[BadVista Advocate] "Free" software

[Lam YongXian]

> "I, personally, don't support non-Free software."
>
> Well, then you're missing out on a lot of great stuff.  How about games?
> I
> enjoy computer games, as do millions of other people.   Those companies
> invest millions in them, do you expect them to give everything away?
>
> "With cars and houses, I'm free to take them apart, do my own repairs or
> modifications (or pay someone else to do it for me), sell them, give them
> away, whatever. So why would I have a problem with cars or houses?"
>
> Do you really do your own car repairs and modifications?  Modern cars are
> very complex and you need specialized training to work on each model.
> Plus
> they now come with a lot of proprietary hardware, and yes, software.  So I
> am betting you do actually pay for non-free software in devices like your
> car and cell phone.
>
> "But I do have a problem with non-Free software, because its users are
> prevented from studying/fixing/modifying the source code (or hiring
> someone
> else to do it for them). And there are obvious security and privacy
> implications, when you run software you're intentionally prevented from
> fully understanding."
>
> There are many proprietary products in the world.  Companies invest a lot
> in
> creating them, of course they need to protect their intellectual property.
> In many cases, giving away the source code would allow competitors to
> steal
> your ideas.  Don't you think competition is a good thing?
>
> Obviously we have a big difference in philosophy.  I don't want to be a
> chef, mechanic, electrician, cook, etc., etc.  Have you heard of division
> of
> labor?  I specialize in one thing, and trade my efforts for those of other
> experts.  I pay people to do my taxes, car work, lawn mowing, house
> cleaning, etc., thus leaving time for me to enjoy my life.  Even though I
> am
> a programmer, I don't want to recompile my O/S!  I had to specialize in
> one
> area of programming to become an expert, I can't also know about video
> drivers, security, media players, etc.  I can't imagine that more than a
> handful of people really do that.  How many Windows users can we convert
> by
> saying "Hey, you can modify and recompile your operating system!"  I think
> most people just want to buy something that works.
>
> "The world will always need new software and people to write, maintain and
> improve it. Those are services for which people/businesses are willing to
> pay."
>
> Ok, so are you just saying that software should be freely distributable
> and
> include all source code, but companies can still charge for it?  That's
> better, but there is still the problem of intellectual property.  I don't
> see why just the software industry is being singled out for this
> treatment.
> The computer you're using has lots of chips in it with proprietary and
> non-free software.  I don't think Intel and AMD are going to give you
> their
> code and trade secrets.
>
> I don't see the appeal of your message to 99% of the population who use
> computers.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocate mailing list
> Advocate at badvista.org
> http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
>

It depends on your specialty. If you are a programmer, you would want your
software to be 'open' to you. You want to know how it works, because you
know how you want it to work like. If you are a automobile specialist, you
would want to built your own car, or at least have a chance to modify your
own. You do not bother about free programs because, it is not your
specialty to hack programs, and you are not interested, and you can't.

But it doesn't mean you shouldn't submit to huge companies who claim to
provide 'solution' for you, just because everyone do, and that it is norm.
You can find a friend who you trust, a programmer, who love hacking
software, to modify programs for you. When he needs a better car, you can
modify it for him. This is base on trust, not so-called intellectual
rights.

In this way, we build an society based on freedom and trust, and less on
materialism and rights. This is good for the society. You don't call the
forest-saver campaign unrealistic because it doesn't benefit the economy,
do you? Of cause, to build this is a long term goal. We have to start
today, slowly yet steadily. Now starting with software. No great changes
happens overnight.

You seems to be speaking at the 'end-user' point of view of the
proprietary-master. "They invest so much", you said yourself that they
Invested. Their goal and effort were not to make software better, but to
get back what they put into their investment. This is unacceptable in the
programmer's world. It is like trading human-labors in the worker's world.
Learn to change your point of view, or at least realize that their are
more than just one 'I own, you use'.

---
Lam YongXian
Adolflam.com

FSF member #5279