> > >The issue is not the modification of the hardware, per se, but rather >the data that can then be pirated after the modification is made. >Therefore, the one alternative is to limit piracy. In order to do that, >strict policing of data streams is necessary. > > This is a logic conclusion only if you assume that you own the flow of data. This way we will soon be policing what other people think, because may be they are using our thoughts without paying us for that. The whole problem boils down to the fact that we humans believee that when we think something we own that thought. This wrong perspective follows from a misunderstanding of what thoughts are. We can not own thoughts the same way that we can not own the air of the planet. However, we have already seen many who have profitted from selling air. This point of view (of rejecting the property of thoughts) is as defendable as the point of view of accepting it. And it seems to be very close to the point in a Debian/Linux mailing list. This is free software, GPL after all.
>So that is your choice: give up freedom to modify hardware, or submit >all data moving in and out of your control to public scrutiny. Since the >former is both distasteful and fundamentally impossible to enforce, the >later is inevitable, IMHO. > > Absolutely not. This can be only the point of view if we see the universe as a huge shop full of merchandise. But this is far from the way other people perceive surrounding reality. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
