Conversation

Notices

1. Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Monday, 10-Dec-2018 23:34:42 EST Strypey

   @jeffcliff that depends what kind of global structure we're talking about. If it's a corporation, the standard term is "privatizing", although like "nationalizing", it's a somewhat misleading term, that implies something quite different to the way it's actually used as a technical term. I wrote about this a few years ago in a piece called 'privacy not privatization'.

   1. Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Monday, 10-Dec-2018 23:38:42 EST Strypey

      in reply to

      @jeffcliff if it's a not-for-profit structure, again, it depends. If a government owned the copyright on a package of software, and decided to free the code and hand it over to a stewardship body like the #ApacheFoundation that operates at a global scale, that wouldn't be privatizing, more like "commoning" or even "collectizing". "Internationalizing" doesn't really fit here, even though you could argue that's what's happening.

      1. Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Monday, 10-Dec-2018 23:44:36 EST Strypey

         in reply to

         @jeffcliff if it was a global governance body, like say the WTO, I would use "globalizing" rather than "internationalizing". To me, the word "international" implies a recognition of national sovereignty. The UN is an international body, a federation of sovereign states, which is also taking steps to recognize the indigenous nations within their borders. The WTO has set itself up as a sort of global Supreme Court, suppressing the exercise of local sovereignty when it interferes with corporations.