Let me start the post with a hyperbole. Elon Musk's Twitter Takeover Offer Is the XNUMXst Century Equivalent of Martin Luther's Ninety-Five Theses that gave rise to the Reformation.
Musk fully impacted the waterline of the religion of "The Founders" andThey are former young people who, in the 90s or 2000s, founded what are now the companies that control the world of technology in a garage or university dormitory, and based on that they became arbiters of what is correct or what is not.
Table of Contents
The religion of the founders
Big tech founders suddenly became media guests, advisers to politicians, and role models for younger generations. Without being prepared for it, they had to import a prefabricated ideology, that of the guilty progressivism of the North American intelligentsia. They were also not prepared for the growth of their companies and adapted the worst practices of unbridled capitalism.
Atari founder Nolan Bushnell had an award withdrawn because an employee denounced the "toxic culture" at the company during the 70s. That several other women who worked there said that everyone was treated the same, even women among themselves and towards men, did not help.
Of course, this moral rectitude does not apply to their own practices. Apple,Even if you don't sell porn in your store, share private data with the Chinese government and censor apps that criticize the lack of democracy. Twitter doesn't like Trump, but it has no problem with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei proposing to eliminate Israel.
Musk's proposal for Twitter could not be clearer:
Freedom of expression is the foundation of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital plaza where vital issues for the future of humanity are debated.
He later clarified what he meant:
By 'freedom of expression' I simply mean that which conforms to the law. I am against censorship that goes beyond the law. If people want less freedom of expression, they will ask the government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people.
On the subject Marc Andressen, the co-founder of Netscape, agreed:
We have 231 years of jurisprudence and cases, hard fought and argued by many of the best minds in our history, both for freedom of expression and for exceptions to freedom of expression. It's hard to believe that the crazed activism of our time can lead to superior conclusions.
That is why I reiterate my proposal
Mr Musk Don't you want to buy the Linux Foundation?
And the same goes for all the other supposedly non-profit entities that govern the destinies of free software but, In practice, they are co-opted by large corporations that benefit from the work of developers, but it is not well known what they give back to the community.
One thing is for sure, with Musk at the helm, the insane campaign to cancel Richard Stallman would never have happened. And how notes Dr. Roy Schestowitz, harsh critic of free software institutions:
What we're seeing in general is that the Linux Foundation is moving away from Linux; it could be said that it is trying to harm Linux and its spokespersons come from Microsoft. New hires have no experience with (or basic understanding of) Linux. Those who do understand and promote GNU/Linux are expelled and fired. This is a very deep problem and the damage extends beyond the Linux Foundation itself…
Of course, it is not about replacing the false idols with another. Musk has too many questions from his shareholders to consider him the new messiah. But, it is not considered above the law and defies the commonplaces of the prevailing ideology. That is already a step forward.