AleksandrSlobodeniuk [email protected]
Moscow, Russia
Briefly - matriarchy and GNU. That's my message.
-
about a gold
2016-06-23T17:13:48Z via Dianara CC: Public
I write some strange thoughts sometimes. Partly this is how I met my wife 5 years ago. A little bit later my favorite blog-platform was destroyed, and that's a long story. Then I wrote some things in my social network page, but that didn't satisfy me. Now I'm going to move them here in english. It's about 4-5 writes. Maybe this is something I would like to talk about, maybe just static memory.
Here's the first one:The gold.
It's very strange, that people always treasured gold and brilliants. What's that point?
The only usage I know is microchips and other analog/digital stuff. But what about acient time?
Just imagine: people invested work digging the mountains for gold. Just because it's bright and yellow?
And today: the country's gold reserve = 150 tons of gold. 150 tons! What can you do with 150 tons of gold?
First thought is: gold carries information purposes as the "universal money". But that's strange because it has no other usage.
Cattle, women, goods, even bags of grain - thats the universal money for wild people.
I mean it looks like the gold has some value that we don't understand.Sometimes I imagine, that the whole earth is the planet-gold mine for some space aliens ;)
I hope there’s a reason why the ancients started collecting gold. It was about 5,000 years ago. I guess it has something to do with it being rare. It started as currency about 2,500 years ago. Ancient miners might have actually been slaves. I don’t think anyone mined it just because it was shiny. North American miners probably mined it for wealth.
>> Kete Foy:
“I hope there’s a reason why the ancients started collecting gold. It was about 5,000 years ago. I guess it has something to do with it being rare. It started as currency about 2,500 years ago. Ancient miners might have actually been slaves. I don’t think anyone mined it just because it was shiny. North American miners probably mined it for wealth.”
Ok, for wealth, but what you think about this: the sence of this welth is that they can exchange some parts of this gold to something they really need. And the seller, who sold his goods for gold exchanges it further down the chain. Along with rarity this means, that gold coin - is just an informational unit, same as paper money, but with lower inflation. This is "the official" theory.
But I see something like vulnerability in this theory, misunderstanding.
The gold is just one of million rare things, and the money can be made of everything, you just need the "encryption algorhythm". And it was too popular in the world, people were searching for the lands where they can dig some gold. Just for informational unit? Not all the rare things cost something. Only the useful ones.
And one other thing:
If in acient time the gold was just a convenient money unit, with verification methods and durability, then it's value is justified for that time.
But for now the price should decrease, because it's just another metal and nothing more. But the price of gold grows. Yes, its just the price of paper/digital money decreases against gold. But it means that all other goods price decreases against gold too. Why? -
Economic justification of GPL
2016-06-18T22:52:41Z via Dianara To: Public
What interests me most in GPL/LGPL - is what makes the people(each individually) support the GPL-projects. I mean in monetary. I think this question is really cool, because it shows us the system part, not the religion. Really, who pays for this? Could you please-please tell me your story? As you can see, I never supported some Free Software project, except tries to make a commit to ffmpeg, but I really wish to. It's just beautiful. GPL is beautiful because it's a just epic hack for the economics. People are making things together, and get result, unlike the "classic" (democratical, if you dont mind) economical system, where they would stuck in every task.
Show all 5 replies
>> JanKusanagi:
“AFAIK, ffmpeg is not a GNU project. Maybe you're using "GNU project" as a synonim for "Free Software project"?
It's not the same =)”
Yes, but let's return to your case. If nobody pays you, then it means you do it for youself. I would understand if you'd support gdb for example, because that's an instrument. But why do you need dianara for example?
I'm trying (unsucessfully yet) to support ffmpeg during the job time, because the company I work in uses it, and I've just fixed some little bugs. Going to send that fixes as a patch,.
And some other one project - BMX. BBC library for mxf video container, under BSD. I'm expanding it for my company, and going to commit it to the BMX repo in future.
For me programming is job. I do it for money. Programming is well payed. Spare time is for family.
>> aleniuk:
“[...] Spare time is for family. [...]”
Well, yours might be. Spare time has plenty of uses.
I like creating tools that help people and make a better world. And I have a use for the tools I create, so it's a win-win situation.
>> JanKusanagi:
Maybe you're using "GNU project" as a synonim for "Free Software project"?
Yes, that's right. Is there any difference except GPL vs LGPL ?
The difference has nothing to do with GPL vs LGPL, or any other license.
The GNU Project is a specific set of people doing a specific set of programs and libraries. Like Mozilla, or KDE. Different Free Software communities, which are not the GNU project.
Using the GNU GPL, or any other GNU license does not make your project part of GNU.
Meanwhile...
-
AleksandrSlobodeniuk favorited a note
-
AleksandrSlobodeniuk updated about a gold
-
AleksandrSlobodeniuk updated about a gold
-
AleksandrSlobodeniuk updated about a gold
-
AleksandrSlobodeniuk updated about the gold
-
aleniuk updated Economic justification of GPL