The difference is that one attempts to work for the greater good (but not
necessarily sacrifice itself in that process, even FOSS developers have to
eat), while the other attempts to maximise profit for itself (and solely for
itself) *regardless* whether this is at cost to others or not.
It's Symbiosis vs Parasitism. Fairness vs Abuse.
Horst,
You state it more clearly than most; the above paragraph-type seems to be gracefully accepted each time it comes up on the list, which is often enough. I would like to see a little more nuance in this recurring moralism. I think it's essential, in fact, if this list is to help construct a result (such as major uptake of FOSS software in healthcare environments), that we lose the mini-sneer when talking about commercial entities.
There are some people here (I am one) who believe in the life-style model of self-employment (risk and adventure) and Commerce (I make it, you want it, we reach a fair deal, thank you's all around, we stay in touch) as a legitimate way of birthing something, then nurturing it. There is definitely a moral position hidden away there. if you don't look too closely, we resemble Good People.
When I decided to develop medical software with my small team of developers, it was obvious to us, for reasons that this list would certainly approve, that that software had to be FOSS. So, we are a for-profit that does not resemble M$, Dick Cheney, or Parmalat in very many ways. Hey, we might even fail in our endeavor.
So I guess what I'm asking here is that people on this list be sensitive to those of us who are betting the farm on our version of the ideal, who have abandoned the relative comfort of being doctor, academic, civil servant, or salaried IT staff.
Or have I misunderstood something?
Respectfully submitted,
Denny Adelman
