Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on November 10, 2003 03:33 PM
""" "School should teach students ways of life that will benefit society as a whole."
Supporting the economy benefits society. """
This is called the 'Broken Windows Fallacy' --that spending money that didn't have to be spent somehow benefits the economy. This has been thoroughly debunked in economic circles for decades.
"""" If schools teach students free software, then the students will use free software after they graduate."
That's not necessarly the case. If you get and IT job you'll use what the company provides (while you're on their time). """
You make the false assumption that everyone on the planet will be forever in a bottom-feeder role and never in decision-making positions. This is clearly false.
""" "Those corporations offer free samples to schools for the same reason tobacco companies distribute free cigarettes: to get children addicted (1). They will not give discounts to these students once they grow up and graduate."
Software isn't addictive like tobacco. Just because I use a demo doesn't mean I am going to buy the full version. """
It sure is addictive if your data is stored in formats that you can only get to with one particular program (Word, anyone?) and even more restrictive if everyone whom you attempt to deal with also sends you the 'poison' (Word documents) so that you can't escape from having to use this one particular program.
""" Let not forget the title of this article is "Why schools should use exclusively free software". So one is lead to believe his arguments will be to that effect, if not maybe he should have choosen a better, more fitting title. """
I believe that you have just performed a classic semantic error and read the title as 'Why schools should exclusively use free software' rather than what it *actually* says, which is 'Why schools should use exclusively free [software which is wholely free] software.
More factual and ontological errors than one can shake a pointy stick at, tut-tut.
Trash pseudo-arguments
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 10, 2003 03:33 PM"School should teach students ways of life that will benefit society as a whole."
Supporting the economy benefits society.
"""
This is called the 'Broken Windows Fallacy' --that spending money that didn't have to be spent somehow benefits the economy. This has been thoroughly debunked in economic circles for decades.
""""
If schools teach students free software, then the students will use free software after they graduate."
That's not necessarly the case. If you get and IT job you'll use what the company provides (while you're on their time).
"""
You make the false assumption that everyone on the planet will be forever in a bottom-feeder role and never in decision-making positions. This is clearly false.
"""
"Those corporations offer free samples to schools for the same reason tobacco companies distribute free cigarettes: to get children addicted (1). They will not give discounts to these students once they grow up and graduate."
Software isn't addictive like tobacco. Just because I use a demo doesn't mean I am going to buy the full version.
"""
It sure is addictive if your data is stored in formats that you can only get to with one particular program (Word, anyone?) and even more restrictive if everyone whom you attempt to deal with also sends you the 'poison' (Word documents) so that you can't escape from having to use this one particular program.
"""
Let not forget the title of this article is
"Why schools should use exclusively free software". So one is lead to believe his arguments will be to that effect, if not maybe he should have choosen a better, more fitting title.
"""
I believe that you have just performed a classic semantic error and read the title as 'Why schools should exclusively use free software' rather than what it *actually* says, which is 'Why schools should use exclusively free [software which is wholely free] software.
More factual and ontological errors than one can shake a pointy stick at, tut-tut.
#