Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Resonant Computing Manifesto

resonantcomputing.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 33 posts

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#21

Post by throwaway13337 »

It's about control.

Our tools are an extension of us as humans. When someone else is in control of those tools, it is alienating.

Modern software is built to make us not masters of our own tools. Like your hand sometimes works for a corporation against your will. I guess that same pattern is also called a job. But the worst kind of job. The one you do without choice.

A happier future is one with humans in control over their own tools and their own livelihoods. That's software with the user's choice at the center and independent work that connects us to eachother by being in genuine service to one another.

I think this manifesto is getting to this idea but from a different angle.

It's the extractive rent seeking monopoly playbook that seeks to undermine it. Only in captive, monopolized markets are companies able to force the use of tools we don't control.

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#22

Post by fogzen »

zephen wrote: post #16
GMoromisato wrote: post #4

I think manifestos are useless without a concrete, real-world example for people to follow and add on to. It's easy to wish for puppies and rainbows, but trying to deliver is hard. For example, Linear has a useful manifesto ( https://linear.app/method ) because they have a product that attempts to follows it. I have much more respect for a manifesto that is informed by contact with reality.

> because they have a product that attempts to follows it. I had no idea what linear.app was. Then I followed your link. Then I had no idea what linear.app was. Then I went to their front page. Then I had no idea what linear.app was. Manifestos are fine. My personal one is that, if I can't tell immediately from your front page what the fuck it is that you do, then we aren't compatible.

Linear is the latest trendy issue tracker. A to-do list, basically.

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#23

Post by martin-t »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #19
jrm4 wrote: post #12

Stallman was right? Seriously, I like these ideas a lot. But/and also, the GNU Manifesto strikes me as ultimately "extremely similar but perhaps clearer," with the added bonus of having arguable "real life teeth," given that it was the inspiration for the GPL. Cue somewhat understandable, yet still perhaps annoying, discussions of "Stallman the person."

Stallman has always been right. Took me many years to understand just how far he saw into the future. It's mind boggling just how right he was about everything. The current status quo is corporations and governments are locking the hardware down, rendering free software irrelevant. Sure, you can hack your computer, but if you do it fails remote attestation and is marked as untrustworthy by other computers on the inte…

> Our values are irrelevant to the wider population.

This is the saddest part. Things are getting worse for everyone and most people just don't care. They are either ignorant or accept it as inevitable.

I see 2 issues:

1) People don't have real power. There's too many steps between an issue you care about and a solution which requires changing laws. I don't see a solution other than people voting on laws directly and possibly votes weighted by how much they actually know about the stuff. How to implement it at reasonable cost is a very difficult question.

2) You can't make people care. People only start caring once they personally get hurt. Theoretical downsides don't interest most of the population. Freedom of speech is something they've learned at school about and they know they are supposed to cheer for it but when a platform requires spelling fuck as f*ck, that's OK with them - it might be the canary in the coal mine before more sophisticated censorship (analysis of sentiment/meaning, shadow bans) is rolled out but that's a theoretical concern, if they are able to comprehend it at all. And even when they get hurt, they often don't learn from it. I've seen plenty of people lose accounts on various platforms but all they do is switch to another proprietary platform, without looking for real alternatives.

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#24

Post by martin-t »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #21

It's about control. Our tools are an extension of us as humans. When someone else is in control of those tools, it is alienating. Modern software is built to make us not masters of our own tools. Like your hand sometimes works for a corporation against your will. I guess that same pattern is also called a job. But the worst kind of job. The one you do without choice. A happier future is one with humans in control ove…

> A happier future is one with humans in control over their own tools and their own livelihoods.

People should own the product of their work and owning companies should be illegal.

Every good product starts as somebody's weekend project or and experiment with a buddy in the garage. Then they start getting users and making money. And then they sell it and the new owner ruins is.

Molecules form cells, cells form humans, humans form organizations. Slavery is illegal, yet it's legal to own a group of humans, replace parts against the group's will and order the group to do something against their will. Owning companies is just an abstraction built to replace slavery with enough indirection that people don't object.

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#26

Post by jrm4 »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #19
jrm4 wrote: post #12

Stallman was right? Seriously, I like these ideas a lot. But/and also, the GNU Manifesto strikes me as ultimately "extremely similar but perhaps clearer," with the added bonus of having arguable "real life teeth," given that it was the inspiration for the GPL. Cue somewhat understandable, yet still perhaps annoying, discussions of "Stallman the person."

Stallman has always been right. Took me many years to understand just how far he saw into the future. It's mind boggling just how right he was about everything. The current status quo is corporations and governments are locking the hardware down, rendering free software irrelevant. Sure, you can hack your computer, but if you do it fails remote attestation and is marked as untrustworthy by other computers on the inte…

Weirdly, I couldn't disagree more.

By focusing strictly on software, we can argue that Stallman mostly won, and I think the mistake would be conflating software freedom with freedom freedom.

Freedom freedom will ALWAYS be hard, no matter what. People who want to take it away will use whatever tools are there to do it. Stallman et al saw that it was special to put guardrails around the very specific notion of "we have general purpose machines that can run any software, the ability to run ANY software must be protected."

And that, today, is overwhelmingly more true than false. You, or groups, can get a computer, hook it to the internet, and run whatever you want. Like "Linux," that doesn't GUARANTEE perfection, but it's an essential step.

AKA, I shudder to think what would have happened if Microsoft had developed AI in house.

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#27

Post by ErroneousBosh »

jrm4 wrote: post #12

Stallman was right? Seriously, I like these ideas a lot. But/and also, the GNU Manifesto strikes me as ultimately "extremely similar but perhaps clearer," with the added bonus of having arguable "real life teeth," given that it was the inspiration for the GPL. Cue somewhat understandable, yet still perhaps annoying, discussions of "Stallman the person."

> Cue somewhat understandable, yet still perhaps annoying, discussions of "Stallman the person."

Arseholes can be correct, even if they're still an arsehole.

Would I want my teenage daughter using software developed using Stallman's ideology? Well, yes, obviously.

Would I want her anywhere within 100 metres of Stallman without a weapon? No.

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#28

Post by svilen_dobrev »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #19
jrm4 wrote: post #12

Stallman was right? Seriously, I like these ideas a lot. But/and also, the GNU Manifesto strikes me as ultimately "extremely similar but perhaps clearer," with the added bonus of having arguable "real life teeth," given that it was the inspiration for the GPL. Cue somewhat understandable, yet still perhaps annoying, discussions of "Stallman the person."

Stallman has always been right. Took me many years to understand just how far he saw into the future. It's mind boggling just how right he was about everything. The current status quo is corporations and governments are locking the hardware down, rendering free software irrelevant. Sure, you can hack your computer, but if you do it fails remote attestation and is marked as untrustworthy by other computers on the inte…

Doctorow's "civil war over general computing" comes to mind..

https://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html

unless the general population somehow freaks into privacy and anonymity and independency, it seems slowly losing (i don't hold my breath, seen enough "freebies" that later turn into highly-paid and noone bothering). Or said in another way, it seems like.. irrelevant?

But you never know. May be garage-made ESP64-meshes will appear, in a parallel "universe". Or whatever. When things get hot..

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#29

Post by jrm4 »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #19
jrm4 wrote: post #12

Stallman was right? Seriously, I like these ideas a lot. But/and also, the GNU Manifesto strikes me as ultimately "extremely similar but perhaps clearer," with the added bonus of having arguable "real life teeth," given that it was the inspiration for the GPL. Cue somewhat understandable, yet still perhaps annoying, discussions of "Stallman the person."

Stallman has always been right. Took me many years to understand just how far he saw into the future. It's mind boggling just how right he was about everything. The current status quo is corporations and governments are locking the hardware down, rendering free software irrelevant. Sure, you can hack your computer, but if you do it fails remote attestation and is marked as untrustworthy by other computers on the inte…

YUP. Old timer here. I remember like having e.g. my Apple II, and somewhat later Stallman saying, e.g. "they're going to be able to reach into your device and burn your ebooks."

And I distinctly remember thinking how absolutely out of his mind PARANOID this man was. Because, you know, books and all are just files. And in what possible universe could you and would you build in the possibility of some other remote person having the ability to hack into the device that's IN YOUR HANDS and do something crazy like that?

oh.

Re: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

#30

Post by jrm4 »

svilen_dobrev wrote: post #28
matheusmoreira wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stallman has always been right. Took me many years to understand just how far he saw into the future. It's mind boggling just how right he was about everything. The current status quo is corporations and governments are locking the hardware down, rendering free software irrelevant. Sure, you can hack your computer, but if you do it fails remote attestation and is marked as untrustworthy by other computers on the inte…

Doctorow's "civil war over general computing" comes to mind.. https://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html unless the general population somehow freaks into privacy and anonymity and independency, it seems slowly losing (i don't hold my breath, seen enough "freebies" that later turn into highly-paid and noone bothering). Or said in another way, it seems like.. irrelevant? But you never know. May be garage-made ESP…

I'm optimistic, actually.

One sort of "big-picture" idea that I've seen that I think is generally useful is kind of like this: For a VERY long time, Linux was kind of a joke for most.

But I realized that, it being 1% of desktops was still VITALLY IMPORTANT, even when it was never huge -- it provided enough "background pressure" for mainstream things to not screw up overly badly.

I see e.g. "homelabs" and "self-hosting" as doing that right now. And, again, given that Linux won :) -- we will see.

Post reply on HN