Peer to peer models of networking are perfect analogs for communism

The GNU coreutils, shell, etc, are all still widely used. Hurd failed because of the poor technical choice of modifying the Mach microkernel instead of building a new one from scratch. Because Hurd took too long, Linux happened to come out first. Thus, interest in Hurd dropped. The reasons were technical, not political.
Moreover, the term "software communism" could just as easily apply to any OSS or FOSS.
Here's an example of the anarcho-communist argument against wage labor (capitalism) as an incentive to work:

Has it completely slipped your mind that RedHat exists, or are you just conveniently ignoring it because it destroys your point?

edonkey/kad solved the problem a long time ago.

GNU is wildly successful. GNU is claiming the achievements of the GNU community.

There is no problem with using the Mach microkernel, it was matured in 2001. The problem is that writing Hurd is inherently more complex than reimplementing a monolithic kernel.

Of course the system was going to recuperate Linux. You didn't think state and capital would let programmers do their own thing when they weren't bothering anyone, did you?
When RedHat fully phases out GNU stuff from the big distros and removes the GPL on systemd, people are going to develop a successor to GNU because free software is useful (and Devuan, Artix, and Void are all functional already). Otherwise, wouldn't everyone have used Windows in the first place? Why wouldn't people develop new varieties when it's still needed for supercomputers and servers?
We wasted this first iteration of free software. This doesn't mean it's dead for good, though. IPFS and other decentralized hosting tech is catching on. People are more concerned about privacy.
I'm not hopeful atm, but I see potential. RedHat will die like every company does. Free software might not.

I could probably write a bot that could spit out statements more meaningful than any of this. I wouldn't release it under the GPL.

You are a reactionary. You need only look at Cuba to see the success of the communist school of thought. Nearly everyone is literate, everyone has access to food, one doctor for every 200 people, almost no outbreaks of diseases as a result of mandatory vaccination and a country that, despite fifty years of embargo, is bouncing back. Typical Americuck

...

...

...

Hey look, a bunch of crazy niggers invaded the town center of a tiny midwestern """""city"""""

wouldn't p2p networks that force you to "seed" be better analogs for communism? Freenet pretty much forces you to use disk space as a distributed data store and upload requests.

From what I know the linux kernel was already usable to the contrary of hurd people went with what already just worked.
From my souvenirs in the sysadmin world most of them just spit on RMS and didn't give a dam from the technical side/advantages of the hurd.
Plus there was also a lot of waiting from the FSF because mach wasn't under a free license at that time they waited for approximately 4 years or something like that.
Imo the hurd was mostly ruined by sysadmin cucks.

You're not wrong, but the BitTorrent protocol has been incredibly successfull at triggering hollywood. So it's obviously working. But if you fear your torrent might not be seeded at all times you could always add a webseed. Other protocols like Tox or Syncthing are also deploying "dedicated" server counterparts in their peer-to-peer network (see relays.syncthing.net/ and nodes.tox.chat/). They're not absolutely necessary for the service to exist, but they certainly help.

It makes little sense to compare a protocol to an economic system IMO, it's like the retards who say hurr linux is free so it's a commie OS. Sure you can make an analogy but it's so shallow it's useless.
You start by assuming everyone is a selfish asshole. The best implementation I know is BitTyrant (torrent client). It attempts to maximize your download speed by giving more of your upload bandwidth to people who upload more to you. Leechers get scraps, good guys get faster downloads.

Same for capitalist countries outside Apefrica. When was the last time you met someone illiterate who wasn't a gypsy, nigger or sandnigger? Or heard of someone starving to death?

You're pretending to be retarded right? Because damn Poes law is a bitch

Where were you when niggers became bulletproof?
We're comming bucko

here. isn't me.

The biggest thing imo is that this is robots, not humans. It's obvious that communism cannot work with humans anytime soon but there's no problem with enslaving robots. I don't have to seed content on bittorrent, my computer does, at no cost to me whatsoever, I already leave it on and I already pay for my internet service, does the daemon work 24/7 without compensation? Sure, but it's software, it doesn't care about the cost of its "labor"/toil and nobody considers it slavery yet. Try that shit with humans, aint happening.

I think distributed and decentralized technologies are great because they require a lot of work from each individual node instead of 1 giant centralized supernode, however the humans setting up the nodes don't have to do any work so it's not a big deal that work must be done by everyone, really, nobody is doing any work, it's all just robot slaves.

I look forward to our hardware being automated and our software decentralized, robot-communism should be tried.

Are you a lazy user or the laziest of anons?

What does being uncultured/illiterate have to do with being lazy? I'm both either way, that's my character, not my point.

Closer in meaning to worker than slave.

...

That's perfectly fine as long as there are enough people willing and able to share. It's also why communism always fails. The ((elites)) leech so much, they eat away the peoples ability and will to share.

>>>Holla Forums

I bet you suck that commie p2p dick like a pro.

torrents dont work guys, stop downloading right now!.

...

:(

The World's End is not a good movie.

what you are describing is a protocol problem. if everyone was forced to seed back what they downloaded this wouldn't happen. that's kinda how communism works. if you give people a choice to share of course they wont share because people are greedy.

it's not sharing if it's forced. it's theft.

It is paying back what you took. Repaying your debt is not theft.

Not if everybody joins voluntary. But it is unsustainable because not everybody is equal. Some people have bigger pipes than others.

Because {{{ISPs}}} invented non-symmetric bandwidth and normies are used to not seeding since because of freeware-adware culture they feel entitled to Internet content.

Cuba is pretty impressive for a country that has been under a crushing trade embargo and economic sanctions for decades. Look across the pond at the shitholes of Nicaragua and Guatemala to see what being a pawn to US capital interests actually gets you.

most torrent clients don't make "not seeding" an option, you can't totally disable upload, and they usually put the setting a few pages deep into the settings. So the total idiot normie won't know how to turn it off or that it's even happening. I don't know if this idiot normie bandwidth makes up for the masses that disable it or set it to 0 or something uselessly low

Close your torrent client, and you're not seeding anymore.
Seeding and downloading should be done via daemons IMO, that way we could really exploit BitTorrent's potential.