Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:11:36 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Johnson David <DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" Message-ID: <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> <3E5E289D.500C9704@mindspring.com> <200302271119.17369.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Johnson David wrote: > On Thursday 27 February 2003 07:02 am, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > Excuse me. But isn't FreeBSD 'Free Software'? Or, I misunderstood > > > the story? > > > > He means "Free" as in "Libertine", not "Free" as in "Free". > > "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 fundamental split between basic philosophies of freedom. One side > is concerned with the "greater good" or "public weal", and sees no > problems with eliminating some freedoms while promoting others, so long > as the total freedom is maximized according to their calculus. The > other side is concerned with individuals, and sees any reduction of an > individuals freedoms to be unacceptable. The problem with that statement is "according to their calculus", as opposed to "according to a mutually agreed upon calculus". > I hesitate to assign any political labels to the two sides, since there > are radical anarchists, extreme authoritarians, and everyone in > between, in both camps. > > It gets interesting in terms of software, because distributing software > under both models is a volunteer cooperation. Some members of the > second side may indeed wish to maximise the greater good and public > weal, but do not see distributing software, as an appropriate vehicle. > And some members of the first side may find genuine distaste at > regulating the freedoms of individuals, but consider the individual > free to choose the authors distribution terms or not. 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. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E5E70F8.85AE964>