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

[Mike VandeVelde]

Yes it's an odd argument: coders need to make money, coders can't make 
money from writing free software, therefor coders can't write free software.

Starts off sounding reasonable (although not true in *every* case), goes 
through obviously false, and ends up ridiculous.

"Until we can take the financial aspects seriously & prove ways of 
maintaining a successful business, very few are going to take it serious."

If that had been the driving force for humanity throughout all of 
history, we never would have gotten anywhere. What a sadly limited point 
of view. Just because you can't think of a way to make money off of it, 
is no reason to discourage those who can, or much more importantly those 
whose main concern is not immediate return on investment.

A thriving public domain is an economic driver in itself. If you are 
blinkered by economics, then think of free software as an investment in 
the future. Standing on the shoulders of giants isn't very fun when they 
all have their hands out for royalties and license fees.

Don't worry about getting rich. Use free software where you have a need 
for it (or simply an opportunity to avoid licensing terms & fees), 
contribute to free software where you have the ability. And then guess 
what - free software will grow, no matter what the financials look like. 
If you can find a way to make money with free software, such as 
providing services, then congratulations go for it! If not then go ahead 
and keep doing what you are doing.

That's how I would respond.

Mike VandeVelde

Simon Bridge 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
> >
> > 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