> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Richard Fish > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 2:07 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How To Play WMV (thread drift > -slaveryware) > > > On 9/29/06, Bob Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not saying he doesn't have the freedom to use them, I'm suggesting that > > they are inaccurate and their connotations don't reflect the true > > relationship between vendors and users, and for that reason their use should > > be reconsidered. > > But they *do* accurately reflect the relationship between vendors and > users from Duncan's viewpoint. Your viewpoint is obviously different, > but doesn't mean yours is the only "true" one. Oh please, spare me the relative truth crap. You can argue all you want that it's true from Duncan's perspective because that's the way it *feels* to him. In the end that's just feel good rationalization and total bullshit. It conveniently avoids the confrontational point, namely that there isn't any hard concrete logic and reason to support or justify the usage of words such as slaveryware and freedomware. > > When a user (who can't read/write source code) has an OSS app or utility > > break frequently, should they feel enslaved? > > No. They should feel empowered to learn about programming and help > fix it, or entice others to do so. That's obviously not what currently happens for the vast majority of people using OSS, why is that, what's wrong? Secondly, if you think thats going to change anytime soon, I'd love to know what evidence supports such a belief. -- Regards Bob Young -- [email protected] mailing list
