7
Every line of code is a politial statement (jeferson.me)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by to c/linux@programming.dev
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

From my view, all software is political in some sense. And if a software claims that isn't political is a political statement in itself. And with the recent dubious statement from Linus in the Kernel of Linux. I think we should either think about it or discuss about it.

What is the political intention that is happening in this.

All feedback is welcomed.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Everything is political because everything is done through a context of society and the perceptions of the people behind it. When you deny that, you are just trying to shut down conversations about the ethics of things, and generally people with morals don’t try to avoid talking about morals.

Citation needed. When I am writing software I am not making a political statement. When I do FOSS, that isn't because I have a political goal in mind. Frankly, I don't give a shit about the context of society or the perceptions of anyone reading my stuff. It isn't about anyone other than me. Do you write software? Is every bit of your work/hobby political? When I deny those things it isn't because I am trying to shut down conversations about ethics. Nor am I amoral merely because I do not wish to discuss your topics. Did you even bother to ask me why? No, you just assumed. That isn't how you have conversations.

Also, religion and atheism are two unrelated things, since a religion is a social group and atheism is a personal belief. A proper comparison would be between, let’s say, theists and atheists, and both are beliefs.

Moreover, it’s quite a bad faith argument to compare beliefs, which are an unprovable, personal opinion, and things like software and politics, which are real world matters.

Are they both beliefs? As an atheist I've made no claim, or professed any belief. I am not saying there is no god. I am saying the people professing their belief in one have not met the bar of evidence for a god. The agnostic position, imo is pretty weaksauce and gives too much benefit of the doubt to the believers by even entertaining the notion that they might be correct, that we just don't know. It is a cop out to placate the religious that cannot present actual evidence.

It’s not the same to believe in god or not, or to believe that minorities need to die or not.

Why are software and politics so inextricably linked? Why are they considered real world, but religion not? You keep making all of these assertions and providing no evidence. Anything presented without evidence can be easy dismissed.

Overall, fuck off with your “not political” bulcrap.

Please level up your opinions with actual statements of fact before engaging.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    You might not be an intentional political statement, but your code is colored by politics. You don't give a shit about the perception of people, that is infused in politics. My point is, your stance within society transpires through your actions, and this has an effect on society.

    And typically, the stance of refusing to acknowledge the political part of things, whether it is in software or not, is loved by the far-right. In this current sociopolitical context, doing that is picking a side. And also showing that you're privileged enough to afford to "ignore" politics, which is not the case for everyone.

    --

    Atheism is about believing in the absence of god, what you're describing is indeed agnosticism. God is a belief, which doesn't require any proof or evidence since it's just a belief. You can then disagree with the consequences or implications of such beliefs, but evidence is not really in question since there can be none. The day there is evidence of god, it won't be a belief anymore, but science.

    However, hit on religions as much as you want, because those are not beliefs, they're more akin to sects, with a whole set of (bullshit) rules on how reality works that are based on nothing.

    As such, religions and software are both real world and are both linked to politics. They are having an effect on how society is structured, and how people live their lives. Also, note that many beliefs are very much political, it's not what I was saying. My point was that believing in god doesn't have as much of an impact as supporting "AI", as believing in god is a personal belief, while LLMs are having a pretty bad impact on the world already.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    I consider aetheism to be more an absence of belief in gods.
    Its not that i believe there arent gods. Its that i have no belief in gods.
    The former being anti-god/anti-religion. And the later being anti-belief.
    Maybe like "not accidentally cutting yourself" and "not having a knife". Both lead to "not accidentally cutting yourself", but 1 involves a knife.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 days ago

    Generally, atheism is about denying the existence of god, and agnosticism is about not believing or disbelieving. It's just a matter of definition in the end, what actually matters is the meanings behind the words.

    It's also not a clear line, you can for example have a slight belief that god doesn't exist, but this belief is superseded by the rational thought that there is no evidence of it nor the opposite, and ending up effectively having an agnostic conclusion. That's why words like that are always clearer when explained further in details.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent