Browse Source

edited the makefiles and generator process

master
manetta 2 years ago
parent
commit
5af14139ca
  1. 192
      CONTEXT.md
  2. BIN
      CONTEXT.pdf
  3. 132
      LICENSES.md
  4. BIN
      LICENSES.pdf
  5. 77
      Make.css
  6. 5
      Make.sh
  7. 15
      Makefile
  8. 12
      README.md
  9. 152
      VIEWPOINTS.md
  10. BIN
      VIEWPOINTS.pdf
  11. 2
      agree-to-disagree/agree-to-disagree.md
  12. BIN
      agree-to-disagree/agree-to-disagree.odt
  13. BIN
      agree-to-disagree/agree-to-disagree.pdf
  14. 22
      convert.css
  15. 2
      donating-upstream/donating-upstream.md
  16. BIN
      donating-upstream/donating-upstream.odt
  17. BIN
      donating-upstream/donating-upstream.pdf
  18. 2
      generative-vocabularies/generative-vocabularies.md
  19. BIN
      generative-vocabularies/generative-vocabularies.odt
  20. BIN
      generative-vocabularies/generative-vocabularies.pdf
  21. 2
      group-configurations/group-configurations.md
  22. BIN
      group-configurations/group-configurations.odt
  23. BIN
      group-configurations/group-configurations.pdf
  24. 2
      increasing-saturation-🌶️/increasing-saturation-🌶️.md
  25. BIN
      increasing-saturation-🌶️/increasing-saturation-🌶️.odt
  26. BIN
      increasing-saturation-🌶️/increasing-saturation-🌶️.pdf
  27. 2
      re-versioning/re-versioning.md
  28. BIN
      re-versioning/re-versioning.odt
  29. BIN
      re-versioning/re-versioning.pdf
  30. 2
      situated-versioning/situated-versioning.md
  31. BIN
      situated-versioning/situated-versioning.odt
  32. BIN
      situated-versioning/situated-versioning.pdf
  33. 2
      team-names/team-names.md
  34. BIN
      team-names/team-names.odt
  35. BIN
      team-names/team-names.pdf
  36. 2
      unpacking-multiple-we-s/unpacking-multiple-we-s.md
  37. BIN
      unpacking-multiple-we-s/unpacking-multiple-we-s.odt
  38. BIN
      unpacking-multiple-we-s/unpacking-multiple-we-s.pdf
  39. 2
      untitled/untitled.md
  40. BIN
      untitled/untitled.odt
  41. BIN
      untitled/untitled.pdf

192
CONTEXT.md

@ -0,0 +1,192 @@
% CONTEXT - Not for Any*
# Not for Any*
<!--
CONTEXT: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-intro>
LICENSES: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-licenses>
VIEWPOINTS: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-viewpoints>
stylesheet pad: https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-css
-->
<!--
curl https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-css/export/txt > Makefile.css && curl https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-intro/export/txt | pandoc --pdf-engine=weasyprint -c Makefile.css -o CONTEXT.pdf
-->
## CONTEXT
These pages hold traces of a research that led to the making of the **Not for any\*** toolkit. The toolkit is an invitation to critically (re)engage with open licenses and question the vocabularies that they operate with, such as *freedom*, *openness* and universal scales that are implied in terms like *anyone*.
This project departed from the collective practices of [Varia](https://varia.zone/), a collective-space in Rotterdam focused on everyday technologies. We are a group of artists, activists, programmers, academics, designers, and more, involved in techo-social practices in the cultural field. Within Varia, we try to make space for radically engaging in ways of conceiving technology in its social context. The latter has been an important ground for us to work with *open access*, *free software* and *technofeminism*.
The stories and examples that appear in this research further unpack these interests. They depart from ideas rooted in open licenses, famous examples of projects that work with these techno-legal tools are *Wikipedia*, the operating system *Linux* and the licenses suite *Creative Commons*. These (pretty well known) examples are part of a bigger field and operate on a big scale. Our (design) practices depart from similar interests, yet operate on a much smaller scale.
At Varia we have been involved in various kinds of projects -- from collective writing, designing and tool making -- manifested in different forms of print and web publishing formats. Some of these projects have been published under a so called *open license*, with which we release and open up our own ownership over the code, the content or the tools that we have developed, making them available for others to use. This is however not the case for all the projects and materials we have been publishing. In moments of tiredness, limited time, uncertainty or indecisiveness, we did fall back on the default legal situation: copyright.
We ended up with a dilemma: we do not want to subscribe to the protective and authoritarian forces of copyright, but at the same time, we are also not always comfortable to publish under a license that opens up our work for *anyone* and *anything*.
Now, we finally get to work on these questions. Through this toolkit we propose to (re)turn (to) the politics of open licenses. With it, we create space for collective engagement with licenses from a (techno)feminist perspective in a playful and embodied way. The toolkit includes a series of exercises to do this with.
The text bellow will give further context in how we as both members of Varia and designers working with free/libre open software came close(r) to open licenses. It is followed by a story around ethical licenses which triggered many frictions and discussions on what *freedom* and *openness* in free software actually means and towards whom.
Some words are purposely put in italics throughout this introduction text, to indicate the entangled and fuzzy understandings that these words embody. This applies to *free*, *freedom*, *open*, *openness*, *open access*, *everyone*, *anyone*, *collective* and *who*.
### Transversal practices
Ideas around open access have had a big techno-legal impact on the field of software. Since the 1980s, different forms of so called *free software* emerged. It was a counter reaction to a hegemonic presence of corporations in the field of computation and the unescapable laws of copyright.
Over the years also other fields started to work with free software and shaped their practice through their tools. And their tools through their practice. Idea(l)s around radical forms of *openness* triggered all sorts of practices around authorship, property, open access, sharing, collective organisational models and more.
Different artist-run initiatives, design collectives and cultural organisations that are closely engaging with free software culture, have worked on all sorts of granular interpretations of openness over the years.
In the mid 1990s, practicioners in the fields of arts and design started working within the techno-legal spectrum of open licenses. [Labomedia](https://labomedia.org/labomedia-eng/), [goto10](https://archive.bleu255.com/goto10/) and the net culture initiative [Servus](https://core.servus.at/) are organisations that bridged free software with media art. Other organisations and initiatives introduced feminist theory into the spectrum, such as [Constant](https://constantvzw.org), [Old Boys Network](https://obn.org/inhalt_index.html), [Systerserver.net](http://systerserver.net) and the mailinglist [Faces](https://www.faces-l.net/). In the field of design, multiple individuals and collectives started to work with free software tools in their practice, such as [Open Source Publishing (OSP)](https://osp.kitchen), [Manufactura Independente](http://manufacturaindependente.org/) and [PrePostPrint](https://prepostprint.org/doku.php//en/introduction). These are (obviously) just a few examples of a bigger field.
Also piracy practices have done important work, by working on extra-legal[^extra] forms of open access. They actively questioned the borders of copyright, often while being directly confronted by responses from the monopolist players of the publishing industry. Examples of pirate libraries include [Monoskop](https://monoskop.org/Monoskop), [aaarg](https://aaaaarg.fail/) and [sci-hub](https://sci-hub.tw/).
We feel that, however, the field of free software is also facing a couple of limits. <!-- ? maube we don't need thid phrase -->
In some places, *openness* has become an economical strategy in the form of an open bazaar[^bazaar], other flavours operate within a libertarian perspective of individual freedom and sovereignty[^memehustler]. Sometimes *open access* is a radical social operation that grants access (for example) to expensive academic journals. Feminist and queer communities fight for an inclusive understanding of *freedom*, which includes the *freedom* to exclude. The forking paths of various socio-technologic discourses result in a linguistic mess around *openness*, *freedom* and *free* of the so called *access*.
In all these densities and complexities around notions of *free*, *freedom* and *openness*, a feeling of discomfort and awkwardness pops up. While open access has been an important trigger for radical sharing practices, it is important to question which *radical* demands are formulated, by whom and for the benefit of whom. How can we escape from the illusion that *open access* leads automatically to equality? Isn't *open access* intertwined with positions of priviledge? And isn't sharing your work *openly* with others very context specific and condition dependent?
If a tool is open for anyone to use, who is this anyone actually? Why would we publish something in the open for a universal *anyone*, if that also includes people that we politically do not align with, such as facists? What does it mean to block access to a specific group of people?[^7thesesonthefediverse] How can we open up and protect at the same time? What would situated ways of sharing look like? Or situated forms of authorship[^authorsofthefuture]? How can we keep everyday conditions in mind, while speaking about open access? How can we devise safer and more ethical collaborations between groups, organizations and institutions?[^intersectionsofcare]
This is where it starts to be blurry, fuzzy and less straight forward.
This toolkit takes a dive into this "mess", by asking questions such as "*open* for who?", "*free* for who?" and how such systems of *openness* perform differently for different agents.
Sometimes this means that a space cannot be *open* for just *anyone*, in order to be *open* for all. And this is where a contradiction emerges: if something is *free* to be used by *anyone*, how can I stop "evil people" from using my program?[^evil]
![*Can I stop “evil people” from using my program?*, Open Source Initiative (2020) <https://opensource.org/faq#evil>](https://vvvvvvaria.org/~mb/generative-conditions/FLOSS/can-i-stop-%22evil%22-people-from-using-my-programme.png)
How can we closely engage with such feelings of discomfort around open licenses?
In this toolkit we are stretching such questions through a series of exercises, which you can find in this toolkit.
### License Gestures
Other people engage differently :-).
Throughout this research, we encountered a myriad of playful vocabularies that address different affiliations with open source and open licenses. The following examples specifically work with language and terminologies. By focusing on language, words become performative tools to unfold imaginaries, take re-directions together, or re-turn to work that has been made in different time-spaces. We started to refer to those modes of wording and phrasing as **license gestures**: short comments, sidenotes or jokes that engage with the act of copying in a playful way.
Licenses are clearly not the only place to make statements about how you share your work for whom it is intended (or for whom not). You can find short one-liners or even illustrations in which authors state their sharing intentions in a more subtle way.
![*Do as you please, but do no harm*, thufir (2020) <https://omnius.zone/files/>](https://vvvvvvaria.org/~mb/generative-conditions/more-recent/do-as-you-please.png)
![*My code is likely not useful for you*, Kibi Gô (2020) <https://go.kibi.family/>](https://vvvvvvaria.org/~mb/generative-conditions/more-recent/go.kibi.family-my-code-is-likely-not-useful-for-you.png)
We also encountered different phrasings to refer to free and open source software. Examples include *non-extractive software*[^nonextractive]: that focusses on the economical models that software is developed within, *non-coercive computing*[^noncoercive]: that addresses tactics of discursive development processes, or *rhizomatic open source way*[^rhizomatic]: that highlights the decentralized potential of making situation-specific versions of a work.
![*we would like to work in a rhizomatic open source way*, Intersections of Care, Florence Cheval and Loraine Furter (2019) <http://www.intersectionsofcare.net/>](https://vvvvvvaria.org/~mb/generative-conditions/more-recent/intersections-of-care-rhizomatic-open-source.png)
With language comes along a shift in attitude.
*“I canʼt imagine why you would want to TOUCH this code, but just in case”* prioritizes the attachment to networks and the search for affinity with others. Opening up towards a more ambigious movement or *gesture* — one that extends its idea of sharing beyond source code, moving the act of sharing to a "just-in-case" situation.
Programmer, artist and educator Michael Murtaugh further expands on this shift in focus in an interview conducted by Cornelia Sollfrank.
> The strength of free software is more this kind of ecosystem of diverse tools, and ways of putting things together. It's not so much about [making] a seamless, singular, monolithic application. It's about the fact that it's a community that shares its sources. That you create things [is important], but it's also about an interest how other people work. Yeah it's all about creating something together and this kind of common heritage of (in this case) software and tools. But [most important is the] thinking *around* the software. <br><br>There was this moment in which it clicked, where I let go. Because indeed you have licenses to talk about the status of the code you release, but at a certain moment I stopped caring about the code. I write code as a practice, but it's not *about* the code. I'm happy to rewrite and rewrite code, but [in the end] it's about the processes around it. The [shared] thinking [is what is] really important.
<small>-- Ecosystems of Writing, Interview with Michael Murtaugh, part of Creating Commons (2019) <https://vimeo.com/309009024></small>
These vocabularies, gentle reminders and shifts in focus could be read as invitations to further explore how such transversal practices can operate and question forms of open access.
How could different forms of authorship be rethought and put into practice? How can we experiment with alternative forms of ownership, or rethink property, when we work with objects or tools? And how can we create space for exchange and thinking together *around* software?
## Negotiating Freedom 0
Within the free software field itself there are ongoing frictions and discussions around the question of what *openness* means and towards whom. There is a specific story that we would like to share, around the appearance of so called *ethical licenses*. These licenses introduce a way of thinking about openness, that is not open for anyone. They use the freedom they are granted, to disallow and restrict access for certain use cases and people.
We decided to include a collection of such ethical licenses to this toolkit, which have become important prototypes in a rising ethical storm[^therisingethicalstorm]. The collection holds a range of licenses that negotiate and propose different understandings of *who* has actually access when something is published in the *open*, and for what purpose it can be used. The list includes a selection of licenses that we encountered throughout the time of this research:
* Peer Production License
* Non White Heterosexual Male License
* Climatestrike License
* The (Cooperative) Non-Violent Public License
* License Zero
* Parity license
* Prosperity Public license
* License Zero Private License
* Anti-Fascist MIT License
* BOLA license
* Hippocratic License
* "Anti 996" License Version 1.0 (Draft)
* Atmosphere Software License (🚪🌳🔌⛅🛂💸)
* 🚩 The Anti-Capitalist Software License
To better understand the impact of these licenses it is useful to look back at the emergence of open licenses within the field of free software.
Open licenses provide computer programmers and other makers a techno-legal framework to publish a work in an *open* way, by giving the *freedom* to someone else to (re)use, modify and (re)publish a work. These open licenses emerged from a genius hack of copyright law in the 1980s[^thexeroxdriver], when programmers at MIT started to use their copyright to release the very same copyright over their code. The first open license appeared: the GNU GPL license[^gpl], after which many others followed. Resulting in a whole range of *free software* tastes, smells, ideals and modes of operation.
These open licenses are based on a recurrent framework of so called *four software freedoms*.
These *four freedoms* appeared in the formentioned [GNU General Public License](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) written by Richard Stallman in 1989, but the skeleton of many of the open licenses that were written later follow pretty much the same format. They are all based on *four freedoms*[ˆfourfreedoms], which grant anyone the freedom to:
* **run** the program as you wish, for any purpose (**Freedom 0**).
* **study** how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (**Freedom 1**). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
* **redistribute** copies so you can help others (**Freedom 2**).
* **distribute** copies of your modified versions to others (**Freedom 3**). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The open licenses included in this toolkit critically re-engage with these ever returning *freedoms*, by questioning specifically the first of the four *freedoms*: Freedom 0. As this is the specific freedom that allows "*anyone* to use and run a program as you wish for *any* purpose", it has been precisely the place where multiple difficult questions cross. Freedom 0 is the "who" freedom, as in, it formulates a demand of having *open access* to a work for an universal *anyone*. The ethical licenses make a critical counter move by reformulating Freedom 0, for the sake of a whole range of different urgencies, including anti-facism, labour conditions, climate change or pacifistic social demands such as non-violence.
However, the ethical licenses included in this toolkit have been strongly criticized[^cantwork]. Questions were raised on the effect and impact of such strong demands within the framework of a license. Many of the urgencies overlap with the scope of human rights, or labour law, which raises the doubts if these licenses should try to operate within this realms. As open licenses are based on copyright law, lawyers are not convinced that any of these ethical demands will succeed in court.
<!--- The questions that remain are: — maybe we can remove this sentences and keep the questions below -->
Are licenses a good place for political and ethical demands?
What other tools do we (programmers, artists, designers) have to engage politically and ethically regarding the (re)use of our work?
## Not for Any* Exercises
Through the exercises in this toolkit, we invite you to (re)turn to open licenses and (re)explore their potential as radical techno-legal tools.
The exercises are an invitation to unfold context specific understandings of them and explore situated formats and imaginaries of *openness* and *freedom*. While staying close to the presence of our different bodies, different priviledges and different conditions, the exercises will hopefully make space for intense engagements, playful activities and compelling conversations.
## Peers, links and thanks!
First of all, a warm thanks to all the authors mentioned in this toolkit for the fantastic work.
We also would like to express a big thanks to Flavia, Eva, Anja, Tina, Luke, Cristina, Joseph, Silvio, Angeliki, Roel, Danny, Samantha and Lídia for your input and feedback.
Another big thanks goes out to Monoskop, for hosting some of the references used in this toolkit.
<small>© Varia, 2020 - This toolkit is published under The Non-Violent Public License v5 (NPLv5) <https://git.pixie.town/thufie/NPL/src/branch/master/NPL.txt>, more information can be found here: <https://thufie.lain.haus/NPL.html>.</small>
> The Non-Violent Public license is a freedom-respecting sharealike license for both the author of a work as well as those subject to a work. It aims
to protect the basic rights of human beings from exploitation and the earth from plunder. It aims to ensure a copyrighted work is forever available
for public use, modification, and redistribution under the same terms so long as the work is not used for harm.
## Situated genealogy
[^extra]: The proposition *extra-* appeared in the practice of Constant, a linguistic hook to open up the binary dichotomy between legal/non-legal, free/non-free, etc. Extra-legal in that sense is a specific way to refer to the complex border of legality. - <https://constantvzw.org/>
[^evil]: *Can I stop “evil people” from using my program?*, Open Source Initiative (2020) <https://opensource.org/faq#evil>
[^nonextractive]: *Extractive software relies on a business model where the user produces economic value for the tech company in exchange for its free (free as in beer, not as in freedom) services (e.g.: Google, Facebook, Amazon, Instagram, et al). However, the exchange rate is often disproportional and can have direct consequences for democracy, society and basic human rights, while generating profits in the order of the billions for the company (e.g.: US$40 billion (2017) for Facebook and US$110 billion (2017) for Google.)*, Digital Solidarity Networks - <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/digital-solidarity-networks>
[^rhizomatic]: Florence Cheval & Loraine Furter, *Rhizomatic open source way*, Intersections of Care (2019) <http://www.intersectionsofcare.net/>
[ˆfourfreedoms]: <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>
[^memehustler]: Evgeny Morozov, The Meme Hustler Tim O’Reilly’s crazy talk (2013) - <https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-meme-hustler>
[^bazaar]: *This directory gives you access to almost all of the contents of my evolving book, The Cathedral and the Bazaar. Enjoy — but be aware that I have sold O'Reilly the exclusive commercial printing rights.* (2000) - <http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/>
[^therisingethicalstorm]: Coraline Ada Ehmke, *The Rising Ethical Storm In Open Source*, CopyleftConf (2020) - <https://archive.org/details/copyleftconf2020-ehmke>
[^cantwork]: *So, unfortunately, this well-meaning effort doesn’t work, and these terms don’t belong in a license.* - <https://perens.com/2019/09/23/sorry-ms-ehmke-the-hippocratic-license-cant-work/>
[^noncoercive]: Helen Pritchard, Eric Snodgrass, Romi Ron Morrison, Loren Britton, Joana Moll, *Burn, dream and reboot!: speculating backwards for the missing archive on non-coercive computing* (2020) - <https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3351095.3375697>
[^gpl]: <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html>
[^7thesesonthefediverse]: by Aymeric Mansoux and Roel Roscam Abbing <https://monoskop.org/images/c/cc/Mansoux_Aymeric_Abbing_Roel_Roscam_2020_Seven_Theses_on_the_Fediverse_and_the_Becoming_of_FLOSS.pdf>
[^authorsofthefuture]: *Authors of the Future - Re-imagining Copyleft* was a study day organised by Constant, to see if we can start re-imagining copyleft together. <https://constantvzw.org/site/Authors-of-the-future-Re-imagining-Copyleft.html>
[^intersectionsofcare]: <http://www.intersectionsofcare.net/>
[^thexeroxdriver]: <https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201d-redux-a-testimonial-about-the-injustice-of-proprietary-firmware>

BIN
CONTEXT.pdf

Binary file not shown.

132
LICENSES.md

@ -0,0 +1,132 @@
% LICENSES - Not for any*
<!--
CONTEXT: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-intro>
LICENSES: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-licenses>
VIEWPOINTS: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-viewpoints>
stylesheet pad: https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-css
-->
# Not for any* licenses
As part of the research, we gathered a list of open licenses that specifically negotiate Freedom 0 (sometimes also referred to as "Three Freedoms" licenses).
<div class="license">
## Peer Production License (2010)
<https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License>
The peer production license is an example of the Copyfair type of license, in which only other commoners, cooperatives and nonprofits can share and re-use the material, but not commercial entities intent on making profit through the commons without explicit reciprocity.
</div>
<div class="license">
## Decolonial Media License 0.1 (2017)
<https://freeculture.org/About/license>
We recognize that private ownership over media, ideas, and technology is rooted in European conceptions of property and the history of colonialism from which they formed. These systems of privatization and monopolization, namely copyright and patent law, enforce the systems of punishment and reward which benefit a privileged minority at the cost of others’ creative expression, political discourse, and cultural survival. The private and public institutions, legal frameworks, and social values which uphold these systems are inseparable from broader forms of oppression. Indigenous people, people of color, queer people, trans people, and women are particularly exploited for their creative and cultural resources while hardly receiving any of the personal gains or legal protections for their work.
We also recognize that the public domain has jointly functioned to compliment the private, as works in the public domain may be appropriated for use in proprietary works. Therefore, we use copyleft not only to circumvent the monopoly granted by copyright, but also to protect against that appropriation.
</div>
<div class="license">
## Climatestrike License (2019)
<https://climatestrike.software/>
The Software may not be used in applications and services that are used for or aid in the exploration, extraction, refinement, processing, or transportation of fossil fuels.
</div>
<div class="license">
## Non White Heterosexual Male License (?)
<https://nonwhiteheterosexualmalelicense.org/>
If you are a white heterosexual male you are provided the same permissions (reuse, modification, resale) but are required to include this license in any documentation and any public facing derivative. You are also required to include attribution to the original author or to an author responsible for redistribution of a derivative.
</div>
<div class="license">
## The (Cooperative) Non-Violent Public License (2019)
<https://thufie.lain.haus/NPL.html>
The *Non-Violent Public License* aims to ensure basic protections against forms of violence, coercion, and discrimination which creations are frequently leveraged for in the modern world. This license covers several formats of creative work but has extra terms for software given the power it has as a tool outside of its creative capacities.
To clarify: These Licenses are intended not only for Software, but also for creative works of all kinds.
</div>
<div class="license">
## License Zero (2017)
<https://licensezero.com/>
* Parity license <https://paritylicense.com/versions/7.0.0>
* Prosperity Public license <https://prosperitylicense.com/versions/3.0.0>
* License Zero Private License <https://licensezero.com/licenses/private>
Contributors can choose from two software licenses, Parity, an open, share-alike license, and Prosperity, noncommercial license, then sell private licenses through licensezero.com for use in closed source or for profit. licensezero.com sends the proceeds directly to developers’ Stripe accounts.
</div>
<div class="license">
## Anti-Fascist MIT License (2018)
<https://github.com/jamiebuilds/anti-fascist-mit-license>
I love Open Source, and I want to give my software away to as many people as possible. However, I refuse to let my work benefit those who support fascism.
</div>
<div class="license">
## BOLA license (2007)
<https://blitiri.com.ar/p/bola/>
*Buena Onda License Agreement*. In spanish, "Buena onda" means something like "cool" or "nice". "Bola" is a spanish word too, and means "ball". Just to be clear, I am NOT a lawyer and I don't want to have anything to do with them. Use it at your own risk. If nightmares about lawyers keep you up at night, stay away from it.
</div>
<div class="license">
## Hippocratic License (2019)
<https://firstdonoharm.dev/version/2/1/license.html>
For too long, we as software developers have divorced ourselves from the consequences of the code that we write. We have told ourselves that development is a pure and abstract pursuit, and have spent our careers writing programs with the goals of clarity, conciseness, readability, performance, and elegance.
But we are starting to realize that the software that we create has a real and lasting impact on the world in which we live.
Introducing the *Hippocratic License*: an Ethical Source license that specifically prohibits the use of software to violate universal standards of human rights, and embodying the principles of Ethical Source Software.
</div>
<div class="license">
## "Anti 996" License Version 1.0 (2019)
<https://github.com/996icu/996.ICU/blob/master/LICENSE>, <https://996.icu/#/en_US>
A "996" work schedule refers to an unofficial work schedule (9 a.m.–9 p.m., 6 days per week) that has been gaining popularity. Serving a company that encourages the "996" work schedule usually means working for at least 60 hours per week.
</div>
<div class="license">
## Atmosphere Software License 🚪🌳🔌⛅🛂💸 (2019)
<https://www.open-austin.org/atmosphere-license/>
The purpose of the Atmosphere License is to let developers push back against this cycle, supporting environmental sustainabiliy by creating code that increases the relative economic value of renewable energy.
</div>
<div class="license">
## Do No Harm License (2017)
<https://github.com/raisely/NoHarm/blob/publish/LICENSE.md>
Most software today is developed with little to no thought of how it will be used, or the consequences for our society and planet.
</div>
<div class="license">
## The Vaccine License - A Software License That Saves Lives (2019)
<https://vaccinelicense.com/>
Open Source developers should work for good, not evil. The misguided rejection of vaccination is one of the greatest evils that has ever existed.
The *Vaccine License* is a software license that requires that users vaccinate their children, and themselves, and that user businesses make a similar requirement of their employees, to the greatest extent legally possible. The required vaccinations are those recommended by the user’s national administration, for example the United States Center for Disease Control. There is an exception for those who, for medical reasons, should not receive a vaccine.
</div>
<div class="license">
## 🚩 The Anti-Capitalist Software License (2020)
<https://anticapitalist.software>
The *Anti-Capitalist Software License* (ACSL) is a software license towards a world beyond capitalism. This license exists to release software that empowers individuals, collectives, worker-owned cooperatives, and nonprofits, while denying usage to those that exploit labor for profit.
</div>
<div class="license">
## ...
Space for another licence that negotiates freedom 0.
</div>

BIN
LICENSES.pdf

Binary file not shown.

77
Make.css

@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
@page{
size: A4;
margin: 10mm 20mm;
@top-center {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
@bottom-center {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
@left-middle {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
@right-middle {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
}
body{
max-width:150mm;
font-size: 16pt;
line-height: 1.4;
}
/* this is the % first line */
/* it sets the document title */
h1.title{
display:none;
}
a {
word-wrap: break-word;
}
blockquote{
font-size: 125%;
font-style: italic;
}
hr{
border:0;
border-bottom:1px dotted magenta;
margin:2.5em 0 2em;
}
figure,
figure img,
figure figcaption{
max-width: 500px;
}
figure{
margin: 2em auto;
text-align: center;
}
figcaption{
font-size: 10px;
font-family: monospace;
text-align: left;
}
div.exercise{
border:1px solid magenta;
background-color:rgba(255,255,0,.1);
padding:0.5em 2em 1em;
margin:1em 0;
}
div.license{
border:1px solid red;
background-color:rgba(255,0,0,.05);
padding:0.5em 2em 1em;
margin:1em 0;
}
a.footnote-back {
text-decoration:none;
padding-left:0.5em;
}

5
convert.sh → Make.sh

@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ FOLDERS=$(ls -d */);
for FOLDER in $FOLDERS; do
echo "-----";
echo "folder: $FOLDER";
for MD in $(ls $FOLDER*.md); do
echo "md: $MD";
PDF=$(echo $MD | sed 's/\.md/\.pdf/');
@ -14,11 +15,11 @@ for FOLDER in $FOLDERS; do
# Make PDF
pandoc \
--pdf-engine=weasyprint \
-c convert.css \
-c Make.css \
"$MD" -o "$PDF";
# Make ODT file (Libre Writer / Word)
pandoc \
"$MD" -o "$ODT";
"$MD" -o "$ODT";
done
done

15
Makefile

@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
all: download convert
download:
curl https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-css/export/txt > Make.css
curl https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-intro/export/txt > CONTEXT.md
curl https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-licenses/export/txt > LICENSES.md
curl https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-viewpoints/export/txt > VIEWPOINTS.md
pdfs: download
pandoc --pdf-engine=weasyprint -c Make.css CONTEXT.md -o CONTEXT.pdf
pandoc --pdf-engine=weasyprint -c Make.css LICENSES.md -o LICENSES.pdf
pandoc --pdf-engine=weasyprint -c Make.css VIEWPOINTS.md -o VIEWPOINTS.pdf
convert:
sh Make.sh

12
README.md

@ -9,6 +9,18 @@ The toolkit includes a series of exercises to do this with. The exercises are an
------------
## CONTEXT
## LICENSES
## VIEWPOINTS
## convert.sh
## untitled
------------
© Varia, 2020 - This toolkit is published under: The Non-Violent Public License v5 (NPLv5) <https://git.pixie.town/thufie/NPL/src/branch/master/NPL.txt>, more information can be found at: <https://thufie.lain.haus/NPL.html>
> The Non-Violent Public license is a freedom-respecting sharealike license for both the author of a work as well as those subject to a work. It aims to protect the basic rights of human beings from exploitation and the earth from plunder. It aims to ensure a copyrighted work is forever available for public use, modification, and redistribution under the same terms so long as the work is not used for harm.

152
VIEWPOINTS.md

@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
% VIEWPOINTS - Not for any*
<!--
CONTEXT: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-intro>
LICENSES: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-licenses>
VIEWPOINTS: <https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-not-for-any-viewpoints>
stylesheet pad: https://pad.vvvvvvaria.org/gc-toolkit-css
-->
# Toolkit Viewpoints
The viewpoints in this toolkit are taken from the listing of licenses that negotiate with *Freedom 0*. We zoom into particular vocabularies, linguistic elements, orientations and urgencies that shape these licenses. And we (re)present them in five sets: **Who**, **Urgencies**, **Frameworks**, **Configurations** & **Conditions**.
<div class="tool">
## WHO
(Who can own something? Who is involved?)
- commoners
- cooperatives
- nonprofits
- predominant class of a community
- minorities
- developers
- companies
- any person
- individuals
- any entity which supports radical authoritarian nationalism
- ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Center, Human Rights Campaign, Refuse Fascism, RAICES, Democratic Socialists of America
- authors
- neighbours
- United Nations
- court
- employee(s)
- copyright holder
- relevant authorities monitoring the compliance of the license
- software developers
- remote users
- victims
- displaced people
- refugees
- entities that target minority groups or refugees for imprisonment or genocide
- enterprises that operate for-profit prisons
- any electric plant that generates more than 10 megawatts of electricity from coal, oil, or natural gas
- owners of facilities or equipment for generating solar or wind power
- forests
- not a lawyer
</div>
<div class="tool">
## URGENCIES
(In what situation do we find ourselves? What to respond to and focus on?)
- labor conditions
- overwork
- worker-owned organizations
- remote user data
- computation
- ecologic causes
- energy
- no waste
- fossil fuel markets
- deforestation
- nonrenewable power generation
- non-extractive
- economics
- (non)-commercial
- profit
- prosperity
- politics
- anti-fascism
- responsibility
- being "buena onda"
- human rights principles & human rights laws
- tolerance
- gender balance/ diversity
- non-normative
- priviledge
- access
- violence, coercion, and discrimination
- companies contributing to for-profit prisons
- civilian internment situations
</div>
<div class="tool">
## FRAMEWORKS
(How to respond to such urgencies?)
- Free Software Freedoms <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>
- Open Source Definition <https://opensource.org/osd>
- Ethical Source Definition <https://ethicalsource.dev/definition/>
- United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
- Human Rights Laws
- Human Rights Principles
- labor & employment jurisdiction
(specifically those relating to labor and employment where the individual is physically located or where the individual was born or naturalized; or where the legal entity is registered or is operating (whichever is stricter);)
- Core International Labor Standards
</div>
<div class="tool">
## CONFIGURATIONS
(Which configurations can we use to create or break apart from entanglements?)
- Affirmative Action
- blacklists
- issue trackers
- financial support
- donation guidelines
`("dollar amounts may range from $0 (for entities that I like) to $500 (for smaller businesses and such) to $5,000-$50,000+ (for large/publicly traded corporations).")`
- work schedules
- divestment
`("Divestment" of an asset means relinquishing all ownership interest in the asset, all profit rights in the asset, or right to control the asset, through sale or other disposal of the asset, or placing the asset under a conservation easement or other effective legal restriction, valid for at least three years, barring use of the asset for the activities that caused it to qualify as a "Disqualifying Asset".)`
- collecting end-user data
</div>
<div class="tool">
## CONDITIONS
(What specific sets of conditions, specifically for negotiating freedom 0, or (dis)entanglements could applied?)
- copyfarleft
`(commercial exploitation only if you are a worker-owned business or worker-owned collective)`
- copyfair
`(commercial exploitation only if you contribute back to the commons)`
- Ethical Restrictions on usage
`(no use for the purpose of ... bodily harm, surveilling individuals for financial gain, war, & more)`
- "I refuse to let my work benefit those who support fascism"
`(no use for those who support facism)`
- be "buena onda"
`(use if you give proper recognition to the authors, share modifications, help someone, don't waste, be tolerant)`
- economical circumstances (licensezero)
- fossil fuel divestment provisions
- physical safety of all stakeholders, including the users and the developers themselves
- Disqualifying Assests (Disqualifying Investments, Disqualifying Facilities)
`(no use if one of the disqualifying assets have been applicable)`
</div>

BIN
VIEWPOINTS.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
agree-to-disagree/agree-to-disagree.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Agree to disagree
* Select one of the licenses from this toolkit. - ⏲ 3 min

BIN
agree-to-disagree/agree-to-disagree.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
agree-to-disagree/agree-to-disagree.pdf

Binary file not shown.

22
convert.css

@ -1,22 +0,0 @@
@page{
size: A4;
margin: 10mm 20mm;
@top-center {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
@bottom-center {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
@left-middle {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
@right-middle {
content:"Not for Any*";
}
}
body{
font-size: 16pt;
line-height: 1.4;
}

2
donating-upstream/donating-upstream.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Donating upstream
* Make a list of open source or software tools together. Include software that you use in your practice. - ⏲ 5 min

BIN
donating-upstream/donating-upstream.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
donating-upstream/donating-upstream.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
generative-vocabularies/generative-vocabularies.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Generative vocabularies
* Pick a **Framework** from the list of viewpoints. - ⏲ 1 min

BIN
generative-vocabularies/generative-vocabularies.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
generative-vocabularies/generative-vocabularies.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
group-configurations/group-configurations.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Group configurations
* Think of possible group situation together (this can be anything, from a sports team to a political party or family dinner, etc!). - ⏲ 3 min

BIN
group-configurations/group-configurations.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
group-configurations/group-configurations.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
increasing-saturation-🌶️/increasing-saturation-🌶️.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Increasing saturation 🌶️
* Pick a license from this toolkit. - ⏲ 1 min

BIN
increasing-saturation-🌶️/increasing-saturation-🌶️.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
increasing-saturation-🌶️/increasing-saturation-🌶️.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
re-versioning/re-versioning.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Re—Versioning
* Pick a file from your computer of something you made/wrote. - ⏲ 2 min

BIN
re-versioning/re-versioning.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
re-versioning/re-versioning.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
situated-versioning/situated-versioning.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Situated versioning
* Pick a **Who** from the list of viewpoints, and connect it to one of the **Urgencies** listed there. - ⏲ 3 min

BIN
situated-versioning/situated-versioning.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
situated-versioning/situated-versioning.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
team-names/team-names.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Team names
* Pick an **Urgency** from the list of viewpoints. - ⏲ 2 min

BIN
team-names/team-names.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
team-names/team-names.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
unpacking-multiple-we-s/unpacking-multiple-we-s.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Unpacking multiple we's
* Pick one of the **Who**'s from the list of viewpoints. - ⏲ 1 min

BIN
unpacking-multiple-we-s/unpacking-multiple-we-s.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
unpacking-multiple-we-s/unpacking-multiple-we-s.pdf

Binary file not shown.

2
untitled/untitled.md

@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
% EXERCISE - Not for Any*
# Making new exercises
Please feel free to formulate other exercises!

BIN
untitled/untitled.odt

Binary file not shown.

BIN
untitled/untitled.pdf

Binary file not shown.
Loading…
Cancel
Save