Joel Rees wrote:
On 2006/02/18, at 14:01, Les Mikesell wrote:
You don't make something free by adding restrictions.
It's the oldest, most trite and over-used example in the philosophy,
but how do you keep a kite in the air? If you let go of the string, how
long does it fly?
I've released some software which I wanted people to be free
to use as they wished. I put them into the public domain. THAT
is freedom.
[snip]
of geeks. The target market is _still_ people who are willing to trade
a little work for a lot of freedom from (you know this) restrictive
EULAs and the various kinds of malware that world breeds like, well,
mold in the fridge (or virii in overworked sinuses in spring).
GPL is an extremely restrictive EULA itself.
You don't increase sharing by restricting how
sharing can be done.
No one is restricting anything. This is the license that incubated
Linux. Nothing has changed.
Eh? GPL restricts redistribution.
[snip]
Actually, all the argument we are going through here now is irrelevant.
The way of the future is for supply side and demand side to treat each
other as equals. It will happen, no matter how much anyone fights it now.
This seems to me to be an argument based on the idea of
exploiting and exploited classes. It seems to presuppose
that when an exchange is made, then one side benefits,
and the other loses.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
