Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> At 2005-09-23 16:35:27 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
>>What does Cray / NaSA and the likes actually give to the community -
>>will they give their source code - ever. I have my doubts - so then
>>what is their stake ?
> 
> 
> NASA has contributed a *lot* to Linux. Donald Becker's work at NASA is
> how Linux first got into the supercomputing space (Beowulf), and he's
> the reason the kernel has such excellent Ethernet device support. Ask
> Google about "cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov" sometime.
> 
> I don't remember offhand if Cray has contributed anything, but did you
> know that the NSA (the US National Security Agency) was responsible for
> the development of SELinux? Not only did they contribute it back, most
> distributions ship with it these days.- 

Thanks - thats education and good to know and 3 cheers for NASA - really
> 
> (But that's not the point. It *doesn't matter* what anyone's stake is.
> Anyone may use free software for whatever reason, as long as they are
> complying with the terms of the license. It doesn't matter if you like
> them or not, or what they believe in. That's what "free" means.)

I won't argue at the licensing terms - of course they may be complying 
with the licenses  and again everyone is free to choose whichever way 
they want to go. But is open source and the *community initiative * only 
  about about complying with licenses. There is that cliched statement 
of freedom - "ones freedom ends when it begins to affect anothers"  - so 
their ( the solid  state commercial interests) freedom does not just end 
with everything is *free forever and after* thats the ultimate fantasy 
of the capitalist crowd- they are not (rather should not be) free to 
choose to *not contribute* - irrespective of licenses. Because it would 
be nice to think we are not talking only licenses and legalities. Call 
is social responsibility, call it a *"request from the community"*

This, however,  is from the view point of a community versus corporate 
  - where the community is the large amorphous mass (whose collective 
resources base is large but individual resource base disparately 
distributed) and the corporate are the proprietory privateers (who have 
even larger private and unshared resources) whose sole motive is profit, 
wherever it may come from and whatever the cost. So is there a 
responsibility with that freedom , to access code, to make profits etc 
and my uneducated question  is are they giving back from where they have 
taken -

Maybe for this discussion I bring my own baggage of what a communtiy 
should be like and what the big corporate brother is up too.


ram
> 
> -- ams
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected]
> http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
> Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> 
> Event: Freedel 2005, 17th & 18th September, 2005 - http://freedel.in
> 


_______________________________________________
ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Event: Freedel 2005, 17th & 18th September, 2005 - http://freedel.in

Reply via email to