1 |
On Thursday 28 September 2006 13:16, "Bob Young" <BYoung@××××××××××.com> |
2 |
wrote about 'RE: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How To Play WMV (thread drift - |
3 |
slaveryware)': |
4 |
> > -----Original Message----- |
5 |
> > From: news [mailto:news@×××××××××.org]On Behalf Of Duncan |
6 |
> > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 3:27 AM |
7 |
> > To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o |
8 |
> > Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How To Play WMV? |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > I didn't |
11 |
> > switch to Linux after a decade on slaveryware just to be enslaved by a |
12 |
> > different master, and enslaved it is, |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Not really, *most* people will be, just as "enslaved" even if they do |
15 |
> use a GPLed version of the software. |
16 |
|
17 |
Not true. The freedom to modify the code is important even if the user |
18 |
cannot directly exert it, because it allows the user to pay someone *other |
19 |
than the copyright holder* to do the modifications for them. |
20 |
|
21 |
Also, anyone is allowed to give their friend free software and to use free |
22 |
software for any purpose. Those freedoms are not provided to users of |
23 |
non-free software. |
24 |
|
25 |
> > when the lack of ATI and NVidia |
26 |
> > drivers is the only reason xorg-7.1 is not yet stable on x86 or amd64, |
27 |
> > and it's the same thing with other distributions -- their actions are |
28 |
> > holding a large segment of the would-be free software world hostage. |
29 |
> > Call it what you like, I call choosing to be a hostage to the whims of |
30 |
> > a software overlord choosing to be enslaved, and I both refuse to do |
31 |
> > it, and refuse to have my money go toward funding the slave-masters! |
32 |
> |
33 |
> How is that different from people who can't read code being at the whims |
34 |
> of Linux kernel developers? |
35 |
|
36 |
No one is at the whims of the kernel developers. Even if you can't read |
37 |
code, you can communicate with people *other than the kernel developers* |
38 |
who can read code. You aren't forced to trust the kernel developers word |
39 |
that patch X is "better" for linux. Sure, it may improve performance in |
40 |
90% of the cases -- but what if you are in the other 10%? Even if you |
41 |
don't understand code, it's simple enough to reverse a patch. |
42 |
|
43 |
> The fact is, that's a weak argument at best, |
44 |
|
45 |
I call BS. |
46 |
|
47 |
> it's valid for a very small |
48 |
> group of people, namely programmers. Everyone else, even if they use |
49 |
> "freedomware," has to depend on *someone else* to fix/modify/update the |
50 |
> app/utility/driver. |
51 |
|
52 |
Yes, they might have to contact someone else. But, the are forced to send |
53 |
all changes through *one particular entity*. They can make their own |
54 |
choices on how the software they use is modified. Remember, free (libre) |
55 |
software isn't free (gratis). The production (and maintenance) of |
56 |
software has a cost and not matter how you license it you *can't* make |
57 |
that cost go away. |
58 |
|
59 |
> I fail to see that it really makes much of a difference whether Jane |
60 |
> Avgusr is dependent on a Linux kernel developer or on an engineer |
61 |
> working at nVidia. |
62 |
|
63 |
Because *no one* is dependent on the linux kernel developers. You can make |
64 |
the needed changes. If you don't have the ability to, you can get someone |
65 |
else to using other resources available to you. E.g. I really need my |
66 |
lawn mowed and I hate doing it; I'll trade you a mowed lawn for a kernel |
67 |
patch. |
68 |
|
69 |
Someone *has* to pay for the cost of maintaining and improving software. |
70 |
That's economic fact. NVidia says you have to pay *them* to improve their |
71 |
software. Linux kernel developers says you can pay *anyone with the |
72 |
skills* (or use your own time) to improve the software. Clearly, you have |
73 |
more options (and are thus more free) with free software. |
74 |
|
75 |
> There really is no such thing as "slaveryware" or "freedomware" it's all |
76 |
|
77 |
Yes, there very well is. I want software I'm free to distribute (I need |
78 |
freedomware). I want software I'm free to use how I see fit (I need |
79 |
freedom ware). I want software I can profile and audit myself |
80 |
|
81 |
> just software, and anyone who doesn't read/write code, which is the vast |
82 |
> majority of the population by the way, is dependent (i.e. "enslaved" by |
83 |
> RS's terminology) on someone else, who that someone else is, doesn't |
84 |
> really make much difference in terms of the dynamics of the |
85 |
> relationship. |
86 |
|
87 |
Analogy: |
88 |
improving and maintaining software = food |
89 |
software companies and individual developers = farms and farmers |
90 |
|
91 |
So, you are saying it "doesn't make much different" whether I'm forced to |
92 |
buy all my food from one particular farm or if I'm allowed to buy food |
93 |
from any farmer (probably on the free market)? |
94 |
|
95 |
The fact is that is DOES matter. And anyone that doesn't understand that |
96 |
is simplifying things to much. |
97 |
|
98 |
-- |
99 |
"If there's one thing we've established over the years, |
100 |
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest |
101 |
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability." |
102 |
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh |