On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, David Jackson wrote: > GNU/Linux is a technology -> technology is science. The Free Software > Foundation spent what little money it had on development, and the end > result is a product that they really won't ever see a profit on. They > did it because it benefits society as a whole (indeed, civilization as a > whole).
I agree 100% with everything you said. GNU developers are scientists, and will pursue science for the sake of science. They'll live as starving artists to pursue their science. Why did they have little money? Did they ever expect a multi-million dollar investment into a product they'll never see a profit on? Luckily they didn't need a lot of money to do great things... the Xprize project does need a lot of money to do great things. There are always exceptions, as Shannon noted. But if private funding for the sake of science were that easy to come by, then professors wouldn't spend so much time writing grant proposals. > It's a pretty cynical viewpoint that sees funding for science as only an > investment with an expected financial return. I see *private* funding for science as an investment with expected financial return. The NSF and universities spend billions per year on research, with no immediate profit expectations. They do it because it benefits everyone. But profitable entities expect a profit on major investments. Last i looked, FSF was non-profit. Like it or not, a lot of the greatest breakthroughs in exploration, science, and technology were motivated by profit. BUT! There's nothing wrong with that. Science for the sake of science is awesome. And in the meantime if someone came make some money off the industry they created, without exploiting it, then good for them. ray
