Richard Dobson wrote:
On 20/09/2011 22:24, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Interesting choice of words. You say agree, I would say recognise.
Do they put it to a vote? My thoughts (which you appear to equate with
things) are my own, and if I choose to share them with anyone else
that is my choice,
On 21/09/2011 09:38, Michael Chapman wrote:
..
What purpose is that? Who decides what the purpose is?
Unless one rejects inheritance taxes, wealth taxes, etc., etc. one
is left with the fact that one has accepted a situation where one has
'a balance'. Perhaps the worst imaginable situation
On 21/09/2011 17:11, Marc Lavallée wrote:
..
Information wants to be free is a 40 years old aphorism, not a scientific
statement, and it does not come from the free software movement. Its author
said later: Information Wants To Be Free. Information also wants to be
expensive..
More like 27
Le Wed, 21 Sep 2011 23:12:47 +0100,
Richard Dobson richarddob...@blueyonder.co.uk a écrit :
On 21/09/2011 17:11, Marc Lavallée wrote:
..
Information wants to be free is a 40 years old aphorism, not a
scientific statement, and it does not come from the free software
movement. Its author
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:49:37 - (GMT), Michael Chapman wrote:
The modern day pharmaceutical industry is perhaps the one exception to
the rule that patents are bad to humanity. Why is that? Well, because
it's remained the most sacred, shielded, unquestioned, and especially
for the longest
