|
The problem isn't the giving or the
using of what I given. It is when
patents are granted, the taking from the commons of what is given to the
commons supported by taxpayer dollars and sponsored by the very organizations
that encourage the giving. You can't separate them,
Stephen. Like those who dislike
these discussions, they blind themselves to the bad to reap the good and then
want to squelch anyone who notices it. That is why the comparisons are made to
the charade played in the Beltway for the last two administrations. It is a rip off except it is being paid
in blood in that case. We do
have a different issue here, but if the process at ISO plays out unencumbered
by these politics as it should, that would work, but it seldom does because of
the smoke of 'openness' or 'rights' or 'illegal
means'. It's ALL
FUD and it is sponsored FUD. I don't know of a clean way so
process is what we have.
David Megginson tries to make the case that
process is bad. Process is all we
have and those who try to take that away from you may be as Tim Bray labels
the, "tools or fools" or both, but take notice who profits, who
gets the fine positions in the big companies and leads you into the sheep
shearing line and the sad bit is you are so easily led. Process is ALL you have. If MS despite their bungling plays to
the process in accordance with the process, then they implement products that
meet the market needs, they win fairly. If in the face of competition,
companies like IBM, Red Hat, Sun and others put FUD on the street, fund the
attacks, and encourage the pile on in the face of process, then they are the
villains in this piece. I've
friends in all of those companies but at some point the ethics have to match
the actions or the willingness to submit to process dies. The magic dies. So here we are waiting for comments to be
resolved. len -----Original
Message----- Ayn Rand was right. She was, but, for the most part, this is not about that. Open source is not anti-objectivism. For many people, via the mechanisms above and others, it is in fact a good embodiement of objectivism. Power to the people by using the power of the people. Ayn was rightly denigrating the stealing / taxing / coopting of those who can to give / do / create to those who can't / won't and allowing the recipients to be guilt-free and even righteous about their "right" to receive. Open source is about giving, giving back when you receive, and a network effect / software-can-be-duplicated-for-free market where everyone benefits more than they put in. Just because dollars aren't changing hands as much doesn't mean that it isn't a market. |