|
Top-level
 Both are good for different purposes. :D If we have a UBI, then providing the basics should be publicly owned for real resilience, but i own the results of my own creativity, so the tools that i make are mine. Note that this is valid up until we get real AI that qualifies for the rights held by all sapients. :D 8 comments
@BillySmith @BillySmith You clearly do. Also, I want to make it clear that by "private ownership" I'm referring to the private ownership of the means of production, not of things you create. I'm an engineer as well as a musician. Some of the things i create are music and song. Some of the things that i create are tools that i use to make more tools. Do i own the tools that i make? yes or no. @BillySmith If you made those tools then yes you own them. But most of the means of production aren't made by just one person, so this isn't really relevant to this discussion. Note that as i work on #OSHW tools, i am happy to share the designs, and help other people make their own versions, but i want to decide who can use my own tools. @BillySmith If you made the tools on your own then that's your right to allow whomever you want to use them. |
Gregory's Server
@BillySmith
Private ownership inherently leads to exploitation and inequality, regardless of the intentions behind it. Collective ownership and democratic control of the means of production would ensure that resources are distributed equitably and decisions are made democratically. Individual creativity and innovation can still flourish within collective ownership, as individuals would be free to contribute their ideas and talents to society without the constraints of private ownership.