Hacker News Reader

Comment by 0xbadcafebee | Hacker News Reader

Even completely closed systems can host open systems, as long as contracts don't forbid it. It's really all about the money. AOL, ISPs, POPs, Microsoft, etc were never either stupid or philanthropic. They saw money in the distance and they built platforms to collect it.

The best way to "save the open web" is to make money off it.

View on HN

The commercial web would look far worse without open source. I don't expect any thanks, just that a new generation gets to the ability to tinker themselves instead of using throw away products.

This idea means whatever exists on the open web is trying to exploit whatever people use it for money. Not thanks. Another possibility is a strong enough social movement to demand the de-commercialization of significant parts of the internet. For example, nationalize facebook, make it more difficult to spend money on the internet, ban or severely limit advertising, and other ideas if one were to be so bold as to suggest them

Nothing you suggested is ever going to happen. Nor, imo, should it ever happen. So let's be practical here.

Well, the first step to making something happen is advocating a position that would actually achieve your goals.

You think the US gov should just nationalize a private corporation? That would have much more disastrous implications than you think.

All of the things you suggest take freedom of choice away from individuals. This is the authoritarianism I spoke of.

The choice to run businesses in particular ways, not political freedoms or freedoms accessible to most working people.

economic rights and civil rights are one and the same. Moreover, a lot of "working" people run businesses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com