[Novalug] [Ma-linux] [FOSE] Starting the discussion

Fri Oct 24 09:05:29 EDT 2008

Free coffee and beer are the best to be honest.

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Joseph Brinkley
<brinkley.joseph at gmail.com>wrote:

> Free coffee and beer are the best to be honest.
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 8:30 AM, greg pryzby <gpryzby at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> James Ewing Cottrell 3rd wrote:
>> > You seem to Miss The Point. Ethics and Logic Give No Quarter. And
>> > Action is either Right/Logical or Wrong/Illogical.
>>
>> You opinion and it is shared by many. However, I stand by, Free means
>> free to do what I want. BSD is free and GPL is not. It restricts what
>> can be done.
>>
>> We can discuss what 'is better' for community, software, world,
>> whatever. However the word free to me means that there is no
>> restrictions. GPL places restrictions.
>>
>> I am not judging if the restrictions are right or wrong, good or bad,
>> they just are.
>>
>> > If you believe that Software Hoarding is Wrong, then allowing others
>> > to take your code and distribute it as a Closed Product is Wrong.
>> >
>> > An analogy might help here. Using my argument above, the GPL is
>> > somewhat like a gun manufacturer requiring that the purchaser (SAY
>> > that they will...) not use the gun for illegal purposes, while the BSD
>> > license is like what we have now.
>> >
>> > Finally, the REAL moment of Freedom is choosing whether to release
>> > something under GPL or not.
>> >
>> > Actually, it doesn't bother me that the GPL "restricts freedom" -- it
>> > prohibits people from doing things which *I* consider uncool.
>> >
>> > That is the Price of using the software. Given that people are trying
>> > to restrict ownership (I bought it, I can do what I want) anyway with
>> > Licensing (no you can't, you can run it only on CPU Serial 364521. On
>> > Tuesday. Or if it's Dark.), it seems like a small price to pay.
>> >
>> > JIM
>> >
>> > greg pryzby wrote:
>> >> GPL is ONE license and there is an argument that some serious
>> >> developers I respect say isn't truly free because it requires certain
>> >> things.  BSD is a free license because once the code has left your
>> >> hands, anyone can take it and do what they want. That is true
>> >> freedom. It is the freedom to let someone do what they want with it
>> >> and not force them to leave it open. They can take it and not make
>> >> the code available and sell it also, without a change (iirc).
>> >>
>> >> I DO NOT tell people what to do or what is right, as Varol said, that
>> >> is the decision of the developer(s).
>> >>
>> >> I remember a heated exchange when the developer told people to take
>> >> his code, only release binaries and sell it-- that is fine by him. He
>> >> wrote the code for himself and shared it because he wanted to. He
>> >> could care less if others liked/used it.
>> >>
>> >> Personally, that is giving true freedom.
>> >>
>> >> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> >>> On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Varol Okan
>> >>> <varokan at movingsatellites.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Serge, remember when people used to have train sets to play with.
>> >>>> No one
>> >>>> really did it to instill freedom in other people, but the motive
>> >>>> most of
>> >>>> the time centered around hobby, fun and relaxation.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As the author of an GPLed SW I did it not mainly to give people free
>> >>>> speech source code, I did it to follow my interests and talents.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Don't get me wrong, I am all for FLOSS, however as a user of FLOSS
>> >>>> SW I
>> >>>> am interested mostly in usability. So yes, I do uses closed source
>> >>>> codecs/driver if I have to.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So when you say every one in the FLOSS community did it ONLY to
>> >>>> support
>> >>>> freedom, I think you can count me out. I did it mainly to solve a
>> >>>> personal need, follow my hobby and enjoy, relax while doing some
>> >>>> productive things for every one to use.
>> >>>>
>> >>> [snip]
>> >>>
>> >>> If you really do not care about other people's freedom at all, why use
>> >>> the GPL?  Why not use some mild shareware license? Then you get to
>> >>> scratch your itch *and* you might get paid a little beer money too?
>> >>>
>> >>> Maybe your answer was so that you could integrate some pre-existing
>> >>> GPLed software and you needed a compatible license. But if thats the
>> >>> case then you could trace the chain back and find someone who cares
>> >>> about freedom at the other end.
>> >>>
>> >>> Or perhaps you wanted to maximize the chances that someone else will
>> >>> chip in?  But there you're taking a bet that they'll care about
>> >>> freedom even if you do not.    ... Or perhaps you wanted to be
>> >>> included in a GNU/Linux distribution that only(/mostly) ships Free
>> >>> Software.
>> >>>
>> >>> I think that pretty much any way you cut it,  you pretty much can't
>> >>> make a rational explanation for the existence of GPLed software
>> >>> without explaining that some people are trying to promote a particular
>> >>> kind of freedom for computer users. We don't need to claim that all
>> >>> GPL users have this purpose, but some very clearly do… and unless it's
>> >>> mentioned the whole system seems a little less sensible and a little
>> >>> more suspicious.
>> >>>
>> >>> Some people call this promotion 'political', but I think thats just
>> >>> really a label we slap on pragmatic efforts to achieve practical goals
>> >>> which we don't share ourselves.  :)
>> >>>
>> >>> [snip]
>> >>>
>> >>>> Now that said I am grateful FLOSS and people defending it. I am just
>> >>>> opposed to the radical view of black vs white, good vs evil, FLOSS vs
>> >>>> closed SW.
>> >>>>
>> >>> Most people that I've met who promote free software are also not fond
>> >>> of BLACK/WHITE style distinctions.
>> >>>
>> >>> For example, virtually all of us are using CPUs whos designs are
>> >>> secret, proprietary, patented, etc but the CPU, coded in a high level
>> >>> design language, is no less software by virtue of being etched into
>> >>> silicon, by at least one rational school of thought.  Basically it's
>> >>> impossible for someone with an absolute black/white position to avoid
>> >>> contradiction and hypocrisy.
>> >>>
>> >>> When people draw shades of grey in very different positions from
>> >>> ourselves we sometimes mistake that with a rigid black and white
>> >>> phenomena (the same as the "they all look alike" view on people of
>> >>> other races from people not accustomed to dealing with them).  But if
>> >>> we listen carefully with tolerance and and open mind, we can usually
>> >>> find the nuance in the position of those we do not agree with.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Novalug mailing list
>> Novalug at calypso.tux.org
>> http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/novalug
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> --Joseph Brinkley
>
>

-- 

--Joseph Brinkley
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://calypso.tux.org/pipermail/novalug/attachments/20081024/d77a15e5/attachment.html 