As the Cassandra of evangelicalism, it's my duty to point out threats to civilization that others might not see. Rev. Mike says that he is 'deeply disappointed” that I didn't sound the alarm about the danger of open source software. I admit that I completely missed that one. But in keeping with my prophetic duties, I'll share a homily from semiotician Umberto Eco on the theological significance of software:
...."Insufficient consideration has been given to the new underground religious war which is modifying the modern world. It's an old idea of mine, but I find that whenever I tell people about it they immediately agree with me.
"The fact is that the world is divided between users of the Macintosh computer and users of MS-DOS compatible computers. I am firmly of the opinion that the Macintosh is Catholic and that DOS is Protestant. Indeed, the Macintosh is counter-reformist and has been influenced by the 'ratio studiorum' of the Jesuits. It is cheerful, friendly, conciliatory, it tells the faithful how they must proceed step by step to reach--if not the Kingdom of Heaven--the moment in which their document is printed. It is catechistic: the essence of revelation is dealt with via simple formulae and sumptuous icons. Everyone has a right to salvation.
"DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can reach salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: a long way from the baroque community of revellers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment.
"You may object that, with the passage to Windows, the DOS universe has come to resemble more closely the counter-reformist tolerance of the Macintosh. It's true: Windows represents an Anglican-style schism, big ceremonies in the cathedral, but there is always the possibility of a return to DOS to change things in accordance with bizarre decisions; when it comes down to it, you can decide to allow women and gays to be ministers if you want to.
"And machine code, which lies beneath both systems (or environments, if you prefer)? Ah, that is to do with the Old Testament, and is talmudic and cabalistic..."
To slightly extend this metaphor, UNIX is comparable to evangelicalism. In UNIX you have the three parts: the kernel, the shell, and the programs.
The kernel of UNIX is the hub of the operating system: it allocates time and memory to programs and handles the filestore and communications in response to system calls. The kernel in evangelicalism is the history and traditions that store our collective memory as the Body of Christ. It provides the response to our calls for community and is the hub around which we can build our faith.
The shell of UNIX acts as an interface between the user and the kernel. The various denominations and theological camps act as the interface between the believer and the kernel of the evangelical faith.
The programs are the individual faith of the believers. Each stands alone yet cannot function without being attached to the kernel and the shell that comprises the evangelical community.
The emerging church is like Linux. It starts with a UNIX-type system but feels free to tamper with it in any way it chooses. Just as Linux is intended to be an operating system for those who don't want to use other types (UNIX, DOS, etc.), the emerging church is a 'fluid” form of church for those who want to be free of other types of faith traditions.
*The following excerpts are from an English translation of Umberto Eco's back-page column, La bustina di Minerva, in the Italian news weekly Espresso, September 30, 1994.
2
Wow, Joe ... I'm ... stunned (?!) by this revelation. And to think that some would say that the gifts of diverse tongues and their interpretation died out with the closing of the apostolic age! :D
Actually, I was asking about the efficacy of Open Source in the sense of, "Are we stealing something here?" Also, from a macroeconomic perspective, I wondered if there was anything substantial to McBride's claim that "free" is the ultimate predatory pricing scheme.
posted on 02.23.2004 8:22 AM3
Okay, so does that mean that if I have my computer setup to dual boot between windows or linux and I also have an iBook, that I'm a unitarian?
-Jim.
4
There is nothing dangerous about open source to our economy. The commercial software market is built on an anti-capitalist system that is going to die sooner or later. The commodity software industry works by making products that are defective enough and lacking enough features to keep people happy with what they already have.
I find it sad that Rev. Mike would actually argue that it is predatory to not sell your software, but instead to give it away. Protestant work ethic in warp speed mode? Exactly. You can tell the true capitalists on this issue, they're the ones that just laugh at the big companies and tell them to go fsck (btw that's an actual unix command :) ) themselves if they want protection from OSS.
Protecting business is not capitalistic. If you want to even the playing field between non-subsidized businesses and subsidized foreign businesses then tax the hell out of foreign goods made with tax subsidies. But oh.... yeah. That'd mean that most of our companies would get hit too since we're as anti-capitalistic as the Europeans when it comes to subsidizing business.
posted on 02.23.2004 10:47 AM6
So, is Mac OSX Evangelical Catholicism? It's got a Unix core, but the same beautiful, near crash free GUI.
posted on 02.23.2004 4:42 PM7
While we're fiddling while Rome burns, Microsoft continues its plans for world domination. :-O
posted on 02.23.2004 6:11 PM8
My trackback ping failed when I posted, but I posted a follow-on/response to this thread at:
http://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/archive/000206.html
RobbL
posted on 02.23.2004 6:12 PM9
Mike, I'm not arguing anything of the sort. I was asking what other people thought, both here and on my own blog. Doing a bit more research today and listening to what other people have said in response, I've come to the conclusion that SCO is basically blowing smoke.
posted on 02.23.2004 9:38 PM10
One more thing, I'm not the one who suggested that "free" software was predatory. That would be Darl McBride, the CEO of SCO.
posted on 02.23.2004 9:39 PM11
Whatever you say Rev. Mike. We're used to the suggestion that we OSS user and developers are commies because the product is given away for free. The inability of many to comprehend why people could make a program and give it away for free is perhaps the only major flaw with the protestant work ethic.
Unfortunately the problem with many conservatives is that their understanding of capitalism is flawed. Capitalism is about nocoercive economic activity. There is absolutely NOTHING socialistic about developing software for free if it's done voluntarily.
I think the real ire needs to be directed against companies like SCO which don't give any meaningful rights to their users. The commercial software industry is in decline because OSS is creating an expectation of pseudo-property rights among users. If you install Linux, it more or less belongs to you. The only restriction on Linux and other OSS is on what you can do with a product you make that is a derivative of the original. Which is fair. If you fork the Linux kernel, why shouldn't you have to meet modest standards set by the developers? The problem with most commercial software is that the license usually says in not so few words, "you have no rights, live with it serf."
posted on 02.24.2004 7:37 PM