On Wednesday 10 March 2010 06:28 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> We wouldn't be having this argument about "give it away for free" if it
> were about making television programs. For well over half a century,
> people have made television programs and given them away for free.
We have that model in s
Graham Todd posted on Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:04:38 + as excerpted:
> There IS nothing beyond the life we see and live now, and there's no
> need to create supernatural fairy stories to explain the unexplainable.
Thanks, but I don't quite see how that addresses the question I asked
(which isn't
Alan Meyer posted on Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:04:55 -0800 as excerpted:
> I can't speak for anyone else since, not being a believer myself, it's
> awkward for me to say what the purpose of God and religion would be if I
> were to believe in God and religion but not believe in an afterlife or
> an immor
On 03/10/2010 03:29 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:08:42 am Joe Zeff wrote:
And no, I don't have any "reading comprehension" issues. I was
responding to the spirit of your comments, not the words themselves.
You clearly have issues with the idea of the profit motive
By "cl
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:08:42 am Joe Zeff wrote:
> And no, I don't have any "reading comprehension" issues. I was
> responding to the spirit of your comments, not the words themselves.
> You clearly have issues with the idea of the profit motive
By "clearly" you mean in your own fevered imaginati
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 07:24:43 am Rob wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 March 2010 01:34 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Google hasn't just released the Go programming language as free,
> > open source software out of charity,
>
> If Google were primarily known for Go, you might have a point, but
> Google has
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 01:34 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Google hasn't just released the Go programming language as free, open
> source software out of charity,
If Google were primarily known for Go, you might have a point, but Google
has the specific policy of encouraging their employees t
On 03/10/2010 10:42 AM, Rob wrote:
While it may be that most of the lines of code written in the world will
never be free, most of it also has free-as-in-freedom alternatives. Our
choice as free software enthusiasts is to choose the free alternatives and,
as you suggest, skip the proprietary stu
On 03/10/2010 10:34 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Society has made a choice to create the legal fiction of "copyright" out
of a belief that this will promote the useful arts and sciences.
And, speaking as a writer (Six time Nanowrimo winner, none published.
Yet.) I'm glad they have. Writing nove
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 12:13 pm, Joe Zeff wrote:
> I support it, but I, at least, also accept that most software will never
> be free, and that software companies have the right to keep their code
> proprietary if that's what they want. If you don't like it, don't do
> business with them, but
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:13:37 am Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 03/10/2010 06:12 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > I could continue, but I trust I've made
> > my point.
>
> Yes, you have: you can make a living while giving away your code if
> *and only if* you have an employer who will support you while you do
>
On 03/10/2010 06:12 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I could continue, but I trust I've made
my point.
Yes, you have: you can make a living while giving away your code if *and
only if* you have an employer who will support you while you do it.
You seem to believe that there is One True Way for sof
Leslie asked for a business model where he can make a living while still
releasing code as open source. Red Hat do it. Canonical does it. Sun
does it, although who knows what will happen now that they've been
bought out by Oracle. Even ID Software does it (although they release
their games as
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:21:32 pm Alan Meyer wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano
>
> > On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:25:06 am Leslie Newell wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > > My challenge to you is to come up with a business model where
> > > I can both eat and make my code open source.
> >
> > It works for Eric Raymond, Guido
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 23:41:17 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> uttered these words:
> what's the
> point if there's nothing beyond the life we see and live now?
>
> If someone wishes to enlighten me...
[snipped]
We die, our bodies rot, and we then provide humus for plants to grow
You mean something like the open standard OpenDocument used by
OpenOffice, Abiword, WordPerfect, KOffice, Google Docs and many others?
Find me a standard that handles the data I need to use and I'll use it.
It works for Eric Raymond, Guido van Rossum, Richard Stallman, and
hundreds of oth
16 matches
Mail list logo
