fsuk-manchester
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Ubuntu !free


From: Noah Slater
Subject: Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Ubuntu !free
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 19:16:11 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 06:57:59PM +0100, Dave Crossland wrote:
> If some options are proprietary software, those options ought to be
> removed because distributing proprietary software is trampling
> people's freedom and is thus not a good idea.

I agree that non-free software does not have the Four Freedoms.

Talking about "freedoms" without clarification gives rise to...

> (I just want to point something out here: I'm not a religious person,
> and find your use of Christian terms like "repent" strange :-) I'm
> putting forward an ethical basis for software freedom. This basis is
> often sleighted as "religious," because people want to imply that it
> is irrational, and I wonder if this has subtley crept into your
> understanding of this issue. You don't seem to be sleighting the ideas
> in this way, but your use of religious words is suggestive... :-)

... the perception of moral absolutism! Hehe, sorry to bang on about this.

Religion's are a very familiar example of entire systems of society built on
moral absolutes, which is probably why a lot of Free Software supporters have
these charges leveled against them.

> If proprietary software is the only way to do something, then I really
> do tell people that they should not use that program, even though that
> they have no option, and if their job depends on it, they should
> refuse that job and get another job which respects their freedom -
> there are plenty of these jobs, I have one, its no big deal to get one
> in our industry.

Having a job which doesn't involve non-free software is a nice ideal that a lot
of people get to enjoy, some don't though and changing jobs is not easy for
everyone. As a young intelligent white male I feel your perspective of the job
market might, possibly, be a _little_ skewed. ;)

> However, if they are in an industry that does not yet have man jobs
> that can rely on free software, there is a huge opportunity waiting
> for them if they quit that job and start a new company that does the
> same work but leveraging free software. I work in graphic design as
> well as computing, and I am doing this too.

I know quite a few graphic designers (my father included) who have clearly
outlined that it is an area where there are absolutely no production quality
free software alternatives to the likes of Adobe and Quark.

GIMP is nice and all, but until it supports CMYK, suggesting it could be used by
the design industry for professional work is laughable. :(

Also, not everyone has:

 *) the skills to start a software business
 *) the money to start a software business
 *) time/interest to start a software business

> Joining a picket is unlikely to change things; quitting and starting a
> company to provide free software that meets banks' needs is more
> likely.

Why does it matter what software a bank uses in-house? As it is not distributed
the Four Freedoms do not apply to this. IIRC, Stallman explicitly stated this in
his talk in Manchester last Month.

> The only way to get rich is to own a business, and the best way to own a
> business in the software industry is to own a free software business.

Define "best"... ;)

> That's again an exaggeration; its clear that you like GNU but don't
> agree with its philosophy.

Absolutes, again. Maybe he half agrees? :p

-- 
Noah Slater - Bytesexual <http://bytesexual.org/>




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]