mike3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Feb 1, 6:40 am, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> mike3 writes: >> > But if it's not Free, then how does that jive with "Gnutianism"'s moral/ >> > ethical codes that says creating and using non-free/"proprietary" >> > software is wrong? >> >> It doesn't. So what? Do you think one is required to sign an oath of >> loyalty and obediance before being permitted to write Free Software? > > No I didn't think that. The question was though, if we consider the > creation and usage of non-free/"proprietary" software wrong, then by > contributing to that creation by developing it it to get paid, isn't > that also wrong? It would seem so to me.
Going beyond sustainability is not useful in the long run for any goal. It may be unethical not to donate blood to people in need of it. But that does not mean that one is a bad person if one does not let oneself be drained completely. The creation of proprietary software is a sterile act. It creates nothing permanently useful, but it also does not destroy anything. If it is the most efficient use of your time to create the resources for creating free software, so what? If that still annoys you, work on changing the rules of the world rather than pretending to be able to ignore them. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
