[BadVista Advocate] "Free" software

[Sunnz]

Just wondering, the architecture blue prints of houses are free and
open right? But yet architects make a fortune out of it?

2007/5/4, Lam YongXian <news at adolflam.com>:
>
> > "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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocate mailing list
> Advocate at badvista.org
> http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
>


-- 
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0