On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:01:50PM -0800, Rich Braun wrote: > He'd already decided that software should be free, and explained > that programmers shouldn't be in it for the money. [...] > But I think back those 3 decades and see that RMS really meant those > words he said to me.
I don't think anyone who's REALLY paid any attention to rms doubts that. But it's naive and impractical. Everyone needs to eat, and nearly every one of us want--perhaps even need--a little bit extra from our lives. Writing software is not simple, and writing GOOD software is actually pretty hard... You ought to be able to earn a decent living at it. There are some very altruistic people who would pass on that to do something "good" but most won't. What I do think is, the operating system that runs your computer should be included in the price, and it should not suck. You should not have to pay for incessant upgrades, and you should have access to the source so that if it has deficiencies for your needs, you can potentially address them. But someone still has to pay for the work to be done, in some fashion or other... > Picture a world without FSF/LPF. Who else could have done it? I can't parse LPF, but I think BSD would have gotten there, eventually... even without rms and the FSF. Or someone else would have done it... Like Linus Torvalds. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
