RE: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How To Play WMV (thread drift -slaveryware)

[Bob Young]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: richard.j.fish@×××××.com [mailto:richard.j.fish@×××××.com]On
> Behalf Of Richard Fish
> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 2:07 PM
> To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How To Play WMV (thread drift
> -slaveryware)
>
>
> On 9/29/06, Bob Young <BYoung@××××××××××.com> wrote:

> > I'm not saying he doesn't have the freedom to use them, I'm suggesting
that
> > they are inaccurate and their connotations don't reflect the true
> > relationship between vendors and users, and for that reason their use
should
> > be reconsidered.
>
> But they *do* accurately reflect the relationship between vendors and
> users from Duncan's viewpoint.  Your viewpoint is obviously different,
> but doesn't mean yours is the only "true" one.

Oh please, spare me the relative truth crap. You can argue all you want that
it's true from Duncan's perspective because that's the way it *feels* to
him. In the end that's just feel good rationalization and total bullshit. It
conveniently avoids the confrontational point, namely that there isn't any
hard concrete logic and reason to support or justify the usage of words such
as slaveryware and freedomware.

> > When a user (who can't read/write source code) has an OSS app or utility
> > break frequently, should they feel enslaved?
>
> No.  They should feel empowered to learn about programming and help
> fix it, or entice others to do so.

That's obviously not what currently happens for the vast majority of people
using OSS, why is that, what's wrong?

Secondly, if you think thats going to change anytime soon, I'd love to know
what evidence supports such a belief.

--
Regards
Bob Young


-- 
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list