Re:The Free Software Community After 20 Years: Wit
Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on January 13, 2004 08:11 PM
I am working with Open Source Software and Ms Windows Software as well and I think a Software engineer I should be aware in every technology and not just Support Open Source or non-Open source.
I think that first of all we should consider what “open source” is and if we don’t have a definition for this we should find one. What I am asking you here is to think what you imaging that most people think that Open Source is. Is it a Free software meaning that you don’t have to pay foe it? Is it just “Open” meaning you have access to the source code but you pay for it?
Let’s say that it is a just Open and you have to pay match less to have it that a non-open software. Then what about the copyrights. why something I give it to the open source community can someone use it to gain money with out pain? On the other hand why not be a Public Knowledge the way a “browser” works or the “drivers works”. Mathematics is under GPL meaning that everyone have the rights to use them free why not the source code of a “browser”?
The answer to all this has 3 step: 1. The problem of the “scaling of use”. 2. The problem of the Money. 3. The definition of what the software is.
1. Let’s think about books. The books is the best container of Knowledge humanity have created so far. a. Should you pay to get a book and its content ?YES b. Is the Knowledge that they contain under GPL? Yes you can write a book using other book(but you can re produce exactly the same book)
2. Let think about Hardware. a. Should you pay to buy a VLSI Cheap?Yes b. Are intel,Amd, Motorola obliged to show you How they great it? NO c. Are under GPL? Lets see i. The Technology is while the Cheap is not ii. Cheap could be “open” some times to universities but if you are a Company you should pay for it. (Very Reasonable I think) d. You don’t know if in the hardware has the ability to give to others your Privet data but you still buy it?YES(I don’t trust them but have no choice)
3. This is the hard one. a. Is software a Machine? Yes it is (that’s the way we develop it like a VM) b. Is software a spiritual product? Yes it is c. Is it art? yes it is look at OpenGL d. Is it maths ? yes it is -> so it is under GPL e. …
What I am saying here is that Freedom is to give you Software Product however you want such as free, open, non-open, Shareware e.t.c. Secondly If a hole system is used form almost all the people then its source code MAST be under general Knowledge. We have the right to know how it works in every detail so it can be possible to check if it “respects” the human Privacy.
Finally, I think Open source is great because it proves that Human thought and creation there is no need to be under a Huge Companies Handling. Secondly it proves that there is need the Knowledge to be under Public License but NOT the PRODUCT of the knowledge too. Finally, It is important to consider the scaling. Telephone is a need and the Telephone service mast be “Open source” so it will be secure and accessible(low cost) to everyone. On the other hand you should pay to have the right to call your friend and talk to him/her for a hour . (Attention to this) You Have to DEMAND to have the right NOT PAY to call at police or a hospital.
So we have to pay to Pay a Electronic game(maybe with lower cast but we have too). We have to pay to have a Office Suite for your Job but not for your home. We Should DEMAND to have an Open Source OS. We should not demand The Os to be Totally free but you Have to Demand to be very Cheap meaning accessible to everyone. All the extras is up to the Producer it will supply to us open, free, or shareware. Don’t forget If something is a Academic Product We have to Demand to be Under GPL and free if it is the creation of a Company then we have to Demand to be under GPL only if it will be the “only solution”.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:The Free Software Community After 20 Years: Wit
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 13, 2004 08:11 PMI think that first of all we should consider what “open source” is and if we don’t have a definition for this we should find one. What I am asking you here is to think what you imaging that most people think that Open Source is. Is it a Free software meaning that you don’t have to pay foe it? Is it just “Open” meaning you have access to the source code but you pay for it?
Let’s say that it is a just Open and you have to pay match less to have it that a non-open software. Then what about the copyrights. why something I give it to the open source community can someone use it to gain money with out pain? On the other hand why not be a Public Knowledge the way a “browser” works or the “drivers works”. Mathematics is under GPL meaning that everyone have the rights to use them free why not the source code of a “browser”?
The answer to all this has 3 step:
1. The problem of the “scaling of use”.
2. The problem of the Money.
3. The definition of what the software is.
1. Let’s think about books. The books is the best container of Knowledge humanity have created so far.
a. Should you pay to get a book and its content ?YES
b. Is the Knowledge that they contain under GPL? Yes you can write a book using other book(but you can re produce exactly the same book)
2. Let think about Hardware.
a. Should you pay to buy a VLSI Cheap?Yes
b. Are intel,Amd, Motorola obliged to show you How they great it? NO
c. Are under GPL? Lets see
i. The Technology is while the Cheap is not
ii. Cheap could be “open” some times to universities but if you are a Company you should pay for it. (Very Reasonable I think)
d. You don’t know if in the hardware has the ability to give to others your Privet data but you still buy it?YES(I don’t trust them but have no choice)
3. This is the hard one.
a. Is software a Machine? Yes it is (that’s the way we develop it like a VM)
b. Is software a spiritual product? Yes it is
c. Is it art? yes it is look at OpenGL
d. Is it maths ? yes it is -> so it is under GPL
e. …
What I am saying here is that Freedom is to give you Software Product however you want such as free, open, non-open, Shareware e.t.c. Secondly If a hole system is used form almost all the people then its source code MAST be under general Knowledge. We have the right to know how it works in every detail so it can be possible to check if it “respects” the human Privacy.
Finally, I think Open source is great because it proves that Human thought and creation there is no need to be under a Huge Companies Handling. Secondly it proves that there is need the Knowledge to be under Public License but NOT the PRODUCT of the knowledge too. Finally, It is important to consider the scaling. Telephone is a need and the Telephone service mast be “Open source” so it will be secure and accessible(low cost) to everyone. On the other hand you should pay to have the right to call your friend and talk to him/her for a hour . (Attention to this) You Have to DEMAND to have the right NOT PAY to call at police or a hospital.
So we have to pay to Pay a Electronic game(maybe with lower cast but we have too). We have to pay to have a Office Suite for your Job but not for your home. We Should DEMAND to have an Open Source OS. We should not demand The Os to be Totally free but you Have to Demand to be very Cheap meaning accessible to everyone. All the extras is up to the Producer it will supply to us open, free, or shareware. Don’t forget If something is a Academic Product We have to Demand to be Under GPL and free if it is the creation of a Company then we have to Demand to be under GPL only if it will be the “only solution”.
#