On Nov 24, 2006, at 10:02 AM, Hawaii Linux Institute wrote:
Jimen Ching wrote:
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Julian Yap wrote:
On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 13:25 -1000, Jimen Ching wrote:
YOU don't NEED to care. A lot of people don't NEED to care. As
long as
there are people who do care and are willing to fight for those
rights.
You'll continue to enjoy the benefits. That's how it worked in the
past.
That's how it's going to work in the future. What you're seeing
now is
just the process...
That takes the view that there's enough people fighting for
freedom in
the first place and that they will actually win.
True. Are you saying this view is wrong semantically, wrong
ethically, or wrong in some other way?
It's my observation that the number of people who fight (meaning
actively doing something beyond writing to your congressman) are a
lot
less than the number of people who benefit. Are you suggesting
otherwise?
Also, when I said peopled aren't needed to care about these
issues, it
doesn't mean they aren't wanted. If people want to join the fight,
I'm sure they will be welcomed.
--jc
Good point Jimen.
I want to add that, when LUAU was being coagulated, one of the names
being tossed around was LUAW (Linux, Unix, And Windows). There was
never any intent to exclude non-Free or even proprietary software.
Indeed, many of the early participants (e.g., founders of Digital
Island, World Place, Lava Net, etc.) based their business on either
Unix
or Windows NT.
Which is fine.
Whether we are using proprietary, or "open" (whatever that means), or
"free" (again, whatever that means) software, should be a business
choice, to be dictated by our needs, our locally unique business
environment, and/or our personal tastes.
Free has a very specific meaning here. 'Open', far less so.
You do great injustice to pretend otherwise.
Your "business choice" doesn't get to trample on my rights,
however. Thats not restricted to the realm of software, either.
It is probably OK to promote one form of licensing in this forum.
But doing too much of that (i.e.,
someone thinks his/her "freedom" is more important than that of
others)
runs the risk of driving potential participants away, something
that, I
believe, none of us has a right to do.
If my freedom more important than yours? No, and yours isn't more
important than mine, thanks.
Personally I got pissed off when someone keeps trying to impose his or
her belief on me. And keep in mind that this is supposed to be a
low-profile, AnonymoUs forum. There is no U in the word
"Advocate". Wayne
Wait, aren't you trying to impose your belief on me?
Jim
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
