioned and many other companies that are "
"proud to support the copyleft movement tend to be blind about this. I am "
"talking from my experiences, my battles and my struggles when I decided to "
"use copyfarleft licenses in most parts of my work. Instead of receiving "
"support from institutional representatives, I first received warnings: “That "
"freedom you are talking about isn't freedom.” Afterwards, when I sought "
"infrastructure support, I got refusals: “You are invited to use our code in "
"your server, but we can't provide you hosting because your licenses aren't "
"free.” Dawgs, if I could, I wouldn't look for your help in the first place, "
"duh."
msgstr ""
"The copyleft institutions I mentioned and many other companies that are "
"proud to support the copyleft movement tend to be blind about this. I am "
"talking from my experiences, my battles and my struggles when I decided to "
"use copyfarleft licenses in most parts of my work. Instead of receiving "
"support from institutional representatives, I first received warnings: “That "
"freedom you are talking about isn't freedom.” Afterwards, when I sought "
"infrastructure support, I got refusals: “You are invited to use our code in "
"your server, but we can't provide you hosting because your licenses aren't "
"free.” Dawgs, if I could, I wouldn't look for your help in the first place, "
"duh."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:123
msgid ""
"Thanks to a lot of Latin American hackers and pirates, I am little by little "
"building my and our own infrastructure. But I know this help is actually a "
"privilege: for many years I couldn't execute many projects or ideas only "
"because I didn't have access to the technology or tuition. And even worse, I "
"wasn't able to look to a wider and more complex horizon without all this "
"learning."
msgstr ""
"Thanks to a lot of Latin American hackers and pirates, I am little by little "
"building my and our own infrastructure. But I know this help is actually a "
"privilege: for many years I couldn't execute many projects or ideas only "
"because I didn't have access to the technology or tuition. And even worse, I "
"wasn't able to look to a wider and more complex horizon without all this "
"learning."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:129
msgid ""
"(There is a pedagogical deficiency in the free software movement that makes "
"people think that writing documentation and praising self-taught learning is "
"enough. From my point of view, it is more about the production of a self-"
"image in how a hacker or a pirate _should be_. Plus, it's fucking scary when "
"you realize how manly, hierarchical and meritocratic this movement tends to "
"be)."
msgstr ""
"(There is a pedagogical deficiency in the free software movement that makes "
"people think that writing documentation and praising self-taught learning is "
"enough. From my point of view, it is more about the production of a self-"
"image in how a hacker or a pirate _should be_. Plus, it's fucking scary when "
"you realize how manly, hierarchical and meritocratic this movement could be)."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:136
msgid ""
"According to copyleft folks, my notion of software freedom isn't free "
"because copyfarleft licenses prevents _people_ from using software. This is "
"a very common criticism of any copyfarleft license. And it is also a very "
"paradoxical one."
msgstr ""
"According to copyleft folks, my notion of software freedom isn't free "
"because copyfarleft licenses prevents _people_ from using software. This is "
"a very common criticism of any copyfarleft license. And it is also a very "
"paradoxical one."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:140
msgid ""
"Between the free software movement and open source initiative, there has "
"been a disagreement about who ought to inherit the same type of license, "
"like the General Public License. For the free software movement, this clause "
"ensures that software will always be free. According to the open source "
"initiative, this clause is actually a counter-freedom because it doesn't "
"allow people to decide which license to use and it also isn't very "
"attractive for enterprise entrepreneurship. Let's not forget that both sides "
"agree that the market is are essential for technology development."
msgstr ""
"Between the free software movement and open source initiative, there has "
"been a disagreement about who ought to inherit the same type of license, "
"like the General Public License. For the free software movement, this clause "
"ensures that software will always be free. According to the open source "
"initiative, this clause is actually a counter-freedom because it doesn't "
"allow people to decide which license to use and it also isn't very "
"attractive for enterprise entrepreneurship. Let's not forget that the "
"institutions of both sides agree that the market is essential for technology "
"development."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:150
msgid ""
"Free software supporters tend to vanish the discussion by declaring that "
"open source defenders don't understand the social implication of this "
"hereditary clause or that they have different interests and ways to change "
"technology development. So it's kind of paradoxical that these folks see the "
"anti-capitalist clause of copyfarleft licenses as a counter-freedom. Or they "
"don't understand its implications or perceive that copyfarleft doesn't talk "
"about technology development in its insolation, but in its relationship with "
"politics, society and economy."
msgstr ""
"Free software supporters tend to vanish the discussion by declaring that "
"open source defenders don't understand the social implication of this "
"hereditary clause or that they have different interests and ways to change "
"technology development. So it's kind of paradoxical that these folks see the "
"anti-capitalist clause of copyfarleft licenses as a counter-freedom. Or they "
"don't understand its implications nor perceive that copyfarleft doesn't talk "
"about technology development in its insolation, but in its relationship with "
"politics, society and economy."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:160
msgid ""
"I won't defend copyfarleft against those criticisms. First, I don't think I "
"should defend anything because I am not saying everyone should grasp our "
"notion of freedom. Second, I have a strong opinion against the usual legal "
"reductionism among this debate. Third, I think we should focus on the ways "
"we can work together, instead of paying attention to what could divide us. "
"Finally, I don't think these criticisms are wrong, but incomplete: the "
"definition of software freedom has inherited the philosophical problem of "
"how we define and what the definition of freedom implies."
msgstr ""
"I won't defend copyfarleft against those criticisms. First, I don't think I "
"should defend anything because I am not saying everyone should grasp our "
"notion of freedom. Second, I have a strong opinion against the usual legal "
"reductionism among this debate. Third, I think we should focus on the ways "
"we can work together, instead of paying attention to what could divide us. "
"Finally, I don't think these criticisms are wrong, but incomplete: the "
"definition of software freedom has inherited the philosophical problem of "
"how we define and what the definition of freedom implies."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:169
msgid ""
"That doesn't mean I don't care about this discussion. Actually, it's a topic "
"I'm very familiar with. Copyright has locked me out with paywalls for "
"technology and knowledge access, copyleft has kept me away with "
"“licensewalls” with the same effects. So let's take a moment to see how free "
"the freedom is that the copyleft institutions are preaching."
msgstr ""
"That doesn't mean I don't care about this discussion. Actually, it's a topic "
"I'm very familiar with. Copyright has locked me out with paywalls for "
"technology and knowledge access, while copyleft has kept me away with "
"“licensewalls” with the same effects. So let's take a moment to see how free "
"the freedom is that the copyleft institutions are preaching."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:175
msgid ""
"According to _Open Source Software & The Department of Defense_ (+++DoD+++), "
"The +++U.S. DoD+++ is one of the biggest consumers of open source. To put it "
"in perspective, all tactical vehicles of the +++U.S.+++ Army employs at "
"least one piece of open source software in its programming. Other examples "
"are _the use_ of Android to direct airstrikes or _the use_ of Linux for the "
"ground stations that operates military drones like the Predator and Reaper."
msgstr ""
"According to _Open Source Software & The Department of Defense_ (+++DoD+++), "
"The +++U.S. DoD+++ is one of the biggest consumers of open source. To put it "
"in perspective, all tactical vehicles of the +++U.S.+++ Army employs at "
"least one piece of open source software in its programming. Other examples "
"are _the use_ of Android to direct airstrikes or _the use_ of Linux for the "
"ground stations that operates military drones like the Predator and Reaper."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:183
msgid ""
"![A Reaper drone [incorrectly bombarding](https://www.theguardian.com/"
"news/2019/nov/18/killer-drones-how-many-uav-predator-reaper) civilians in "
"Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and Yemen in order to deliver +++U.S. DoD+"
"++ notion of freedom.](../../../img/p006_i002.png)"
msgstr ""
"![Reaper drones incorrectly bombarding civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, "
"Pakistan, Syria and Yemen in order to deliver +++U.S. DoD+++ notion of "
"freedom.](../../../img/p006_i002_en.png)"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:184
msgid ""
"Before you argue that this is a problem about open source software and not "
"free software, you should check out the +++DoD+++ [+++FAQ+++ section]"
"(https://dodcio.defense.gov/Open-Source-Software-FAQ). There, they define "
"open source software as “software for which the human-readable source code "
"is available for use, study, re-use, modification, enhancement, and re-"
"distribution by the users of that software.” Does that sound familiar? Of "
"course!, they include +++GPL+++ as an open software license and they even "
"rule that “an open source software license must also meet the +++GNU+++ Free "
"Software Definition.”"
msgstr ""
"Before you argue that this is a problem about open source software and not "
"free software, you should check out the +++DoD+++ [+++FAQ+++ section]"
"(https://dodcio.defense.gov/Open-Source-Software-FAQ). There, they define "
"open source software as “software for which the human-readable source code "
"is available for use, study, re-use, modification, enhancement, and re-"
"distribution by the users of that software.” Does that sound familiar? Of "
"course!, they include +++GPL+++ as an open software license and they even "
"rule that “an open source software license must also meet the +++GNU+++ Free "
"Software Definition.”"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:194
msgid ""
"This report was published in 2016 by the Center for a New American Security "
"(+++CNAS+++), a right-wing think tank which [mission and agenda](https://www."
"cnas.org/mission) is “designed to shape the choices of leaders in the +++U.S."
"+++ government, the private sector, and society to advance +++U.S.+++ "
"interests and strategy.”"
msgstr ""
"This report was published in 2016 by the Center for a New American Security "
"(+++CNAS+++), a right-wing think tank which [mission and agenda](https://www."
"cnas.org/mission) is “designed to shape the choices of leaders in the +++U.S."
"+++ government, the private sector, and society to advance +++U.S.+++ "
"interests and strategy.”"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:199
msgid ""
"I found this report after I read about how the [+++U.S.+++ Army scrapped one "
"billion dollars for its “Iron Dome” after Israel refused to share code]"
"(https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-army-scraps-1b-iron-dome-project-after-"
"israel-refuses-to-provide-key-codes). I found it interesting that even the "
"so-called most powerful army in the world was disabled by copyright laws---a "
"potential resource for asymmetric warfare. To my surprise, this isn't an "
"anomaly."
msgstr ""
"I found this report after I read about how the +++U.S.+++ Army [scrapped]"
"(https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-army-scraps-1b-iron-dome-project-after-"
"israel-refuses-to-provide-key-codes) one billion dollars for its “Iron Dome” "
"after Israel refused to share key codes. I found it interesting that even "
"the so-called most powerful army in the world was disabled by copyright "
"laws---a potential resource for asymmetric warfare. To my surprise, this "
"isn't an anomaly."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:206
msgid ""
"The intention of +++CNAS+++ report is to convince +++DoD+++ to adopt more "
"open source software because its “generally better than their proprietary "
"counterparts […] because they can _take advantage_ of the brainpower of "
"larger teams, which leads to faster innovation, higher quality, and superior "
"security for _a fraction of the cost_.” This report has its origins by the "
"“justifiably” concern “about the erosion of +++U.S.+++ military technical "
"superiority.”"
msgstr ""
"The intention of +++CNAS+++ report is to convince +++DoD+++ to adopt more "
"open source software because its “generally better than their proprietary "
"counterparts […] because they can _take advantage_ of the _brainpower_ of "
"larger teams, which leads to faster innovation, higher quality, and superior "
"security for _a fraction of the cost_.” This report has its origins by the "
"“justifiably” concern “about the erosion of +++U.S.+++ military technical "
"superiority.”"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:214
msgid ""
"Who would think that this could happen to +++FOSS+++? Well, all of us from "
"this part of the world have been saying that the type of freedom endorsed by "
"many copyleft institutions is too wide, counterproductive for its own "
"objectives and, of course, inapplicable for our context because that liberal "
"notion of software freedom relies on strong institutions and the capacity of "
"own property or capitalize knowledge. The same ones which have been trying "
"to explain that the economic models they try to “teach” us don't work or we "
"doubt them because of their side effects. Crowdfunding isn't easy here "
"because our cultural production is heavily dependent on government aids and "
"policies, instead of the private or public sectors. And donations aren't a "
"good idea because of the hidden interests they could have and the economic "
"dependence they generate."
msgstr ""
"Who would think that this could happen to +++FOSS+++? Well, all of us from "
"this part of the world have been saying that the type of freedom endorsed by "
"many copyleft institutions is too wide, counterproductive for its own "
"objectives and, of course, inapplicable for our context because that liberal "
"notion of software freedom relies on strong institutions and the capacity of "
"own property or capitalize knowledge. The same ones which have been trying "
"to explain that the economic models they try to “teach” us don't work or we "
"doubt them because of their side effects. Crowdfunding isn't easy here "
"because our cultural production is heavily dependent on government aids and "
"policies, instead of the private or public sectors. And donations aren't a "
"good idea because of the hidden interests they could have and the economic "
"dependence they generate."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:227
msgid ""
"But I guess it has to burst their bubble in order to get the point across. "
"For example, the Epstein controversial donations to +++MIT+++ Media Lab and "
"his friendship with some folks of +++CC+++; or the use of open source "
"software by the +++U.S.+++ Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While for "
"decades +++FOSS+++ has been a mechanism to facilitate the murder of “Global "
"South” citizens; a tool for Chinese labor exploitation denounced by the "
"anti-996 movement; a licensewall for technological and knowledge access for "
"people who can't afford infrastructure and the learning it triggers, even "
"though the code is “free” _to use_; or a police of software freedom that "
"denies Latin America and other regions their right to self-determinate its "
"freedom, its software policies and its economic models."
msgstr ""
"But I guess it has to burst their bubble in order to get the point across. "
"For example, the Epstein controversial donations to +++MIT+++ Media Lab and "
"his friendship with some folks of +++CC+++; or the use of open source "
"software by the +++U.S.+++ Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While for "
"decades +++FOSS+++ has been a mechanism to facilitate the murder of “Global "
"South” citizens; a tool for Chinese labor exploitation denounced by the "
"anti-996 movement; a licensewall for technological and knowledge access for "
"people who can't afford infrastructure and the learning it triggers, even "
"though the code is “free” _to use_; or a police of software freedom that "
"denies Latin America and other regions their right to self-determinate its "
"freedom, its software policies and its economic models."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:240
msgid ""
"Those copyleft institutions that care so much about “user freedoms” actually "
"haven't been explicit about how +++FOSS+++ is helping shape a world where a "
"lot of us don't fit in. It had to be right-wing think tanks, the ones that "
"declare the relevance of +++FOSS+++ for warfare, intelligence, security and "
"authoritarian regimes, while these institutions have been making many "
"efforts in justifying its way of understanding cultural production as a "
"commodification of its political capacity. They have shown that in their "
"pursuit of government and corporate adoption of +++FOSS+++, when it favors "
"their interests, they talk about “software user freedoms” but actually refer "
"to “freedom of use software”, no matter who the user is or what it has been "
"used for."
msgstr ""
"Those copyleft institutions that care so much about “user freedoms” actually "
"haven't been explicit about how +++FOSS+++ is helping shape a world where a "
"lot of us don't fit in. It had to be right-wing think tanks, the ones that "
"declare the relevance of +++FOSS+++ for warfare, intelligence, security and "
"authoritarian regimes, while these institutions have been making many "
"efforts in justifying its way of understanding cultural production as a "
"commodification of its political capacity. They have shown that in their "
"pursuit of government and corporate adoption of +++FOSS+++, when it favors "
"their interests, they talk about “software user freedoms” but actually refer "
"to “freedom of use software,” no matter who the user is or what it has been "
"used for."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:252
msgid ""
"There is a sort of cognitive dissonance that influences many copyleft "
"supporters to treat others harshly, those who just want some aid in the "
"argument over which license or product is free or not. But in the meantime, "
"they don't defy, and some of them even embrace the adoption of +++FOSS+++ "
"for any kind of corporation, it doesn't matter if it exploits its employees, "
"surveils its users, helps to undermine democratic institutions or is part of "
"a killing machine."
msgstr ""
"There is a sort of cognitive dissonance that influences many copyleft "
"supporters to treat others---those who just want some aid---harshly by the "
"argument over which license or product is free or not. But in the meantime, "
"they don't defy, and some of them even embrace, the adoption of +++FOSS+++ "
"for any kind of corporation, it doesn't matter if it exploits its employees, "
"surveils its users, helps to undermine democratic institutions or is part of "
"a killing machine."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:260
msgid ""
"In my opinion, the term “use” is one of the key concepts that dilutes "
"political capacity of +++FOSS+++ into the aestheticization of its activity. "
"The spine of software freedom relies in its four freedoms: the freedoms of "
"_run_, _study_, _redistribute_ and _improve_ the program. Even though "
"Stallman, his followers, the +++FSF+++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++ and so on "
"always indicate the relevance of “user freedoms,” these four freedoms aren't "
"directly related to users. Instead, they are four different use cases."
msgstr ""
"In my opinion, the term “use” is one of the key concepts that dilutes "
"political capacity of +++FOSS+++ into the aestheticization of its activity. "
"The spine of software freedom relies in its four freedoms: the freedoms of "
"_run_, _study_, _redistribute_ and _improve_ the program. Even though "
"Stallman, his followers, the +++FSF+++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++ and so on "
"always indicate the relevance of “user freedoms,” these four freedoms aren't "
"directly related to users. Instead, they are four different use cases."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:269
msgid ""
"The difference isn't a minor thing. A _use case_ neutralizes and reifies the "
"subject of the action. In its dilution the interest of the subject becomes "
"irrelevant. The four freedoms don't ban the use of a program for selfish, "
"slayer or authoritarian uses. Neither do they encourage them. By the "
"romantic idea of a common good, it is easy to think that the freedoms of "
"run, study, redistribute and improve a program are synonymous with a "
"mechanism that improves welfare and democracy. But because these four "
"freedoms don't relate to any user interest and instead talk about the "
"interest of using software and the adoption of an “open” cultural "
"production, it hides the fact that the freedom of use sometimes goes against "
"and uses subjects."
msgstr ""
"The difference isn't a minor thing. A _use case_ neutralizes and reifies the "
"subject of the action. In its dilution the interest of the subject becomes "
"irrelevant. The four freedoms don't ban the use of a program for selfish, "
"slayer or authoritarian uses. Neither do they encourage them. By the "
"romantic idea of a common good, it is easy to think that the freedoms of "
"run, study, redistribute and improve a program are synonymous with a "
"mechanism that improves welfare and democracy. But because these four "
"freedoms don't relate to any user interest and instead talk about the "
"interest of using software and the adoption of an “open” cultural "
"production, it hides the fact that the freedom of use sometimes goes against "
"and uses subjects."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:281
msgid ""
"So the argument that copyfarleft denies people the use of software only "
"makes sense between two misconceptions. First, the personification of "
"institutions---like the ones that feed authoritarian regimes, perpetuate "
"labor exploitation or surveil its users---with their policies sometimes "
"restricting freedom or access _to people_. Second, the assumption that "
"freedoms over software use cases is equal to the freedom of its users."
msgstr ""
"So the argument that copyfarleft denies people the use of software only "
"makes sense between two misconceptions. First, the personification of "
"institutions---like the ones that feed authoritarian regimes, perpetuate "
"labor exploitation or surveil its users---and their policies that sometimes "
"restrict freedom or access _to people_. Second, the assumption that freedoms "
"over software use cases is equal to the freedom of its users."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:288
msgid ""
"Actually, if your “open” economic model requires software use cases freedoms "
"over users freedoms, we are far beyond the typical discussions about "
"cultural production. I find it very hard to defend my support of freedom if "
"my work enables some uses that could go against others' freedoms. This is of "
"course the freedom dilemma about the [paradox of tolerance](https://en."
"wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance). But my main conflict is when "
"copyleft supporters boast about their defense of users freedoms while they "
"micromanage others' software freedom definitions and, in the meantime, they "
"turn their backs to the gray, dark or red areas of what is implicit in the "
"freedom they safeguard. Or they don't care about us or their privileges "
"don't allow them to have empathy."
msgstr ""
"Actually, if your “open” economic model requires software use cases freedoms "
"over users freedoms, we are far beyond the typical discussions about "
"cultural production. I find it very hard to defend my support of freedom if "
"my work enables some uses that could go against others' freedoms. This is of "
"course a freedom dilemma related to the [paradox of tolerance](https://en."
"wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance). But my main conflict is when "
"copyleft supporters boast about their defense of users freedoms while they "
"micromanage others' software freedom definitions and, in the meantime, they "
"turn their backs to the gray, dark or red areas of what is implicit in the "
"freedom they safeguard. Or they don't care about us or their privileges "
"don't allow them to have empathy."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:300
msgid ""
"Since the _+++GNU+++ Manifesto_ the relevance of industry among software "
"developers is clear. I don't have a reply that could calm them down. It is "
"becoming more clear that technology isn't just a broker that can be used or "
"abused. Technology, or at least its development, is a kind of political "
"praxis. The inability of legislation for law enforcement and the possibility "
"of new technologies to hold and help the _statu quo_ express this political "
"capacity of information and communications technologies."
msgstr ""
"Since the _+++GNU+++ Manifesto_ the relevance of industry among software "
"developers is clear. I don't have a reply that could calm them down. It is "
"becoming more clear that technology isn't just a broker that can be used or "
"abused. Technology, or at least its development, is a kind of political "
"praxis. The inability of legislation for law enforcement and the possibility "
"of new technologies to hold and help the _statu quo_ express this political "
"capacity of information and communications technologies."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:308
msgid ""
"So as copyleft hacked copyright law, with copyfarleft we could help "
"disarticulate structural power or we could induce civil disobedience. By "
"prohibiting our work from being used by military, police or oligarchic "
"institutions, we could force them to stop _taking advantage_ and increase "
"their maintenance costs. They could even reach a point where they couldn't "
"operate anymore or at least they couldn't be as affective as our communities."
msgstr ""
"So as copyleft hacked copyright law, with copyfarleft we could help "
"disarticulate structural power or we could induce civil disobedience. By "
"prohibiting our work from being used by military, police or oligarchic "
"institutions, we could force them to stop _taking advantage_ and increase "
"their maintenance costs. They could even reach a point where they couldn't "
"operate anymore or at least they couldn't be as affective as our communities."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:315
msgid ""
"I know it sounds like a utopia because in practice we need the effort of a "
"lot of people involved in technology development. But we already did it "
"once: we used copyright law against itself and we introduced a new model of "
"workforce distribution and means of production. We could again use copyright "
"for our benefit, but now against the structures of power that surveils, "
"exploits and kills people. These institutions need our “brainpower,” we can "
"try by refusing their use. Some explorations could be software licenses that "
"explicitly ban surveillance, exploitation or murder."
msgstr ""
"I know it sounds like a utopia because in practice we need the effort of a "
"lot of people involved in technology development. But we already did it "
"once: we used copyright law against itself and we introduced a new model of "
"workforce distribution and means of production. We could again use copyright "
"for our benefit, but now against the structures of power that surveils, "
"exploits and kills people. These institutions need our “brainpower,” we can "
"try by refusing their _use_. Some explorations could be software licenses "
"that explicitly ban surveillance, exploitation or murder."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:324
msgid ""
"We could also make it difficult for them to thieve our technology "
"development and deny access to our communication networks. Nowadays +++FOSS++"
"+ distribution models have confused open economy with gift economy. Another "
"think tank---Centre of Economics and Foreign Policy Studies---published a "
"report---_Digital Open Source Intelligence Security: A Primer_---where it "
"states that open sources constitutes “at least 90%” of all intelligence "
"activities. That includes our published open production and the open "
"standards we develop for transparency. It is why end-to-end encryption is "
"important and why we should extend its use instead of allowing governments "
"to ban it."
msgstr ""
"We could also make it difficult for them to thieve our technology "
"development and deny access to our communication networks. Nowadays +++FOSS++"
"+ distribution models have confused open economy with gift economy. Another "
"think tank---Centre of Economics and Foreign Policy Studies---published a "
"report---_Digital Open Source Intelligence Security: A Primer_---where it "
"states that open sources constitutes “at least 90%” of all intelligence "
"activities. That includes our published open production and the open "
"standards we develop for transparency. It is why end-to-end encryption is "
"important and why we should extend its use instead of allowing governments "
"to ban it."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:335
msgid ""
"Copyleft could be a global pandemic if we don't go against its incorporation "
"inside virulent technologies of destruction. We need more organization so "
"that the software we are developing is free as in “social freedom,” not only "
"as in “free individual.” "
msgstr ""
"Copyleft could be a global pandemic if we don't go against its incorporation "
"inside virulent technologies of destruction. We need more organization so "
"that the software we are developing is “free as in social freedom, not only "
"as in free individual.” "

852
content/po/es/006_copyleft-pandemic.po Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,852 @@
msgid ""
msgstr ""
"Project-Id-Version: 006_copyleft-pandemic 1.0\n"
"Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: Nika Zhenya <nika.zhenya@cliteratu.re>\n"
"POT-Creation-Date: 2020-04-08 00:02-0500\n"
"Last-Translator: Automatically generated\n"
"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
"PO-Revision-Date: 2020-04-08 05:51-0500\n"
"Language-Team: none\n"
"Language: es\n"
"Plural-Forms: nplurals=2; plural=(n != 1);\n"
"X-Generator: Poedit 2.3\n"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:1
msgid "# The Copyleft Pandemic"
msgstr ""
"# La pandemia del _copyleft_\n"
"\n"
"> @published 2020/04/08, 6:00 {.published}"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:2
msgid ""
"It seems that we needed a global pandemic for publishers to finally give "
"open access. I guess we should say… thanks?"
msgstr ""
"Al parecer necesitábamos una pandemia global para que finalmente los "
"editores otorgaran acceso abierto a obras. Supongo que deberíamos decir… "
"¿gracias?"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:4
msgid ""
"In my opinion it was a good +++PR+++ maneuver, who doesn't like companies "
"when they do _good_? This pandemic has shown its capacity to fortify public "
"and private institutions, no matter how poorly they have done their job and "
"how these new policies are normalizing surveillance. But who cares, I can "
"barely make a living publishing books and I have never been involved in "
"government work."
msgstr ""
"En mi opinión fue una buena maniobra de relaciones públicas, ¿a quién no le "
"agradan las compañías cuando hacer _el bien_? Esta pandemia ha evidenciado "
"su capacidad para fortalecer instituciones públicas o privadas, sin importar "
"qué tan pobre han realizado su trabajo o cómo estas nuevas políticas están "
"normalizando la vigilancia. Pero qué importa, con trabajos puedo vivir de la "
"edición de libros y nunca he estado involucrado en trabajo gubernamental."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:10
msgid ""
"An interesting side effect about this “kind” and _temporal_ openness is "
"about authorship. One of the most relevant arguments in favor of "
"intellectual property (+++IP+++) is the defense of authors' rights to make a "
"living with their work. The utilitarian and labor justifications of +++IP+++ "
"are very clear in that sense. For the former, +++IP+++ laws confer an "
"incentive for cultural production and, thus, for the so-called creation of "
"wealth. For the latter, author's “labour of his body, and the work of his "
"hands, we may say, are properly his.”"
msgstr ""
"Un interesante efecto secundario de esta «amable» y _temporal_ apertura es "
"en torno a la autoría. Uno de los argumentos más relevantes a favor de la "
"propiedad intelectual (+++PI+++) es la defensa de los derechos de los "
"autores a vivir de su trabajo. Las justificaciones utilitaristas o "
"laboristas de la +++PI+++ son muy claras en este sentido. Para la primera, "
"las leyes de +++PI+++ confieren un incentivo para la producción cultural y, "
"por tanto, para la así llamada generación de riqueza. Para la última, los "
"autores y «[e]l trabajo de su cuerpo y la labor producida por sus manos "
"podemos decir que son suyos»."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:19
msgid ""
"But also in personal-based justifications the author is a primordial subject "
"for +++IP+++ laws. Actually, this justification wouldn't exist if the author "
"didn't have an intimate and qualitatively distinctive relationship with her "
"own work. Without some metaphysics or theological conceptions about cultural "
"production, this special relation is difficult to prove---but that is "
"another story."
msgstr ""
"Pero para las justificaciones personalistas también el autor es el sujeto "
"primordial para las leyes de +++PI+++. De hecho, esta justificación no "
"existiría si la autoría no tuviera una relación íntima y cualitativamente "
"distintiva con su trabajo. Sin algunas concepciones metafísicas o teológicas "
"sobre la producción cultural, esta relación especial sería difícil de probar "
"---pero esa es otra historia---."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:25
msgid ""
"![Locke and Hegel drinking tea while discussing several topics on "
"Nothingland…](../../../img/p006_i001.png)"
msgstr ""
"![Locke y Hegel bebiendo el té mientras discuten diversos temas en "
"Nadalandia…](../../../img/p006_i001_es.jpg)"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:26
msgid ""
"From copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft movements, a lot of people have "
"argued that this argument hides the fact that most authors can't make a "
"living, whereas publishers and distributors profit a lot. Some critics claim "
"governments should give more power to “creators” instead of allowing "
"“reproducers” to do whatever they want. I am not a fan of this way of doing "
"things because I don't think anyone should have more power, including "
"authors, and also because in my world government is synonymous with "
"corruption and death. But diversity of opinions is important, I just hope "
"not all governments are like that."
msgstr ""
"Desde los movimientos del _copyfight_, _copyleft_ y _copyfarleft_, mucha "
"gente ha discutido que este argumento oculta el hecho de que la mayoría de "
"los autores no pueden vivir de su trabajo, mientras que los editores y los "
"distribuidores ganan bastante. Algunos críticos demandan que los gobiernos "
"deberían dar más poder a los «creadores» en lugar de permitir que los "
"«reproductores» hagan lo que quieran. No soy fan de esa manera de hacer las "
"cosas porque no pienso que nadie debiera tener más poder ---incluyendo a los "
"autores--- sino distribuirlo, y debido a que en mi mundo el gobierno es "
"sinónimo de corrupción y muerte. Pero la diversidad de opiniones es "
"importante, solo espero que no todos los gobiernos sean así."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:36
msgid ""
"So between copyright, copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft defenders there is "
"usually a mysterious assent about producer relevance. The disagreement comes "
"with how this overview about cultural production is or should translate into "
"policies and legislation."
msgstr ""
"Así que entre los defensores del _copyright_, _copyfight_, _copyleft_ y "
"_copyfarleft_ de manera usual hay un misterioso consentimiento acerca de la "
"relevancia del productor. El desacuerdo subyace en cómo este panorama sobre "
"la producción cultural se traduce o debería verterse en políticas, "
"legislaciones u organización política."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:40
msgid ""
"In times of emergency and crisis we are seeing how easily it is to “pause” "
"those discussions and laws---or fast track [other ones](https://www."
"theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/06/us-internet-bill-seen-as-opening-shot-"
"against-end-to-end-encryption). On the side of governments this again shows "
"how copyright and authors' rights aren't natural laws nor are they grounded "
"beyond our political and economic systems. From the side of copyright "
"defenders, this phenomena makes it clear that authorship is an argument that "
"doesn't rely on the actual producers, cultural phenomena or world issues… "
"And it also shows that there are [librarians](https://blog.archive."
"org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-responds-why-we-released-the-national-"
"emergency-library) and [researchers](https://www.latimes.com/business/"
"story/2020-03-03/covid-19-open-science) fighting in favor of public "
"interests; +++AKA+++, how important libraries and open access are today and "
"how they can't be replaced by (online) bookstores or subscription-based "
"research."
msgstr ""
"En tiempos de emergencia y de crisis estamos viendo qué tan fácil es hacer "
"una «pausa» sobre estas discusiones y leyes ---o acelerar [otras](https://"
"www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/06/us-internet-bill-seen-as-opening-"
"shot-against-end-to-end-encryption)---. Del lado de los gobiernos de nuevo "
"se muestra cómo el _copyright_ y los derechos de autor no son leyes "
"naturales ni se apoyan más allá de los sistemas políticos y económicos. Del "
"lado de los defensores de estos derechos, el fenómeno pone en claro que la "
"autoría es un argumento que no depende de los productores de carne y hueso, "
"el fenómeno cultural y cuestiones globales… Y también evidencia que hay "
"[bibliotecarios](https://blog.archive.org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-"
"responds-why-we-released-the-national-emergency-library) e [investigadores]"
"(https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-03-03/covid-19-open-science) "
"luchando a favor de intereses públicos; es decir, cuán importantes hoy en "
"día son las bibliotecas y el acceso abierto y cómo no pueden ser resplazados "
"por las librerías (en línea) o la investigación por suscripción."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:53
msgid ""
"I would find it very pretentious if [some authors](https://www.authorsguild."
"org/industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending) and "
"[some publishers](https://publishers.org/news/comment-from-aap-president-and-"
"ceo-maria-pallante-on-the-internet-archives-national-emergency-library) "
"didn't agree with this _temporal_ openness of their work. But let's not miss "
"the point: this global pandemic has shown how easily it is for publishers "
"and distributors to opt for openness or paywalls---who cares about the "
"authors?… So next time you defend copyright as authors' rights to make a "
"living, think twice, only few have been able to earn a livelihood, and while "
"you think you are helping them, you are actually making third parties richer."
msgstr ""
"Me parece muy pretencioso que ciertos [autores](https://www.authorsguild.org/"
"industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending) y "
"[editores](https://publishers.org/news/comment-from-aap-president-and-ceo-"
"maria-pallante-on-the-internet-archives-national-emergency-library) no "
"estuvieran de acuerdo con esta apertura _temporal_ de su trabajo. Pero no "
"perdamos el punto: esta pandemia global ha demostrado qué tan sencillo es "
"para los editores y los distribuidores optar por la apertura o los muros de "
"pago ---¿a quién le importa los autores?---… Así que la próxima ves que "
"defiendas el _copyright_ o los derechos de los autores a vivir de su "
"trabajo, piénsalo dos veces, solo unos pocos han sido capaces de tener un "
"sustento de vida y, mientras piensas que los estás ayudando, en realidad "
"estás haciendo más ricos a terceros."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:62
msgid ""
"In the end the copyright holders are not the only ones who defend their "
"interests by addressing the importance of people---in their case the "
"authors, but more generally and secularly the producers. The copyleft "
"holders---a kind of cool copyright holder that hacked copyright laws---also "
"defends their interest in a similar way, but instead of authors, they talk "
"about users and instead of profits, they supposedly defend freedom."
msgstr ""
"Al final los titulares de los derechos reservados no son los únicos que "
"defienden sus intereses al hablar de la importancia de la gente ---en su "
"caso los autores, pero de manera más general y secular sobre los "
"productores---. Los titulares de obras con _copyleft_ ---una versión «chida» "
"de titulares de derechos que hackearon las leyes de _copyright_--- también "
"defienden sus intereses de manera similar pero, en lugar de autores, hablan "
"sobre los usuarios y, en lugar de ganancias, ellos supuestamente defienden "
"la libertad."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:69
msgid ""
"There is a huge difference between each of them, but I just want to denote "
"how they talk about people in order to defend their interests. I wouldn't "
"put them in the same sack if it wasn't because of these two issues."
msgstr ""
"Existe una enorme diferencia entre cada posición, pero solo quiero denotar "
"cómo hablan de la gente para defender sus intereses. No los pondría en el "
"mismo saco si no fuera por dos cuestiones."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:73
msgid ""
"Some copyleft holders were so annoying in defending Stallman. _Dudes_, at "
"least from here we don't reduce the free software movement to one person, no "
"matter if he's the founder or how smart or important he is or was. "
"Criticizing his actions wasn't synonymous with throwing away what this "
"movement has done---what we have done!---, as a lot of you tried to mitigate "
"the issue: “Oh, but he is not the movement, we shouldn't have made a big "
"issue about that.” His and your attitude is the fucking issue. Together you "
"have made it very clear how narrow both views are. Stallman fucked it up and "
"was behaving very immaturely by thinking the movement is or was thanks to "
"him---we also have our own stories about his behavior---, why don't we just "
"accept that?"
msgstr ""
"Algunos titulares de _copyleft_ fueron muy fastidiosos al defender a "
"Stallman. _Weyes_, al menos desde aquí no reducimos el movimiento del "
"_software_ libre a una persona, sin importar si es el fundador o cuán "
"inteligente o importante ha sido o alguna vez fue. La crítica a sus acciones "
"no es sinónimo de tirar a la basura lo que este movimiento ha hecho ---¡lo "
"que hemos logrado!---, como muchos de ustedes trataron de mitigar el asunto "
"al indicar: «Oh, pero él no es el movimiento, no deberíamos hacer un gran "
"problema sobre ello». Su actitud y la tuya son el pinche problema. Ambas "
"dejan en claro lo estrecho de sus miras. Stallman la cagó y se estaba "
"comportando de una manera muy inmadura al pensar que el movimiento es "
"gracias a él o que alguna vez lo fue ---nosotros también tenemos nuestras "
"propias historias sobre su comportamiento---, ¿por qué simplemente no lo "
"aceptamos?"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:85
msgid ""
"But I don't really care about him. For me and the people I work with, the "
"free software movement is a wildcard that joins efforts related to "
"technology, politics and culture for better worlds. Nevertheless, the +++FSF+"
"++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++, and other big copyleft institutions don't seem "
"to realize that a plurality of worlds implies a diversity of conceptions "
"about freedom. And even worse, they have made a very common mistake when we "
"talk about freedom: they forgot that “freedom wants to be free.”"
msgstr ""
"Pero en realidad no me importa. Para mí y las personas con las que trabajo, "
"el movimiento del _software_ libre es un comodín en donde se reúnen los "
"esfuerzos relativos a la tecnología, política y cultura para mejores mundos. "
"Sin embargo, la +++FSF+++, la +++OSI+++, +++CC+++ y otras instituciones "
"grandes dentro del _copyleft_ no parecen darse cuenta que una pluralidad de "
"mundos implica una diversidad de concepciones acerca de la libertad. O peor "
"aún, han cometido el común error cuando hablamos acerca de la libertad: "
"olvidan que «la libertad quiere ser libre»."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:93
msgid ""
"Instead, they have tried to give formal definitions of software freedom. "
"Don't get me wrong, definitions are a good way to plan and understand a "
"phenomenon. But besides its formality, it is problematic to bind others to "
"your own definitions, mainly when you say the movement is about and for them."
msgstr ""
"En su lugar, han tratado de dar definiciones formales a la libertad del "
"_software_. No lo tomes a mal, las definiciones son un buen camino para "
"planear y entender un fenómeno. Pero además de su formalización, es "
"problemático atar a otros a tus propias definiciones, principalmente cuando "
"dices que el movimiento es acerca de ellos y para sus necesidades."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:98
msgid ""
"Among all concepts, freedom is actually very tricky to define. How can you "
"delimit a concept in a definition when the concept itself claims the "
"inability of, perhaps, any restraint? It is not that freedom can't be "
"defined---I am actually assuming a definition of freedom---, but about how "
"general and static it could be. If the world changes, if people change, if "
"the world is actually an array of worlds and if people sometimes behave one "
"way or the other, of course the notion of freedom is gonna vary."
msgstr ""
"Entre todos los conceptos, la libertad es muy truculenta de definir. ¿Cómo "
"puedes delimitar una idea en una definición cuando el concepto en sí llama a "
"la incapacidad, quizá, de cualquier atadura? No es que la libertad no pueda "
"ser definida ---de hecho estoy asumiendo una definición de esta---, pero "
"sobre cuán general y estática puede ser. Si el mundo muta, si las personas "
"cambian, si el mundo es en realidad un conjunto de mundos y si la gente se "
"comporta de una manera y a veces de otra, por supuesto que la noción de "
"libertad va a variar."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:107
msgid ""
"With freedom's different meanings we could try to reduce its diversity so it "
"could be embedded in any context or we could try something else. I dunno, "
"maybe we could make software freedom an interoperable concept that fits each "
"of our worlds or we could just stop trying to get a common principle."
msgstr ""
"Podríamos intentar reducir la diversidad de los diferentes significados de "
"la libertad para que pueda ser empotrado en cualquier contexto o podríamos "
"intentar otra cosa. No lo sé, tal vez pudiéramos hacer de la libertad del "
"_software_ un concepto interoperativo que se adecúe a cada uno de nuestros "
"mundos o simplemente podríamos dejar de intentar tener un mismo principio."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:112
msgid ""
"The copyleft institutions I mentioned and many other companies that are "
"proud to support the copyleft movement tend to be blind about this. I am "
"talking from my experiences, my battles and my struggles when I decided to "
"use copyfarleft licenses in most parts of my work. Instead of receiving "
"support from institutional representatives, I first received warnings: “That "
"freedom you are talking about isn't freedom.” Afterwards, when I sought "
"infrastructure support, I got refusals: “You are invited to use our code in "
"your server, but we can't provide you hosting because your licenses aren't "
"free.” Dawgs, if I could, I wouldn't look for your help in the first place, "
"duh."
msgstr ""
"Las instituciones del _copyleft_ que mencioné y demás compañías que se "
"enorgullecen de apoyar al movimiento tienden a no ver esto. Hablo desde mis "
"experiencias, mis luchas y mis angustias cuando decidí usar licencias "
"_copyfarleft_ en la mayoría de mi trabajo. En lugar de recibir apoyo de los "
"representantes de estas instituciones, primero recibí advertencias: «La "
"libertad de la que hablas no es libertad». Después, cuando busqué su apoyo "
"para infraestructura, obtuve rechazos: «Estás invitado a usar nuestro código "
"en tu servidor, pero no podemos hospedarte porque tus licencias no son "
"libres». Compas, no hubiera buscado su ayuda en primer lugar si pudiera, dah."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:123
msgid ""
"Thanks to a lot of Latin American hackers and pirates, I am little by little "
"building my and our own infrastructure. But I know this help is actually a "
"privilege: for many years I couldn't execute many projects or ideas only "
"because I didn't have access to the technology or tuition. And even worse, I "
"wasn't able to look to a wider and more complex horizon without all this "
"learning."
msgstr ""
"Gracias a muchos hackers y piratas latinoamericanos, poco a poco estoy "
"construyendo mi infraestructura junto con estas personas. Pero sé que esta "
"ayuda es más bien un privilegio: por muchos años no pude ejecutar proyectos "
"o ideas solo porque no tenía acceso a la tecnología o a tutores. Y peor aún, "
"no tenía capacidad de observar desde un horizonte más amplio y complejo sin "
"todo este aprendizaje."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:129
msgid ""
"(There is a pedagogical deficiency in the free software movement that makes "
"people think that writing documentation and praising self-taught learning is "
"enough. From my point of view, it is more about the production of a self-"
"image in how a hacker or a pirate _should be_. Plus, it's fucking scary when "
"you realize how manly, hierarchical and meritocratic this movement tends to "
"be)."
msgstr ""
"(Existe una deficiencia pedagógica en el movimiento del _software_ libre que "
"induce a las personas a pensar que es suficiente con escribir documentación "
"y elogiar el aprendizaje autodidacta. Desde mi punto de vista, es más bien "
"la producción de una autoimagen sobre cómo _debe ser_ un hacker o pirata. "
"Además, da mucho pinche miedo cuando te das cuenta que tan masculino, "
"jerárquico y meritocrático puede llegar a ser este movimiento)."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:136
msgid ""
"According to copyleft folks, my notion of software freedom isn't free "
"because copyfarleft licenses prevents _people_ from using software. This is "
"a very common criticism of any copyfarleft license. And it is also a very "
"paradoxical one."
msgstr ""
"Según los compas del _copyleft_, mi noción de libertad del _software_ no es "
"libre porque las licencias _copyfarleft_ impiden a _las personas_ usar el "
"_software_. Esta es una crítica común para cualquier licencia _copyfarleft_. "
"Y también es una muy paradójica."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:140
msgid ""
"Between the free software movement and open source initiative, there has "
"been a disagreement about who ought to inherit the same type of license, "
"like the General Public License. For the free software movement, this clause "
"ensures that software will always be free. According to the open source "
"initiative, this clause is actually a counter-freedom because it doesn't "
"allow people to decide which license to use and it also isn't very "
"attractive for enterprise entrepreneurship. Let's not forget that both sides "
"agree that the market is are essential for technology development."
msgstr ""
"Entre el movimiento del _software_ libre y la iniciativa del código abierto "
"ha existido un desacuerdo acerca de si se debería heredar el mismo tipo de "
"licencia, como la Licencia Pública General. Para el movimiento del "
"_software_ libre esta cláusula asegura que el _software_ siempre será libre. "
"Según la iniciativa del código abierto esta cláusula en realidad es una "
"contralibertad porque no permite a las personas decidir el tipo de licencia "
"a usar y debido a que es poco atractiva para el emprendimiento empresarial. "
"No olvidemos que las instituciones de ambos lados asienten con el carácter "
"esencial del mercado para el desarrollo tecnológico."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:150
msgid ""
"Free software supporters tend to vanish the discussion by declaring that "
"open source defenders don't understand the social implication of this "
"hereditary clause or that they have different interests and ways to change "
"technology development. So it's kind of paradoxical that these folks see the "
"anti-capitalist clause of copyfarleft licenses as a counter-freedom. Or they "
"don't understand its implications or perceive that copyfarleft doesn't talk "
"about technology development in its insolation, but in its relationship with "
"politics, society and economy."
msgstr ""
"Las personas que apoyan el movimiento del _software_ libre tienden a "
"desvanecer la discusión al declarar que los defensores del código abierto no "
"entienden las implicaciones sociales de la cláusula hereditaria o que tienen "
"diferentes intereses y maneras de cambiar el desarrollo tecnológico. Así que "
"es un tanto paradójico que estos compas vean la cláusula anticapitalista de "
"las licencias _copyfarleft_ como una contralibertad. O no entienden sus "
"implicaciones o no perciben que el _copyfarleft_ no habla del desarrollo "
"tecnológico en su insolación, sino en sus relaciones políticas, sociales y "
"económicas."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:160
msgid ""
"I won't defend copyfarleft against those criticisms. First, I don't think I "
"should defend anything because I am not saying everyone should grasp our "
"notion of freedom. Second, I have a strong opinion against the usual legal "
"reductionism among this debate. Third, I think we should focus on the ways "
"we can work together, instead of paying attention to what could divide us. "
"Finally, I don't think these criticisms are wrong, but incomplete: the "
"definition of software freedom has inherited the philosophical problem of "
"how we define and what the definition of freedom implies."
msgstr ""
"No voy a defender al _copyfarleft_ de este criticismo. Primero, no pienso "
"que he de hacer una defensa porque no estoy diciendo que deberían asir esta "
"noción de libertad. Segundo, tengo una dura opinión en contra del usual "
"reduccionismo jurídico de este debate. Tercero, pienso que deberíamos "
"enfocarnos en las maneras en como podemos trabajar en conjunto, en lugar de "
"poner atención a lo que nos divide. Por último, no pienso que esta crítica "
"sea incorrecta sino incompleta: la definición de la libertad del _software_ "
"ha heredado el problema filosófico de cómo definir la libertad y lo que esta "
"definición implica."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:169
msgid ""
"That doesn't mean I don't care about this discussion. Actually, it's a topic "
"I'm very familiar with. Copyright has locked me out with paywalls for "
"technology and knowledge access, copyleft has kept me away with "
"“licensewalls” with the same effects. So let's take a moment to see how free "
"the freedom is that the copyleft institutions are preaching."
msgstr ""
"Esto no quiero decir que me desinteresa esta discusión. Se trata de un tema "
"que me es familiar. El _copyright_ me ha bloqueado el acceso a la tecnología "
"y el conocimiento con sus muros de pago, mientras que el _copyleft_ con los "
"mismos efectos me ha puesto un embargo con sus «muros de licencias». Así que "
"tomemos un momento para ver qué tan libre es la libertad que predican las "
"instituciones del _copyleft_."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:175
msgid ""
"According to _Open Source Software & The Department of Defense_ (+++DoD+++), "
"The +++U.S. DoD+++ is one of the biggest consumers of open source. To put it "
"in perspective, all tactical vehicles of the +++U.S.+++ Army employs at "
"least one piece of open source software in its programming. Other examples "
"are _the use_ of Android to direct airstrikes or _the use_ of Linux for the "
"ground stations that operates military drones like the Predator and Reaper."
msgstr ""
"Según _Open Source Software & The Department of Defense_ (_Programas de "
"código abierto y el Departamento de Defensa_; +++DoD+++ por sus siglas en "
"inglés), el +++DoD+++ estadunidense es uno de los más grandes consumidores "
"de código abierto. Para ponerlo en perspectiva, todos los vehículos tácticos "
"del ejército estadunidense usa al menos una pedazo de _software_ de código "
"abierto en su programación. Otros ejemplos puede ser _el uso_ de Android "
"para dirigir ataques aéreos o _el uso_ de Linux en las estaciones terrestres "
"que operan los drones militares como el Predator o el Reaper ---«_predator_» "
"de «predador» y «_reaper_» también quiere decir «parca» en inglés---."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:183
msgid ""
"![A Reaper drone [incorrectly bombarding](https://www.theguardian.com/"
"news/2019/nov/18/killer-drones-how-many-uav-predator-reaper) civilians in "
"Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and Yemen in order to deliver +++U.S. DoD+"
"++ notion of freedom.](../../../img/p006_i002.png)"
msgstr ""
"![Drones Reaper bombardeando de manera incorrecta a civiles en Afganistán, "
"Irak, Pakistán, Siria y Yemen para repartir la noción de libertad del "
"Departamento de Defensa de Estados Unidos.](../../../img/p006_i002_es.png)"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:184
msgid ""
"Before you argue that this is a problem about open source software and not "
"free software, you should check out the +++DoD+++ [+++FAQ+++ section]"
"(https://dodcio.defense.gov/Open-Source-Software-FAQ). There, they define "
"open source software as “software for which the human-readable source code "
"is available for use, study, re-use, modification, enhancement, and re-"
"distribution by the users of that software.” Does that sound familiar? Of "
"course!, they include +++GPL+++ as an open software license and they even "
"rule that “an open source software license must also meet the +++GNU+++ Free "
"Software Definition.”"
msgstr ""
"Antes de que argumentes que este es un problema del _software_ de código "
"abierto y no del _software_ libre, deberías revisar la [sección de preguntas "
"frecuentes](https://dodcio.defense.gov/Open-Source-Software-FAQ) del +++DoD++"
"+ estadunidense. Ahí ellos definen al _software_ de código abierto como «un "
"programa cuyo código fuente legible por humanos está disponible para su uso, "
"estudio, reuso, modificación, mejoramiento y redistribución por los usuarios "
"de ese programa». ¿Acaso te suena familiar? ¡Por supuesto!, ellos incluyen "
"la +++GPL+++ como una licencia de _software_ abierto y hasta establecen que "
"«un programa de código abierto también debe satisfacer la definición de "
"_software_ libre del proyecto +++GNU+++»."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:194
msgid ""
"This report was published in 2016 by the Center for a New American Security "
"(+++CNAS+++), a right-wing think tank which [mission and agenda](https://www."
"cnas.org/mission) is “designed to shape the choices of leaders in the +++U.S."
"+++ government, the private sector, and society to advance +++U.S.+++ "
"interests and strategy.”"
msgstr ""
"Este reporte fue publicado en 2016 por el Centro para una Nueva Seguridad "
"Americana (+++CNAS+++, por sus siglas en inglés), un instituto de "
"investigación de derecha cuya [misión y agenda](https://www.cnas.org/"
"mission) está «diseñada para dar forma a las decisiones de los líderes del "
"gobierno estadunidense, el sector privado y la sociedad en pos de los "
"intereses y estrategia de Estados Unidos»."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:199
msgid ""
"I found this report after I read about how the [+++U.S.+++ Army scrapped one "
"billion dollars for its “Iron Dome” after Israel refused to share code]"
"(https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-army-scraps-1b-iron-dome-project-after-"
"israel-refuses-to-provide-key-codes). I found it interesting that even the "
"so-called most powerful army in the world was disabled by copyright laws---a "
"potential resource for asymmetric warfare. To my surprise, this isn't an "
"anomaly."
msgstr ""
"Encontré este reporte después de leer sobre cómo el ejército estadunidense "
"[dio un pasó atrás](https://israelnoticias.com/militar/estados-unidos-cupula-"
"hierro-defensa) al acuerdo por un millardo de dólares para la adquisición de "
"la «Cúpula de Hierro» después de que Israel se rehusó a compartir su código "
"([fuente en inglés](https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-army-scraps-1b-iron-"
"dome-project-after-israel-refuses-to-provide-key-codes)). Me pareció "
"interesante que incluso el autodenominado ejército más poderoso del mundo "
"quedó deshabilitado por cuestiones de leyes de _copyright_ ---un potencial "
"recurso para guerras asimétricas---. Para mi sorpresa, esta no es una "
"anormalidad."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:206
msgid ""
"The intention of +++CNAS+++ report is to convince +++DoD+++ to adopt more "
"open source software because its “generally better than their proprietary "
"counterparts […] because they can _take advantage_ of the brainpower of "
"larger teams, which leads to faster innovation, higher quality, and superior "
"security for _a fraction of the cost_.” This report has its origins by the "
"“justifiably” concern “about the erosion of +++U.S.+++ military technical "
"superiority.”"
msgstr ""
"La intención del reporte hecho por el +++CNAS+++ es convencer al +++DoD+++ "
"estadunidense ha adoptar más _software_ de código abierto porque «de manera "
"general es mejor que su contraparte propietaria […] debido a que pueden "
"_tomar ventaja_ del _poder mental_ de grandes equipos, lo que conlleva a una "
"innovación más rápida, a una mejor calidad y a una superior seguridad por "
"_una fracción del costo_». Este reporte tiene sus orígenes en la "
"«justificada» preocupación «acerca de la erosión de la superioridad técnica "
"del ejército de Estados Unidos»."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:214
msgid ""
"Who would think that this could happen to +++FOSS+++? Well, all of us from "
"this part of the world have been saying that the type of freedom endorsed by "
"many copyleft institutions is too wide, counterproductive for its own "
"objectives and, of course, inapplicable for our context because that liberal "
"notion of software freedom relies on strong institutions and the capacity of "
"own property or capitalize knowledge. The same ones which have been trying "
"to explain that the economic models they try to “teach” us don't work or we "
"doubt them because of their side effects. Crowdfunding isn't easy here "
"because our cultural production is heavily dependent on government aids and "
"policies, instead of the private or public sectors. And donations aren't a "
"good idea because of the hidden interests they could have and the economic "
"dependence they generate."
msgstr ""
"¿Quién habría de pensar que esto le podría ocurrir al +++FOSS+++? Bueno, a "
"todos nosotros que desde esta parte del mundo hemos estado diciendo que el "
"tipo de libertad avalada por muchas instituciones del _copyleft_ es muy "
"amplia, contraproducente para sus propios objetivos y, por supuesto, "
"inaplicable para nuestro contexto, porque esa noción liberal de la libertad "
"del _software_ depende de instituciones con legitimidad y de la capacidad de "
"que cada quien tenga propiedad o pueda capitalizar su conocimiento. Ellos "
"son los mismos que han tratado de explicarnos los modelos económicos que "
"tratan de «enseñarnos» pero que no funcionan aquí o de los que dudamos "
"debido a sus efectos secundarios. El micromecenazgo no es fácil de llevar a "
"cabo aquí porque nuestra producción cultural depende demasiado de apoyos "
"gubernamentales y sus políticas, en lugar de vincularse con los sectores "
"privado o público. Y las donaciones no son buena idea por los intereses "
"ocultos que pueden tener, así como la dependencia económica que generan."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:227
msgid ""
"But I guess it has to burst their bubble in order to get the point across. "
"For example, the Epstein controversial donations to +++MIT+++ Media Lab and "
"his friendship with some folks of +++CC+++; or the use of open source "
"software by the +++U.S.+++ Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While for "
"decades +++FOSS+++ has been a mechanism to facilitate the murder of “Global "
"South” citizens; a tool for Chinese labor exploitation denounced by the "
"anti-996 movement; a licensewall for technological and knowledge access for "
"people who can't afford infrastructure and the learning it triggers, even "
"though the code is “free” _to use_; or a police of software freedom that "
"denies Latin America and other regions their right to self-determinate its "
"freedom, its software policies and its economic models."
msgstr ""
"Pero supongo que su burbuja tiene que rasgarse para que entiendan el punto. "
"Por ejemplo, las donaciones controversiales realizadas por Epstein al +++MIT+"
"++ Media Lab o su amistad con algunas personas de +++CC+++; o el uso del "
"_software_ de código abierto por el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de "
"Aduanas de los Estados Unidos. Mientras que por décadas el +++FOSS+++ ha "
"sido un mecanismo que facilita el asesinato de los ciudadanos del «sur "
"global»; una herramienta para la explotación laboral china denunciada por el "
"movimiento anti-996; un muro de licencias para el acceso a la tecnología y "
"el conocimiento de personas que no pueden costearse infraestructura y el "
"aprendizaje que desata, sin importar que el código es «libre» _de usar_, o "
"la policía de la libertad del _software_ que niega a América Latina y otras "
"regiones su derecho a autodeterminar su libertad, sus políticas sobre el "
"_software_ y sus modelos económicos."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:240
msgid ""
"Those copyleft institutions that care so much about “user freedoms” actually "
"haven't been explicit about how +++FOSS+++ is helping shape a world where a "
"lot of us don't fit in. It had to be right-wing think tanks, the ones that "
"declare the relevance of +++FOSS+++ for warfare, intelligence, security and "
"authoritarian regimes, while these institutions have been making many "
"efforts in justifying its way of understanding cultural production as a "
"commodification of its political capacity. They have shown that in their "
"pursuit of government and corporate adoption of +++FOSS+++, when it favors "
"their interests, they talk about “software user freedoms” but actually refer "
"to “freedom of use software”, no matter who the user is or what it has been "
"used for."
msgstr ""
"Esas instituciones del _copyleft_ que tanto les importan las «libertades de "
"los usuarios» en realidad no han sido explícitas acerca de cómo el +++FOSS++"
"+ está ayudando a dar forma a un mundo donde muchos de nosotros no tenemos "
"cabida. Tuvieron que ser centros de investigación de derecha los que "
"declararon la relevancia del +++FOSS+++ para el arte de la guerra, la "
"inteligencia, la seguridad y los regímenes autoritarios, mientras que estas "
"instituciones se han esforzado en justificar su comprensión de la producción "
"cultural como la mercantilización de su capacidad política. En su búsqueda "
"para que gobiernos y corporaciones adopten el +++FOSS+++ han hecho evidente "
"que, cuando favorece a sus intereses, hablan de «libertad de los usuarios de "
"_software_» aunque más bien se refieran a la «libertad de uso del "
"_software_», sin importar quién es su usuario ni para qué ha sido usado."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:252
msgid ""
"There is a sort of cognitive dissonance that influences many copyleft "
"supporters to treat others harshly, those who just want some aid in the "
"argument over which license or product is free or not. But in the meantime, "
"they don't defy, and some of them even embrace the adoption of +++FOSS+++ "
"for any kind of corporation, it doesn't matter if it exploits its employees, "
"surveils its users, helps to undermine democratic institutions or is part of "
"a killing machine."
msgstr ""
"Existe una disonancia cognitiva entre quienes apoyan el _copyleft_ que los "
"hace ser muy duros con otros ---los que solo quieren alguna ayuda--- bajo el "
"argumento sobre si una licencia o un producto es libre o no. Mientras tanto, "
"no desafían la adopción del +++FOSS+++ hecha por cualquier corporación, e "
"incluso la acogen, sin importar que explote a sus empleados, vigile a sus "
"usuarios, ayude a dinamitar instituciones democráticas o forme parte de una "
"máquina de matar."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:260
msgid ""
"In my opinion, the term “use” is one of the key concepts that dilutes "
"political capacity of +++FOSS+++ into the aestheticization of its activity. "
"The spine of software freedom relies in its four freedoms: the freedoms of "
"_run_, _study_, _redistribute_ and _improve_ the program. Even though "
"Stallman, his followers, the +++FSF+++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++ and so on "
"always indicate the relevance of “user freedoms,” these four freedoms aren't "
"directly related to users. Instead, they are four different use cases."
msgstr ""
"En mi opinión el término «uso» es uno de los conceptos centrales que diluye "
"la capacidad política del +++FOSS+++ hacia una estetización de su actividad. "
"La espina de las libertades del _software_ recaen en sus cuatro libertades: "
"las de _ejecución_, _estudio_, _redistribución_ y_mejora_ del programa de "
"cómputo. Aunque Stallman, sus pupilos, la +++FSF+++, la +++OSI+++, +++CC+++ "
"y más siempre indiquen la relevancia de las «libertades del usuario», estas "
"cuatro libertades no están directamente relacionadas a sus usuarios. En su "
"lugar, estas son cuatro distintos casos de uso."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:269
msgid ""
"The difference isn't a minor thing. A _use case_ neutralizes and reifies the "
"subject of the action. In its dilution the interest of the subject becomes "
"irrelevant. The four freedoms don't ban the use of a program for selfish, "
"slayer or authoritarian uses. Neither do they encourage them. By the "
"romantic idea of a common good, it is easy to think that the freedoms of "
"run, study, redistribute and improve a program are synonymous with a "
"mechanism that improves welfare and democracy. But because these four "
"freedoms don't relate to any user interest and instead talk about the "
"interest of using software and the adoption of an “open” cultural "
"production, it hides the fact that the freedom of use sometimes goes against "
"and uses subjects."
msgstr ""
"La diferencia no es minúscula. Un _caso de uso_ neutraliza y reifica al "
"sujeto de su acción. Cuando se diluyen sus intereses, el sujeto se vuelve "
"irrelevante. Las cuatro libertades no prohíben que un programa se use de "
"manera egoísta, asesina o autoritaria. Aunque tampoco las fomentan. Mediante "
"la idea romantizada de un bien común es fácil pensar que las libertades de "
"ejecución, estudio, redistribución o mejora de un programa son sinónimos de "
"un mecanismo que aumenta el bienestar y la democracia. Pero debido a que "
"estas cuatro libertades no se relacionan a ningún interés del usuario y en "
"su lugar hablan sobre los intereses de uso de _software_ y la adopción de "
"una producción cultural «abierta», esta oculta el hecho de que la libertad "
"de uso en ciertas ocasiones va en contra de los sujetos, incluso hasta "
"utilizarlos."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:281
msgid ""
"So the argument that copyfarleft denies people the use of software only "
"makes sense between two misconceptions. First, the personification of "
"institutions---like the ones that feed authoritarian regimes, perpetuate "
"labor exploitation or surveil its users---with their policies sometimes "
"restricting freedom or access _to people_. Second, the assumption that "
"freedoms over software use cases is equal to the freedom of its users."
msgstr ""
"Entonces, el argumento que señala cómo el _copyfarleft_ niega a las personas "
"el uso de _software_ solo tiene sentido entre dos equívocos. Primero, la "
"personificación de las instituciones ---como aquelas que alimentan regímenes "
"autoritarios, perpetúan la explotación laboral o vigilan a sus usuarios--- y "
"sus términos de uso que en ocasiones constriñen la libertad de _las "
"personas_ o el acceso a su tecnología. Segundo, el supuesto de que las "
"libertades sobre los casos de uso es igual a la libertad de sus usuarios."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:288
msgid ""
"Actually, if your “open” economic model requires software use cases freedoms "
"over users freedoms, we are far beyond the typical discussions about "
"cultural production. I find it very hard to defend my support of freedom if "
"my work enables some uses that could go against others' freedoms. This is of "
"course the freedom dilemma about the [paradox of tolerance](https://en."
"wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance). But my main conflict is when "
"copyleft supporters boast about their defense of users freedoms while they "
"micromanage others' software freedom definitions and, in the meantime, they "
"turn their backs to the gray, dark or red areas of what is implicit in the "
"freedom they safeguard. Or they don't care about us or their privileges "
"don't allow them to have empathy."
msgstr ""
"Más bien, si tu modelo económico «abierto» requiere de las libertades de los "
"casos de uso del _software_ en lugar de las libertades de sus usuarios, "
"estamos ya muy lejos de la típica discusión sobre la producción cultural. Me "
"parece muy difícil defender mi apuesta por la libertad si mi trabajo permite "
"ciertos usos que podrían ir en contra de la libertad de otros. Por supuesto "
"este es un dilema de la libertad relativa a la [paradoja de la tolerancia]"
"(https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoja_de_la_tolerancia). Pero mi principal "
"conflicto es cuando las personas que apoyan el _copyleft_ se jactan sobre su "
"defensa a la libertad de los usuarios mientras hacen _micromanagement_ en "
"torno a las definiciones de la libertad de _software_ de otros y, al mismo "
"tiempo, dan su espalda a las zonas grises, oscuras o rojas sobre las "
"implicaciones de la libertad que tanto cuidan. O no les importamos o sus "
"privilegios les impiden tener empatía."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:300
msgid ""
"Since the _+++GNU+++ Manifesto_ the relevance of industry among software "
"developers is clear. I don't have a reply that could calm them down. It is "
"becoming more clear that technology isn't just a broker that can be used or "
"abused. Technology, or at least its development, is a kind of political "
"praxis. The inability of legislation for law enforcement and the possibility "
"of new technologies to hold and help the _statu quo_ express this political "
"capacity of information and communications technologies."
msgstr ""
"Desde _El manifiesto de +++GNU+++_ queda clara la relevancia que tiene la "
"industria entre los desarrolladores de _software_. No cuento con una "
"respuesta que podría tranquilizarlos. Cada vez se está volviendo más claro "
"que la tecnología no es un mero instrumento que pueda ser usado o abusado. "
"La tecnología, o al menos su desarrollo, es un tipo de praxis política. La "
"incapacidad de la legislación para hacer valer las leyes mientras que las "
"posibilidades de las nuevas tecnologías permiten mantener al _statu quo_, "
"así como recurren a su auxilio, expresan la capacidad política que tienen "
"estas tecnologías de la comunicación y la información."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:308
msgid ""
"So as copyleft hacked copyright law, with copyfarleft we could help "
"disarticulate structural power or we could induce civil disobedience. By "
"prohibiting our work from being used by military, police or oligarchic "
"institutions, we could force them to stop _taking advantage_ and increase "
"their maintenance costs. They could even reach a point where they couldn't "
"operate anymore or at least they couldn't be as affective as our communities."
msgstr ""
"Así como el _copyleft_ hackeó la ley de _copyright_, con el _copyfarleft_ "
"podríamos ayudar a desarticular las estructuras del poder o podríamos "
"inducir a la desobediencia civil. Al prohibir que nuestro trabajo sea usado "
"con fines militares, policiacos u oligárquicos, podríamos forzarlos a que "
"dejen de _tomar ventaja_ y a aumentar sus costos de mantenimiento. Estas "
"instituciones podrían incluso alcanzar el punto donde no puedan operar más o "
"les sea imposible ser tan efectivas como nuestras comunidades."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:315
msgid ""
"I know it sounds like a utopia because in practice we need the effort of a "
"lot of people involved in technology development. But we already did it "
"once: we used copyright law against itself and we introduced a new model of "
"workforce distribution and means of production. We could again use copyright "
"for our benefit, but now against the structures of power that surveils, "
"exploits and kills people. These institutions need our “brainpower,” we can "
"try by refusing their use. Some explorations could be software licenses that "
"explicitly ban surveillance, exploitation or murder."
msgstr ""
"Sé que suena como a una utopía porque en la práctica necesitamos el esfuerzo "
"de muchas personas involucradas en el desarrollo tecnológico. Pero ya lo "
"hicimos una vez: usamos la ley de _copyright_ en contra de sí misma e "
"introducimos un nuevo modelo de distribución de la fuerza de trabajo y los "
"medios de producción. De nueva cuenta podríamos usar el _copyright_ para "
"nuestro beneficio, pero ahora en contra de las estructuras de poder que "
"vigilan, explotan o matan personas. Estas instituciones necesitan nuestro "
"«poder mental», podemos intentar con rehusárselo. Algunas exploraciones "
"podrían ser licencias de _software_ que de manera explícita prohíban la "
"vigilancia, la explotación o el asesinato."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:324
msgid ""
"We could also make it difficult for them to thieve our technology "
"development and deny access to our communication networks. Nowadays +++FOSS++"
"+ distribution models have confused open economy with gift economy. Another "
"think tank---Centre of Economics and Foreign Policy Studies---published a "
"report---_Digital Open Source Intelligence Security: A Primer_---where it "
"states that open sources constitutes “at least 90%” of all intelligence "
"activities. That includes our published open production and the open "
"standards we develop for transparency. It is why end-to-end encryption is "
"important and why we should extend its use instead of allowing governments "
"to ban it."
msgstr ""
"También podríamos dificultarles el robo de nuestro desarrollo tecnológico y "
"negarles el acceso a nuestras redes de comunicación. Hoy en día los modelos "
"de distribución del +++FOSS+++ han confundido una economía abierta con una "
"economía del regalo. Otro instituto ---el Centro de Investigación de "
"Economía y Política Exterior (+++EDAM+++, por sus siglas en inglés)--- "
"publicó un reporte ---_Digital Open Source Intelligence Security: A Primer_ "
"(_Inteligencia de seguridad digital con fuentes abiertas: una "
"introducción_)--- donde indica que las fuentes abiertas constituyen «al "
"menos un 90%» de todas las actividades de inteligencia. Esto incluye nuestra "
"producción publicada de manera abierta y los estándares abiertos que "
"desarrollamos en pos de la transparencia. Por este motivo la encriptación "
"punto a punto es importante y por eso deberíamos extender su uso en lugar de "
"permitir que los gobiernos la prohíban."
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:335
msgid ""
"Copyleft could be a global pandemic if we don't go against its incorporation "
"inside virulent technologies of destruction. We need more organization so "
"that the software we are developing is free as in “social freedom,” not only "
"as in “free individual.” "
msgstr ""
"El _copyleft_ podría ser una pandemia global si no hacemos algo en contra de "
"su incorporación dentro de las virulentas tecnologías de la destrucción. "
"Necesitamos una mayor organización para que el _software_ que desarrollamos "
"sea «libre como en libertad social y no solo como individuo libre». "

494
content/pot/006_copyleft-pandemic.pot Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,494 @@
#, fuzzy
msgid ""
msgstr ""
"Project-Id-Version: 006_copyleft-pandemic 1.0\n"
"Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: Nika Zhenya <nika.zhenya@cliteratu.re>\n"
"POT-Creation-Date: 2020-04-08 00:02-0500\n"
"Last-Translator: Nika Zhenya <nika.zhenya@cliteratu.re>\n"
"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:1
msgid "# The Copyleft Pandemic"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:2
msgid ""
"It seems that we needed a global pandemic for publishers to finally give "
"open access. I guess we should say… thanks?"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:4
msgid ""
"In my opinion it was a good +++PR+++ maneuver, who doesn't like companies "
"when they do _good_? This pandemic has shown its capacity to fortify public "
"and private institutions, no matter how poorly they have done their job and "
"how these new policies are normalizing surveillance. But who cares, I can "
"barely make a living publishing books and I have never been involved in "
"government work."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:10
msgid ""
"An interesting side effect about this “kind” and _temporal_ openness is "
"about authorship. One of the most relevant arguments in favor of "
"intellectual property (+++IP+++) is the defense of authors' rights to make a "
"living with their work. The utilitarian and labor justifications of +++IP+++ "
"are very clear in that sense. For the former, +++IP+++ laws confer an "
"incentive for cultural production and, thus, for the so-called creation of "
"wealth. For the latter, author's “labour of his body, and the work of his "
"hands, we may say, are properly his.”"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:19
msgid ""
"But also in personal-based justifications the author is a primordial subject "
"for +++IP+++ laws. Actually, this justification wouldn't exist if the author "
"didn't have an intimate and qualitatively distinctive relationship with her "
"own work. Without some metaphysics or theological conceptions about cultural "
"production, this special relation is difficult to prove---but that is "
"another story."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:25
msgid ""
"![Locke and Hegel drinking tea while discussing several topics on "
"Nothingland…](../../../img/p006_i001.png)"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:26
msgid ""
"From copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft movements, a lot of people have "
"argued that this argument hides the fact that most authors can't make a "
"living, whereas publishers and distributors profit a lot. Some critics claim "
"governments should give more power to “creators” instead of allowing "
"“reproducers” to do whatever they want. I am not a fan of this way of doing "
"things because I don't think anyone should have more power, including "
"authors, and also because in my world government is synonymous with "
"corruption and death. But diversity of opinions is important, I just hope "
"not all governments are like that."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:36
msgid ""
"So between copyright, copyfight, copyleft and copyfarleft defenders there is "
"usually a mysterious assent about producer relevance. The disagreement comes "
"with how this overview about cultural production is or should translate into "
"policies and legislation."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:40
msgid ""
"In times of emergency and crisis we are seeing how easily it is to “pause” "
"those discussions and laws---or fast track [other ones](https://www."
"theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/06/us-internet-bill-seen-as-opening-shot-"
"against-end-to-end-encryption). On the side of governments this again shows "
"how copyright and authors' rights aren't natural laws nor are they grounded "
"beyond our political and economic systems. From the side of copyright "
"defenders, this phenomena makes it clear that authorship is an argument that "
"doesn't rely on the actual producers, cultural phenomena or world issues… "
"And it also shows that there are [librarians](https://blog.archive."
"org/2020/03/30/internet-archive-responds-why-we-released-the-national-"
"emergency-library) and [researchers](https://www.latimes.com/business/"
"story/2020-03-03/covid-19-open-science) fighting in favor of public "
"interests; +++AKA+++, how important libraries and open access are today and "
"how they can't be replaced by (online) bookstores or subscription-based "
"research."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:53
msgid ""
"I would find it very pretentious if [some authors](https://www.authorsguild."
"org/industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending) and "
"[some publishers](https://publishers.org/news/comment-from-aap-president-and-"
"ceo-maria-pallante-on-the-internet-archives-national-emergency-library) "
"didn't agree with this _temporal_ openness of their work. But let's not miss "
"the point: this global pandemic has shown how easily it is for publishers "
"and distributors to opt for openness or paywalls---who cares about the "
"authors?… So next time you defend copyright as authors' rights to make a "
"living, think twice, only few have been able to earn a livelihood, and while "
"you think you are helping them, you are actually making third parties richer."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:62
msgid ""
"In the end the copyright holders are not the only ones who defend their "
"interests by addressing the importance of people---in their case the "
"authors, but more generally and secularly the producers. The copyleft "
"holders---a kind of cool copyright holder that hacked copyright laws---also "
"defends their interest in a similar way, but instead of authors, they talk "
"about users and instead of profits, they supposedly defend freedom."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:69
msgid ""
"There is a huge difference between each of them, but I just want to denote "
"how they talk about people in order to defend their interests. I wouldn't "
"put them in the same sack if it wasn't because of these two issues."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:73
msgid ""
"Some copyleft holders were so annoying in defending Stallman. _Dudes_, at "
"least from here we don't reduce the free software movement to one person, no "
"matter if he's the founder or how smart or important he is or was. "
"Criticizing his actions wasn't synonymous with throwing away what this "
"movement has done---what we have done!---, as a lot of you tried to mitigate "
"the issue: “Oh, but he is not the movement, we shouldn't have made a big "
"issue about that.” His and your attitude is the fucking issue. Together you "
"have made it very clear how narrow both views are. Stallman fucked it up and "
"was behaving very immaturely by thinking the movement is or was thanks to "
"him---we also have our own stories about his behavior---, why don't we just "
"accept that?"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:85
msgid ""
"But I don't really care about him. For me and the people I work with, the "
"free software movement is a wildcard that joins efforts related to "
"technology, politics and culture for better worlds. Nevertheless, the +++FSF+"
"++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++, and other big copyleft institutions don't seem "
"to realize that a plurality of worlds implies a diversity of conceptions "
"about freedom. And even worse, they have made a very common mistake when we "
"talk about freedom: they forgot that “freedom wants to be free.”"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:93
msgid ""
"Instead, they have tried to give formal definitions of software freedom. "
"Don't get me wrong, definitions are a good way to plan and understand a "
"phenomenon. But besides its formality, it is problematic to bind others to "
"your own definitions, mainly when you say the movement is about and for them."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:98
msgid ""
"Among all concepts, freedom is actually very tricky to define. How can you "
"delimit a concept in a definition when the concept itself claims the "
"inability of, perhaps, any restraint? It is not that freedom can't be "
"defined---I am actually assuming a definition of freedom---, but about how "
"general and static it could be. If the world changes, if people change, if "
"the world is actually an array of worlds and if people sometimes behave one "
"way or the other, of course the notion of freedom is gonna vary."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:107
msgid ""
"With freedom's different meanings we could try to reduce its diversity so it "
"could be embedded in any context or we could try something else. I dunno, "
"maybe we could make software freedom an interoperable concept that fits each "
"of our worlds or we could just stop trying to get a common principle."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:112
msgid ""
"The copyleft institutions I mentioned and many other companies that are "
"proud to support the copyleft movement tend to be blind about this. I am "
"talking from my experiences, my battles and my struggles when I decided to "
"use copyfarleft licenses in most parts of my work. Instead of receiving "
"support from institutional representatives, I first received warnings: “That "
"freedom you are talking about isn't freedom.” Afterwards, when I sought "
"infrastructure support, I got refusals: “You are invited to use our code in "
"your server, but we can't provide you hosting because your licenses aren't "
"free.” Dawgs, if I could, I wouldn't look for your help in the first place, "
"duh."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:123
msgid ""
"Thanks to a lot of Latin American hackers and pirates, I am little by little "
"building my and our own infrastructure. But I know this help is actually a "
"privilege: for many years I couldn't execute many projects or ideas only "
"because I didn't have access to the technology or tuition. And even worse, I "
"wasn't able to look to a wider and more complex horizon without all this "
"learning."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:129
msgid ""
"(There is a pedagogical deficiency in the free software movement that makes "
"people think that writing documentation and praising self-taught learning is "
"enough. From my point of view, it is more about the production of a self-"
"image in how a hacker or a pirate _should be_. Plus, it's fucking scary when "
"you realize how manly, hierarchical and meritocratic this movement tends to "
"be)."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:136
msgid ""
"According to copyleft folks, my notion of software freedom isn't free "
"because copyfarleft licenses prevents _people_ from using software. This is "
"a very common criticism of any copyfarleft license. And it is also a very "
"paradoxical one."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:140
msgid ""
"Between the free software movement and open source initiative, there has "
"been a disagreement about who ought to inherit the same type of license, "
"like the General Public License. For the free software movement, this clause "
"ensures that software will always be free. According to the open source "
"initiative, this clause is actually a counter-freedom because it doesn't "
"allow people to decide which license to use and it also isn't very "
"attractive for enterprise entrepreneurship. Let's not forget that both sides "
"agree that the market is are essential for technology development."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:150
msgid ""
"Free software supporters tend to vanish the discussion by declaring that "
"open source defenders don't understand the social implication of this "
"hereditary clause or that they have different interests and ways to change "
"technology development. So it's kind of paradoxical that these folks see the "
"anti-capitalist clause of copyfarleft licenses as a counter-freedom. Or they "
"don't understand its implications or perceive that copyfarleft doesn't talk "
"about technology development in its insolation, but in its relationship with "
"politics, society and economy."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:160
msgid ""
"I won't defend copyfarleft against those criticisms. First, I don't think I "
"should defend anything because I am not saying everyone should grasp our "
"notion of freedom. Second, I have a strong opinion against the usual legal "
"reductionism among this debate. Third, I think we should focus on the ways "
"we can work together, instead of paying attention to what could divide us. "
"Finally, I don't think these criticisms are wrong, but incomplete: the "
"definition of software freedom has inherited the philosophical problem of "
"how we define and what the definition of freedom implies."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:169
msgid ""
"That doesn't mean I don't care about this discussion. Actually, it's a topic "
"I'm very familiar with. Copyright has locked me out with paywalls for "
"technology and knowledge access, copyleft has kept me away with "
"“licensewalls” with the same effects. So let's take a moment to see how free "
"the freedom is that the copyleft institutions are preaching."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:175
msgid ""
"According to _Open Source Software & The Department of Defense_ (+++DoD+++), "
"The +++U.S. DoD+++ is one of the biggest consumers of open source. To put it "
"in perspective, all tactical vehicles of the +++U.S.+++ Army employs at "
"least one piece of open source software in its programming. Other examples "
"are _the use_ of Android to direct airstrikes or _the use_ of Linux for the "
"ground stations that operates military drones like the Predator and Reaper."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:183
msgid ""
"![A Reaper drone [incorrectly bombarding](https://www.theguardian.com/"
"news/2019/nov/18/killer-drones-how-many-uav-predator-reaper) civilians in "
"Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and Yemen in order to deliver +++U.S. DoD+"
"++ notion of freedom.](../../../img/p006_i002.png)"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:184
msgid ""
"Before you argue that this is a problem about open source software and not "
"free software, you should check out the +++DoD+++ [+++FAQ+++ section]"
"(https://dodcio.defense.gov/Open-Source-Software-FAQ). There, they define "
"open source software as “software for which the human-readable source code "
"is available for use, study, re-use, modification, enhancement, and re-"
"distribution by the users of that software.” Does that sound familiar? Of "
"course!, they include +++GPL+++ as an open software license and they even "
"rule that “an open source software license must also meet the +++GNU+++ Free "
"Software Definition.”"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:194
msgid ""
"This report was published in 2016 by the Center for a New American Security "
"(+++CNAS+++), a right-wing think tank which [mission and agenda](https://www."
"cnas.org/mission) is “designed to shape the choices of leaders in the +++U.S."
"+++ government, the private sector, and society to advance +++U.S.+++ "
"interests and strategy.”"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:199
msgid ""
"I found this report after I read about how the [+++U.S.+++ Army scrapped one "
"billion dollars for its “Iron Dome” after Israel refused to share code]"
"(https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-army-scraps-1b-iron-dome-project-after-"
"israel-refuses-to-provide-key-codes). I found it interesting that even the "
"so-called most powerful army in the world was disabled by copyright laws---a "
"potential resource for asymmetric warfare. To my surprise, this isn't an "
"anomaly."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:206
msgid ""
"The intention of +++CNAS+++ report is to convince +++DoD+++ to adopt more "
"open source software because its “generally better than their proprietary "
"counterparts […] because they can _take advantage_ of the brainpower of "
"larger teams, which leads to faster innovation, higher quality, and superior "
"security for _a fraction of the cost_.” This report has its origins by the "
"“justifiably” concern “about the erosion of +++U.S.+++ military technical "
"superiority.”"
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:214
msgid ""
"Who would think that this could happen to +++FOSS+++? Well, all of us from "
"this part of the world have been saying that the type of freedom endorsed by "
"many copyleft institutions is too wide, counterproductive for its own "
"objectives and, of course, inapplicable for our context because that liberal "
"notion of software freedom relies on strong institutions and the capacity of "
"own property or capitalize knowledge. The same ones which have been trying "
"to explain that the economic models they try to “teach” us don't work or we "
"doubt them because of their side effects. Crowdfunding isn't easy here "
"because our cultural production is heavily dependent on government aids and "
"policies, instead of the private or public sectors. And donations aren't a "
"good idea because of the hidden interests they could have and the economic "
"dependence they generate."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:227
msgid ""
"But I guess it has to burst their bubble in order to get the point across. "
"For example, the Epstein controversial donations to +++MIT+++ Media Lab and "
"his friendship with some folks of +++CC+++; or the use of open source "
"software by the +++U.S.+++ Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While for "
"decades +++FOSS+++ has been a mechanism to facilitate the murder of “Global "
"South” citizens; a tool for Chinese labor exploitation denounced by the "
"anti-996 movement; a licensewall for technological and knowledge access for "
"people who can't afford infrastructure and the learning it triggers, even "
"though the code is “free” _to use_; or a police of software freedom that "
"denies Latin America and other regions their right to self-determinate its "
"freedom, its software policies and its economic models."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:240
msgid ""
"Those copyleft institutions that care so much about “user freedoms” actually "
"haven't been explicit about how +++FOSS+++ is helping shape a world where a "
"lot of us don't fit in. It had to be right-wing think tanks, the ones that "
"declare the relevance of +++FOSS+++ for warfare, intelligence, security and "
"authoritarian regimes, while these institutions have been making many "
"efforts in justifying its way of understanding cultural production as a "
"commodification of its political capacity. They have shown that in their "
"pursuit of government and corporate adoption of +++FOSS+++, when it favors "
"their interests, they talk about “software user freedoms” but actually refer "
"to “freedom of use software”, no matter who the user is or what it has been "
"used for."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:252
msgid ""
"There is a sort of cognitive dissonance that influences many copyleft "
"supporters to treat others harshly, those who just want some aid in the "
"argument over which license or product is free or not. But in the meantime, "
"they don't defy, and some of them even embrace the adoption of +++FOSS+++ "
"for any kind of corporation, it doesn't matter if it exploits its employees, "
"surveils its users, helps to undermine democratic institutions or is part of "
"a killing machine."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:260
msgid ""
"In my opinion, the term “use” is one of the key concepts that dilutes "
"political capacity of +++FOSS+++ into the aestheticization of its activity. "
"The spine of software freedom relies in its four freedoms: the freedoms of "
"_run_, _study_, _redistribute_ and _improve_ the program. Even though "
"Stallman, his followers, the +++FSF+++, the +++OSI+++, +++CC+++ and so on "
"always indicate the relevance of “user freedoms,” these four freedoms aren't "
"directly related to users. Instead, they are four different use cases."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:269
msgid ""
"The difference isn't a minor thing. A _use case_ neutralizes and reifies the "
"subject of the action. In its dilution the interest of the subject becomes "
"irrelevant. The four freedoms don't ban the use of a program for selfish, "
"slayer or authoritarian uses. Neither do they encourage them. By the "
"romantic idea of a common good, it is easy to think that the freedoms of "
"run, study, redistribute and improve a program are synonymous with a "
"mechanism that improves welfare and democracy. But because these four "
"freedoms don't relate to any user interest and instead talk about the "
"interest of using software and the adoption of an “open” cultural "
"production, it hides the fact that the freedom of use sometimes goes against "
"and uses subjects."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:281
msgid ""
"So the argument that copyfarleft denies people the use of software only "
"makes sense between two misconceptions. First, the personification of "
"institutions---like the ones that feed authoritarian regimes, perpetuate "
"labor exploitation or surveil its users---with their policies sometimes "
"restricting freedom or access _to people_. Second, the assumption that "
"freedoms over software use cases is equal to the freedom of its users."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:288
msgid ""
"Actually, if your “open” economic model requires software use cases freedoms "
"over users freedoms, we are far beyond the typical discussions about "
"cultural production. I find it very hard to defend my support of freedom if "
"my work enables some uses that could go against others' freedoms. This is of "
"course the freedom dilemma about the [paradox of tolerance](https://en."
"wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance). But my main conflict is when "
"copyleft supporters boast about their defense of users freedoms while they "
"micromanage others' software freedom definitions and, in the meantime, they "
"turn their backs to the gray, dark or red areas of what is implicit in the "
"freedom they safeguard. Or they don't care about us or their privileges "
"don't allow them to have empathy."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:300
msgid ""
"Since the _+++GNU+++ Manifesto_ the relevance of industry among software "
"developers is clear. I don't have a reply that could calm them down. It is "
"becoming more clear that technology isn't just a broker that can be used or "
"abused. Technology, or at least its development, is a kind of political "
"praxis. The inability of legislation for law enforcement and the possibility "
"of new technologies to hold and help the _statu quo_ express this political "
"capacity of information and communications technologies."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:308
msgid ""
"So as copyleft hacked copyright law, with copyfarleft we could help "
"disarticulate structural power or we could induce civil disobedience. By "
"prohibiting our work from being used by military, police or oligarchic "
"institutions, we could force them to stop _taking advantage_ and increase "
"their maintenance costs. They could even reach a point where they couldn't "
"operate anymore or at least they couldn't be as affective as our communities."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:315
msgid ""
"I know it sounds like a utopia because in practice we need the effort of a "
"lot of people involved in technology development. But we already did it "
"once: we used copyright law against itself and we introduced a new model of "
"workforce distribution and means of production. We could again use copyright "
"for our benefit, but now against the structures of power that surveils, "
"exploits and kills people. These institutions need our “brainpower,” we can "
"try by refusing their use. Some explorations could be software licenses that "
"explicitly ban surveillance, exploitation or murder."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:324
msgid ""
"We could also make it difficult for them to thieve our technology "
"development and deny access to our communication networks. Nowadays +++FOSS++"
"+ distribution models have confused open economy with gift economy. Another "
"think tank---Centre of Economics and Foreign Policy Studies---published a "
"report---_Digital Open Source Intelligence Security: A Primer_---where it "
"states that open sources constitutes “at least 90%” of all intelligence "
"activities. That includes our published open production and the open "
"standards we develop for transparency. It is why end-to-end encryption is "
"important and why we should extend its use instead of allowing governments "
"to ban it."
msgstr ""
#: content/md/006_copyleft-pandemic.js:335
msgid ""
"Copyleft could be a global pandemic if we don't go against its incorporation "
"inside virulent technologies of destruction. We need more organization so "
"that the software we are developing is free as in “social freedom,” not only "
"as in “free individual.” "
msgstr ""