luciole (he/him)

In 2012 Microsoft launched Windows 8, which was supposed to be a first step towards transitioning the OS into a walled garden. They clearly intended to shut Steam out, eat Valve’s lunch and take over PC gaming. In the end they backed down, but Gabe took the hint. The consequences are still steadily unravelling today.

So I’m guessing this was before actual ears were invented, and all you got was a couple dumb tiny holes to pick up the noise?

Whether it is being offered to the end users as free (as in freedom) software or as paid closed source has the usual implications. Ease of use, accessibility measures and support impacts inclusivity. Supported languages (natural and programming) will influence further who uses them or not. What constitutes the user base will determine what’s it’s used for and in turn will apply pressure to the editor to take a certain direction.

Political impact is not always obvious and not every single grain of software will be infused with a powerful one. The point is that our choice is either to ignore it or to acknowledge it. We can’t opt out of the world; blind neutrality is as political as any other position.

I would like to offer as a counterpoint that everything is political. Tech is no exception. Tech is a tool, a tool comes with a specific affordance and an affordance suggests to the wielder a certain worldview. To wilfully ignore the social and political impact of one’s work does not protect it from the world’s turmoil.