There is no or a very small impact of regulation on the number of exiled people coming in country. However, making more people illegal let bosses exploit them more. Those workers could not sue their boss because of those regulations, and most conservative unions rely unfortunately too much on legal solutions.

So if a country couldn’t limit immigrations, it could exploit more people and bybass human right with regulations against exiled people.

Yes, this is only positive for far-right bosses, and awful for others. But guess who decide in a capitalist economy ?

What ? A corporation that earn money in selling personal data, that don’t want to share its code that run on a device with a microphone, actually use it ? I’m shocked

We used C++ based software. Who need sanity ? Clearly overrated

all managers are bastards

• Short term interest: Yearly benefits make the corporation value. Work to enhance stability, such as investment in other open source project, documentation, formation, or code quality enhancement are less likely to qet time
• Commercial focus: In a capitalist economy, we don’t have pure and perfect knowledge of product. Even if it’s supposed to work like this, commercials and adds are way more effective to sell products, than a top notch product
• Antagonist interests: even if workers tend to like making good stuff, they’d rather eat and get housed. Sending a warning because the products are bad or dangerous can threat someone that made a bad decision, which is likely to be someone in charge. Keeping a low profile is (unfortunately) a reasonable behavior

I think that an economy lead by financial interest, open market, and a hierarchy in the production is a good definition of capitalism.

And yes, definitely the way that people get food, housing, and not being exclude will define a lot of thing in society.

So in the end, they is an internal contradiction in capitalism. It just append to be collapse due to lack of ressources and dumb management

In any demonstration, you have to make some unproven statement, taken as true. It could be “1+1 = 2” or “God exists”. So sciences are methodologies based on believes. Lot of religions use logic and reasons, based on science and philosophy, to deduce things from their core believes. This is theology.

So if both science and religions are based on believes, and could have the same methods, how to distinguish one of the other ? We could argue that science try to reduce believes as possible. Personally I’m not good enough in sciences to argue with religious people, and demonstrate that point. In trying to challenge my believes in scientific models, I have to stay tolerant with religious people (I’m not sure I would otherwise); which is a most productive approach. Furthermore, it helps to have a critical point on view on science (as you’ve said, and to taking it as a blind faith)

How do you know that science is not a believe like the other ? My answer is in challenge it with other believe systems to explain reality. Of course some things make a lot more sense with science methodology, but to be faire, te main point of religions is not to explain gravity.

I consider other believes as opportunities, no to explain to others, or to be taught by others, but making both and strengthen us all.

However, we shall to care do not confuse religions and believes. A lot of people took part in religions and do not believes, and others believes and do not took part in a dedicated community. This is a different topic. Communities are generally a good thing, but hierarchy lead to abuses. This true in every organization, religions include

Fun fact : if you write french with the last grammar modernization, and with the gender minority inclusivity, you could being correct AND pissed off a lot of french speaker.

yea sorry. It was a typo

Whatever the result, what cause the rise of far right will be still there. We have to continue to mobilize after the election this time. Organized for your interest fellows

I am not sure this is a wide spread behavior among the IT. Reading the “Debian Free Software Guidelines”, we could have some doubts. My point is not that free software are good or bad, but that is not enough. If we want te be responsible as producers, we have to organize as such to stop production that killing us (with climat change or military for example) and promote the one that emancipate us. Free software are a way to achieve the last one, unions the fist one

I said such things too, but one day I ask myself, could I said it in front of people bombed by my tools ? Our tools are not neutral things, but produce and distribute by social relationship that we could fight. Sorry but we the rise of fascism and ecological disaster we could not afford to give up our power as producer to mass murderer

Law do not exist by itself; it’s the result of balance of power. How would you know that your State do not use illegally free software ? And if you know it, could you sue it ? Even if it’s a classified administration ?

Apply laws Internationally is even worse. It usually depends of the imperialist relationship between States. For exemple, Facebook rules was illegal in France, but France changes it’s laws rather than sue Facebook. A decade later, the whole European Union could forte RGPD upon the GAFAM.

China have nothing to fear in ignoring those licence, and we shouldn’t rely on it to protect our work. However we could strengthen our common defenses, through FOSS for people in the US … and maybe trade unions elsewhere.

Sadly yes, Linux kill

French government make electricity price scale on the most expansive one. So with the war in Ukraine, the price of gas plumed up, and so do every electricity bill that was never so expansive, by far.

The “liberalization of energy market” force everyone to buy electricity from courrier that don’t do anything; they do not produce or invest, they just buy and sell electricity. This firms take all the money between the price and the cost. This severely threat the electricity production, that is still made by the former public firm (ex « Électricité de France » ); even if it’s electricity is the cheapest, and it’s the firm that invest the more in renewable energy.

Okay guys, maybe the is a contradiction in capitalism that make it collapse. It just append to be toxic masculinity

Yep, in a lot of countries. In France, the fascists has been stopped by the union of left parties, and the union of trades unions, and lead to the most social progress we still rely on (the first paid holidays for example). If we shall not thing that history repeat itself, this period have a big particularity that is not enough told : those social progress where not planned by the political parties, and the reunification of trades unions (like CGT and CGT-U) where not at the initiative of their leaders. Workers took the street and very offensive strike forced them off. Their sure is a lack of initiative of the workers, I think that’s why we fail during the retirement movement; and If trade Unions sure have a place, I’m not sure that it’s next to political parties in these “Nouvel Union Populaire”.

Pro:

• Look this shitload of money you don’t have to pay for insurance, parking and gaz

Con:

• Look this shitload of time you’ve spent to “fix just this another thing”