Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 3rd Apr 2014 19:40 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones

Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn't live up to it. We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it's because we haven't stayed true to ourselves.

We didn’t act like you'd expect Mozilla to act. We didn't move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We're sorry. We must do better.

Brendan Eich has chosen to step down from his role as CEO. He's made this decision for Mozilla and our community.

The only sensible move.

Thread beginning with comment 586538
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
jgfenix
Member since:
2006-05-25

You can´t do anything without imposing on the freedom of others. You promote weapons control, you impose on others; you reform property law, you impose on others etc. Any form of political act affects someone´s rights.

Reply Parent Score: 2

LinBox Member since:
2014-04-04

You can´t do anything without imposing on the freedom of others. You promote weapons control, you impose on others; you reform property law, you impose on others etc. Any form of political act affects someone´s rights.


But that is the wrong thinking when it comes to freedom. This is the problem in this world. Freedom says you are free to do as you wish as long as it don't impose on my freedoms.

So in your gun example, there is no one forcing you to buy a gun if you don't believe in owning or disliking guns. In a free world I would be allowed to own a gun and you would not be forced into owning one.

There is a way to have true freedom but the collective consciousnesses don't allow it. Taxes are the same way. We have to have taxes to have government services. You can promote a tax increase if you would like for yourself, you can even ask me to participate in the increase for the greater good or whatever. But you would not force me to participate in those taxes.

The thought of the people are flawed in the way they think about freedom. Speech for instance is not a freedom but a given right. I was born with a mouth and trained in my youth on how to use it. In a free world I can use it as long as I don't use it in a way that imposes on your freedom. Of course one of your freedoms should include the right to live as peaceful as you like, I should not be allowed to use my mouth to impose on your peace. Now this should not be a law but should be a common law we all abide. Will this ever happen where we have a common law? Who knows.

I do know however that the collective are great at dictating the lives of others. The collective is great at judging. The collective are none to concerned about the things that matter. Do I hold hope for the collective? Maybe... But the collective will have to learn to live ones own life and learn to know they enjoying freedom comes with the cost of knowing that others get to enjoy their freedoms as well (even if you don't like the freedoms they enjoy).

The other problem we have is we follow an invisible leader (media?). Who runs the collective? There is no governing body that I know of but the collective is a mass social creature that is hell bent on ruining the lives of others while they enjoy life themselves. The collective (IMHO) is an massive beast with a devastating appetite that needs a big change.

Of course many will go on and on about how they are individual and whatnot. But the process of forming ones own thoughts is becoming something of an ancient art. Sad but true!

Edited 2014-04-07 22:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

jgfenix Member since:
2006-05-25

you didn´t understand. If I promote a law to increase the weapons control (something I believe in, by the way) I will be affecting someone´s right to buy them, if I don´t want bars or sex shops in my neighborhood I limit someone's right to establish a business. In a democracy, people's rights are in conflict, so the rights have internal and external limits.

Reply Parent Score: 2