Re: [fsf-community-team] Argument from economic nessesity

[Edward Cherlin]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 19:11, Simon Bridge <address@hidden> wrote:
> Something popped up on the NZLUG lists today - anyone want to respond?
> (Note, this is the argument from economic nessesity, which we see idn
> various forms often. Good practice. The trick is not to get drawn into
> side issues.) Here it is:
>
>> Playing devil's advocate here, and there questions are in no simple
>> way to convey to new-comers to the game

All straw men.

1) Free Software companies hire coders. I will just cite IBM and Red
Hat, but there are plenty more. Other companies write Free Software on
contract. Governments have begun to think that all code they
commission, except secret defense and intelligence code, should be put
under Free licenses. Media, including textbooks, also.

2) MS complains (on behalf of its poor, put-upon customers ^_^) that
Free Software sysadmins, coders, and other professionals cost more
than people who do Windows. This appears to be because Free Software
is more productive and of higher quality, so those pros are worth the
extra money. The Wall Street Journal is the most implacable enemy of
Free Software in what is known as the Mainstream Media (MSM). WSJ
considers Freedom bad for business. The business of the largest
companies, that is, the ones with the greatest amounts of
anti-competitive market power, the ones most likely to spend money on
WSJ ads. The actual economy, which counts benefits to small business
and to consumers as essential measures of the effectiveness of free
and competitive markets, is no concern of the WSJ.

>> I'm not saying that making money should be the primary concern, but it
>> should rank up there... Without some sort of stable, fixed income, how
>> are full-time coders (needed for quality-control; see current
>> news-crisis) supposed to get paid (customization only goes so far), or
>> any expense be paid on marketing or any of the other day-to-day
>> operations required for a successful, growing enterprise (paying for
>> office-space, power, taxes, etc)?
>>
>> Re philosophy: I understand the what & why, but it still does not
>> address some fundamental issues: I cannot eat, send the kids to
>> school, or pay my rent with good intentions/philosophical principals.
>> Eventually I'll reach a point where I'd have to supplement my income,
>> and selling shrink-wrapped software with a limited shelf-life is a
>> simple & effective way to address such shortcomings (albeit a
>> cop-out).
>> Until we can take the financial aspects seriously & prove ways of
>> maintaining a successful business, very few are going to take it
>> serious.
>>
>> The problem with the FSF campaigns where that they had a negative
>> message attacking their opponents, and people are turned off by that
>> approach (honey vs vinegar), and they're preaching to the choir.
>> ms are MASTERS of marketing & manipulation, and often it more
>> important to make people good about their choice of purchase than
>> actually providing a good product (see vista & win-me; TOTAL rubbish,
>> but people still bought it by the millions, despite being TOLD it's
>> absolute rubbish)
>>
>> If FLOSS plans to "grow up", "go mainstream/highstreed" & be totally
>> user-accessible (and not just a really cool tool for
>> techies/hobbyists), then it may have to get it's hands dirty
>>
>>
>> There are those out there that have managed to build successful
>> FLOSS-based businesses; they usually operate on the basis of providing
>> hosted services (which RMS seems to have a beef with), or the
>> customization of existing FLOSS systems.
>> I've not really found much deviation from these models, and IMO, it's
>> an *extremely* limited scope compared to the entire economic
>> landscape.
>>
>> Is there something I've missed? (I'm, pretty sure there's a lot)
>>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Edward Mokurai (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) Cherlin
Silent Thunder is my name, and Children are my nation.
The Cosmos is my dwelling place, the Truth my destination.
http://www.earthtreasury.org/