On Jun 9, 2021, at 6:48 AM, Christopher Dimech via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>> wrote > All this could became meaningless in ten years time because major > changes have resulted from division. If we go on dividing the > world using a knife rather than stitching it together, everything > will be left in tatters. The more effort taken in this direction, > the more destructive things will become. Rather, we must touch > deeper dimensions of our intelligence which is naturally > unifying. > > For the sake of study, we initially divided things. With time we > start believing that's how things work. But nature is such that > without inclusiveness, there is no possibility. If people do not > understand what I am talking about, they only have to keep their > mouth shut and hold their nose, and became totally exclusive. > And in a few minutes they will be dead. > > The question is whether we are conscious about what is happening > or not. Otherwise, inclusiveness will only be for survival > purposes. The recent changes in the control of Gcc have all been > about survival. Although, the change in copyright assignment can > prove beneficial to everybody, this assumes that the people in > the Gcc Steering Committee are actually capable of formally > understanding and operating the appropriate legal instruments (or > getting people who do the capability) to move the world closer to > a freedom respecting technological culture. > > It is undeniable that the driving force behind the change was not > communal at all. The aim was to loosen the bonds between the GCC > Projects and the FSF, pushed by the drive to impose the most > extreme form of censure to an individual and declare him "Persona > Non-Grata". > > As for the way forward in the next ten years, software must > became much leaner and effective because of technological > capabilities. There is no other way. Software has not moved > fast as it should be for users. The trend in the world in the > area of technology is that most things are becoming very lean and > mean. One of the greatest injustices I see is that many things > are made in a hurry.
I imagine a person who could write this sort of thing in this context might imagine themselves a prescient voice of reason, along the lines of Cicero or something or perhaps imagine the writings one day being read it and readers shaking their heads sadly at how they were treated just as they do when reading about Socrates’ Apology, or Tacitus about suffering under the emperors. Instead, I suspect this will be tossed in a very different, more awkward category. Aaron
