On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 23:40 +0530, Yadu Nand wrote: > Well, we can always be firm on freedom and be not fanatic at the same time > right ? Don't you think we could do that ,rather that push our demands for > freedom to the extend that it puts us in misery ? If we want absolute freedom > it'll be at a huge cost... most likely, at the cost of other's freedom.
Of course, the cost of achieving freedom, once we have lost it, will always be high. Just recollect the human cost of any freedom struggle (Indian, South African, ...). That is why we insist on retaining freedom once we have got it. But, in the case of software, I don't see any serious human costs. And I don't see how other's freedom is going to be affected. First of all, I don't understand who these "others" are. > What I'm trying to say is that if for the sake of "freedom" we do something > like > keep away all proprietary drivers, the hardware manufacturers will have less > interest than if we gave them an opportunity to run linux-drivers. > Once they see > what their linux-drivers do for their h/w they'd move towards making the code > open and free. Well, I don't see how that can happen, too. I think companies made the drivers free because they found that it is advantageous for them to do so. What could have been the advantage? The only thing I see is that they need not invest in developing the drivers. That would be done by the community. In any case, drivers never brought them any income. Moreover, they found that if they do not free their drivers, they would lose the market to their competitors who have made their drivers free, or for which free drivers are available. This was made possible by the community that decided to purchase only hardware that had free drivers. Yes, this must have created some difficulties for some people, but that is the cost one willingly pays for freedom. Think of the thousands who have died in wars, trying to defend their countries against external (and now even internal) aggression. > I feel that holding on to "freedom" too tightly shoos away average > ppl too. Yes, of course, it does. Even the Indian struggle for freedom kept a lot of people away because they found that their life was comfortable working with the rulers. This happens in every country where there is a freedom movement. There will always be a section of the people siding with the rulers because they are happy in the present situation. But remember the popular poem: First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist; Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me. Best -- V. Sasi Kumar http://swatantryam.blogspot.com -- "Freedom is the only law". "Freedom Unplugged" http://www.ilug-tvm.org You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ilug-tvm" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For details visit the website: www.ilug-tvm.org or the google group page: http://groups.google.com/group/ilug-tvm?hl=en
