From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 13: 7: 7 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE49037B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:07:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from thor.acuson.com (thor.acuson.com [157.226.71.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47BB043F3F for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:07:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DavidJohnson@Siemens.com) Received: from mvaexch02.acuson.com (mvaexch02.acuson.com [157.226.230.209]) by thor.acuson.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 (built Feb 21 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HAZ00GJIJXMJP@thor.acuson.com> for freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:05:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mvaexch02.acuson.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:58:49 -0800 Received: from dhcp-46-158.acuson.com ([157.226.46.158]) by mvaexch01.acuson.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Y2R04S9K; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:00:08 -0800 Content-return: allowed Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:06:26 -0800 From: Johnson David Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" In-reply-to: <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: <200302271306.26357.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> Organization: Siemens Medical Systems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <200302271119.17369.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thursday 27 February 2003 12:11 pm, Terry Lambert wrote: > > "Libertine" is not really the right word, except in the most > > cynical sense. Here's a slightly improved statement: He means > > "Free" as in "regulated", not "Free" as in "unrestricted". > > He means free as in "has been liberated". "Liberated" and > "Libertine" and similar words derived from that root have bad > political connotations in the U.S., which is why he had to redefine > the word "Free" in order to avoid using the technically correct > words. 8-). It's a form of "GNUspeak". If you speak enough GNUspeak, you start to believe what you're saying. For instance, "liberating software". A good analogy is an injured fox in a foxtrap. The BSD camp will "liberate" the fox by releasing it from the trap and letting it go. The GNU camp will "liberate" the fox by releasing it from the trap, then cutting its legs off so it can't get trapped again. > The problem with that statement is "according to their calculus", > as opposed to "according to a mutually agreed upon calculus". Such is the problem with any philosophy that seeks to maximize the greater good. > Actually, it's a lot simpler than that. One side believes people > will do what's right, because it is right, and the other side > believe people will not do what's right unless their feet are held > over a fire. GPL advocates are cynical about other people being > willing to "do the right thing", without having to be coerced. 8^p. Let's see, GNU expects people to steal, so people end up "stealing" from GNU. On the other hand, BSD expects people to give back without being asked, so people end up giving back to BSD without being asked. The best example of this is Steve Jobs. He "stole" GCC by writing a Objective C front end for it, and gave back to BSD in the form of Darwin and numerous bug fixes and improvements. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message