On 10/09/2013 08:10 PM, Bob Ham wrote:
On Sun, 2013-10-06 at 08:42 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
1. you are talking about "open SOURCE hardware" (which I call "free hardware")
No. I've explicitly refrained from distinguishing between such labels
because I'm aware that they are not as well defined in the domain of
hardware as they are in the domain of software.
As far as I have been able to tell, you have been arguing the entire
time from the position that the terms *are* well defined, and that
therefore the project should be using those definitions.
Now you are suddenly saying that the terms *aren't* well defined, which
is a contradiction of that position.
This appears to me to be either an admission that your position is
incorrect, or an admission that you are being hypocritical (like you
accused Nikolaus of being).
(Note also that you just admitted that you can't use arguments from the
software domain, since you said that it has different definitions of the
terms than the hardware domain does (even if they're similar). This
holds even if you argue that the "as" in "as well" is important.)
On 10/09/2013 08:23 PM, Bob Ham wrote:
And the next day, when you've found an old definition that accords with
your view, suddenly that one definition would have obviated any
discussion.
I understood that as being not because *he* needed such a definition to
follow, but because it appears that *you* do. Basically, that you
apparently want everybody to follow a known definition, and this shows
that they are - which could have saved us a lot of this thread (assuming
you accepted the definition as a valid one, and aren't arguing just to
argue).
(Disclaimer: I haven't actually read that definition (yet), just going
by what I've seen in this thread.)
I also don't really see the contradiction you claim is present in the
out-of-context snippets you posted, but that might just be me.
--
Regards,
Frode Austvik
___
Openmoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
