Comments on: Second Life Left Unity’s Open Letter to LL

By: Archie Lukas

Archie Lukas — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 09:45:09 +0000

Very funny

“anti-capitalist group”

and yet you join an american company encompassing the ideals of capitalist profit?

WTF guys, get real.

By: Plot Tracer

Plot Tracer — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:05:50 +0000

Lol! Intlibber- that is the most uneducated and funniest put down of Marx and os socialism I have ever read! And this as unfettered greed puss our planet to the point were it will no longer support human life. Marx saw the good in capitalism- it was a step forward from fuedalism, but he saw it for what it should be- a step towards the day when everyone benefits from the resources of the worl, rather than the few. Unfortunately Marx was writing in the 19th Century, and he did not see the effect industrialisation and “the parcelling up” of resources would have on our eco system… but he did see the effect it would have on the freedoms of people- he reported on the Scottish clearances and the companies who owned towns in England and Ireland.

Socialism, under whatever name people will choose to call it at the time, is inevitable as people are educated in the disparities of the world and how they are subjigated. Good use of your imagination, Intlibber- but a pointless one. I choose to imagine a free, equitable world for my kids and grandkids, rather than this system we live in which degrades and uses and polutes. I hope those who share MY vision win, and those who share yours at present realise their mistake in time.

By: IntLibber Brautigan

IntLibber Brautigan — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 15:05:10 +0000

Forelle,
Oh Marx recognised the innovative power of capitalism. Thats one reason he opposed it. Marx was essentially an economic luddite who sought to hoodwink the peasantry into returning to feudalism with he and his communist intelligentsia as the aristocrats, controlling innovation to perpetuate their own power, rationalized as “for the greater good”.

Much the same, the socialists in SL seek to perpetuate and reinforce the feudalistic craft/guild economics of so much of SL, and oppose the mechanisms of capital markets needed to exponentially grow the productivity and standards of living of people in SL.

Capital is the true revolutionary force. Marxism is counterrevolutionary economic luddism.

By: Forelle Broek

Forelle Broek — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 07:45:10 +0000

@Alexandra

There’s nothing “ironic” at all about anti-capitalists recognizing the innovative power of capitalism. Indeed, Marx emphasized that very point:

“The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real condition of life and his relations with his kind.

[...]
The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of nature’s forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground — what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor?”

By: plot tracer

plot tracer — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:39:14 +0000

Unfortunately, like the burghers of old, we are fighting within a system. We may want a more equitable world, but we don’t have it yet and to eat I need to compete for my scraps every bit as much as you do, Alexandra. Lets hope the corporations don’t totally shut down the flow of money to those like me who rely on their charity. Or maybe if they do we’ll be forced to fight for a fair share, rather than what they deem to pay us?

By: Alexandra Talbot

Alexandra Talbot — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:38:02 +0000

Funny that. Anti-capitalists saying that a CAPITALIST-created tool is more useful than any other application they have tried.

The irony here is too delicious.

By: Plot Tracer

Plot Tracer — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:39:47 +0000

If anyone is concerned about the latest tos/ the shutting down by controlling corporations and governments of the web) please come along to our meeting where we can share knowledge and begin a campaign both inside sl and out on the “free web” to make these issues known and ensure people know that there are non-corporate alternatives.

Im me at 2.55pm pdt /9.55pm gmt for a tp- or do a classifieds search.

By: Franz Carver

Franz Carver — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 14:08:48 +0000

The total Terms of Service for SL (or should that be inSL[tm]?) now seem to total just under 13,500 words. That’s quite a lot. My favourite has to be 2.6, that basically says they can cancel your account with or without reason for doing so. Nice. Presumably if they sell the company these rights will be passed on to the new owners. That is a pretty powerful term of service. Should a new owner want to cancel the account to gain any property (intellectual or virtual) then does this mean they can?

By: Oops noagain

Oops noagain — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:44:51 +0000

“We also seek clarification on whether you have any kind of user data privacy and protection policy in place, where conversations or actions are deleted and will not be given over to marketing companies, corporations, courts or Governments? We have concerns that if not, that the collection and storage of user data could be open to massive and intrusive misuse.”

Do they? Will they send a reply? This is amazing stuff.

It is strange that most people have concentrated on the branding rather than the privacy issues.

People here are all to easily giving up rights to freedom our grandparents fought for in WW2 and our parents trembled about during the cold War.

We are all to easily sliding into the state of;
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

By: higgleDpiggle Snoats

higgleDpiggle Snoats — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:44:34 +0000

Prokofy:
if the actual substance of your criticism of our letter is that “There is nothing whatsoever in this new trademark policy that suggests you can’t criticize IBM or have a strike in solidarity with striking IBM workers.”,
then you are mistaken and need to go back and read the new SL and inSL usage guidelines, which state (as we have outlined in the letter):

“7. Impermissible Use. Your SL Associated Name must not be, and must not be used for any business, organization, product, service, website, or activity that is, ** in Linden Lab’s sole opinion **:

Violent, racially intolerant, or ** advocating against any individual, group, or organization **”

We do not yet know if this means that LL intend to ban our peaceful political activity inworld, on their whim, if we continue under our current name, (which is SL Left Unity)- this is what we are seeking clarification on. We also raise these and other issues on behalf of others whom the changes may affect.

What *IS* extreme is how aggressive Linden Research are being in stipulating the usage terms of their newly trademarked brands, and how OVER-zealously they suddenly want to protect these, and dictate use of language, given that the previously enjoyed freedom to use these terms has in fact been key in virally building their brand.

I don’t expect you to share these concerns, as they apparently don’t affect you yet. However, as is frequently the case, your desire to go into *attack* mode as soon as you see the word ‘left’ leaves you prone to jumping to false conclusions.