Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 12:20:58 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) Cc: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen), Mike Jeays <mj001@rogers.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bystander shot by a spam filter. Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20030105121306.02936b00@localhost> In-Reply-To: <lkwulkmdlj.ulk@localhost.localdomain> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030104193110.0285a570@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104145840.02925620@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104131212.03837e10@localhost> <3E120659.3D60EB30@mindspring.com> <200212312041.gBVKfr183480@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> <3E120659.3D60EB30@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104112015.026a5530@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104131212.03837e10@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104145840.02925620@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104193110.0285a570@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:20 PM 1/4/2003, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: >But you don't NEED to un-GNU it for many purposes. While copyleft code >is worthless (and so not a free gift) for some purposes (eg, >close-combining with non-GPL code), it still has value as a free gift >for some purposes, like when executing or when a copy is sold on a >CDROM, etc. It's a gift; just not as much of a gift as if it were under >a better license. Again, it's a Trojan horse. The user sees no harm in accepting the gift, but by not using alternatives (particularly commercial alternatives) he is furthering the FSF's "scorched earth" agenda. This, in the long run, hurts him. Those with insidious agendas frequently rely upon the average person's focus on short term benefits and/or lack of knowledge of the "big picture." >> It's effectively servitude, in that by using the code FreeBSD is >> doing Stallman's bidding and promoting his agenda. > >"Servitude" is lack of freedom or involuntary service, neither of which >is implied by their "doing" or "promoting" anything. When you are infected by and propagate a virus, you are, in effect, performing an involuntary service for it. The same is true when you use, promote, propagate, or decline to seek an alternative to GPLed software. You're being used, whether you know it or not. One of the most insidious effects is that you may not promote the creation of a truly free alternative. >> The GPL is more than "restrictive." It's viral, discriminatory, and >> aimed right at programmers' livelihoods. > >And how is any closed-source license better? It is better in that it is not confiscatory, as the GPL is. People do have a right to their own work, but they do not have the right to confiscate that of others. What's more, closed source licensing ensures that people can be paid for their work. The GPL is designed to prevent that from happening. >BTW, the GPL was aimed at software PUBLISHER's livelihoods. RMS >envisaged programmers being paid to write software, not being paid to >let people use their software. Not true. In "The GNU Manifesto," Stallman specifically states that one of the aims of the GPL and the FSF is to ensure that good-paying jobs for programmers are "banned." >I forgot to say that the individuals deserve some blame none-the-less; >sacrifice deserves praise while cowardice and laziness deserve scorn -- >in order to encourage the former and discourage the latter. But it's a >bit Quixotic to think one can influence other's software (or political) >selections, I suppose. Yet, the FSF seems to have done quite well at it -- albeit via deception. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20030105121306.02936b00>