>
> I know I am right. Our country has produced boundless mythological classics
> on this very topic :-).
>
> Well, let's not keep on carrying on with another myth, in that case. Any
> businessmodel that emphasises synonymising 'cutting and bleeding' with
> 'excellence' won't be completely kosher.
>
To be pedantic, we are talking of "cutting-edges and bleeding-edges"; not
"cutting and bleeding" :-)
> We have, on the contrary, numerous examples from history, the more recent of
> which are probably not completely mangled from reality, of attempts to do
> things with violence, and we do not have a high record of success with them.
> I do not think we have even one, for that matter.
> I have every respect for the view on violence expressed in the Gita, for
> instance, but that does not mean that I set about beating up everyone I know,
> or think that path will lead me to peace.
I wasn't at all talking of physical violence. Without arguments and friction of
thoughts and ideas the right thing to do will never bubble up. Being a pacifist
in an indecent time is dangerous. But then I hope that we're all activists
here. As far as the Gita is concerned, when two parties that have inflexible
positions on "their turf" I doubt if anything other than resorting to physical
violence will help. But that is a separate topic...
> To echo what KK said, in the war of words, it is the sustainable ones that
> will bring lasting value, while the flash-in-the-pans will fall by history's
> wayside.
"Freedom to do what one wants, while allowing others to enjoy the same freedoms
at the same time." <--- That should be a good measure of sustenance.
Coming back to the topic of the original thread, there are people I know who
are afraid of "Free & Open", not only in software but when it comes to society
at large. Again, I won't hesitate to point out that may of these people are
products of the developed world. Free and Open just gets brings them negative
connotations. Unthinkable? Not very...
To cite an already documented example... Alan Cox in a kernel release towards
2.2.20 inserted a strange tag in the changelog. It said, "Security fixes.
Details censored in accordance with the US DMCA". When quizzed about it in a
interview, he replies... "It was simply a matter of following the law and
avoiding liability. The fact that American citizens are forbidden by their own
government from hearing, or speaking the truth turns itself into a political
statement." And, he goes on to say, "It's an unfortunate situation when the
major Linux conference pretty much has to be in Canada because the US will not
let some of the attendees even pass through their airspace, and many of the
others fear to visit. I just hope that over time things will improve." This was
sometime in January 2002.
Compared to this, I think the issue of calling something "sharing surface" or
"collaborating space" at the expense of "cutting-edge" and "bleeding-edge" is
moot; especially when "Free & Open" haven't yet won. And, in a lot of ways
India and maybe Brazil are the last straws...
Cheers,
Amol Hatwar
_______________________________________________
network mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
