[LUAU] the term "open source" is dead, says Eben Moglen

[Jim Thompson]

On Nov 24, 2006, at 2:39 PM, Julian Yap wrote:

> On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 10:58 -1000, Jimen Ching wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Julian Yap wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 13:25 -1000, Jimen Ching wrote:
>>>> YOU don't NEED to care.  A lot of people don't NEED to care.  As  
>>>> long as
>>>> there are people who do care and are willing to fight for those  
>>>> rights.
>>>> You'll continue to enjoy the benefits.  That's how it worked in  
>>>> the past.
>>>> That's how it's going to work in the future.  What you're seeing  
>>>> now is
>>>> just the process...
>>>
>>> That takes the view that there's enough people fighting for  
>>> freedom in
>>> the first place and that they will actually win.
>>
>> True.  Are you saying this view is wrong semantically, wrong  
>> ethically, or
>> wrong in some other way?
>
> Semantically, saying people don't need to care is wrong.  It's like
> saying, you don't need to vote.  Just replace the word 'care' with
> 'vote' in your first paragraph.

In order for society to function, we must all express a basic level  
of caring for, and empathizing with, our fellow human beings (as well as
other life forms on this planet, and, indeed, the planet itself.)

Radical ideas are often met with a response from the cultural immune  
system.    When somebody goes outside the cultural norms, the culture  
tries to protect itself.
This is why we label people who express radical ideas (odd thoughts,  
etc) as "insane" or perhaps just "eccentric".  Its society working to  
protect itself.   Software should be Free (as in Freedom) is a  
radical idea, as it works against the accepted norm of being able to  
charge (again and again and again) for the product of one's labors.    
It may well be, however,
that it is better for *society* (as a whole) for software to be  
shared.   In our society, the author of the software gets to make a  
choice.

should we not honor that choice?

>
>> It's my observation that the number of people who fight (meaning  
>> actively
>> doing something beyond writing to your congressman) are a lot less  
>> than
>> the number of people who benefit.  Are you suggesting otherwise?
>
> Depends what side you're 'fighting for'.  You could be fighting for  
> big
> business in which case the number of people who benefit is a minority
> (who then wield this power to do things like change laws so it stays
> that way).

Frankly, in a representative republic (news flash: we do not live in  
a *democracy* (nor do we want to!)) it doesn't take that many people  
to change things.

>> Also, when I said peopled aren't needed to care about these  
>> issues, it
>> doesn't mean they aren't wanted.  If people want to join the  
>> fight, I'm
>> sure they will be welcomed.
>
> True.
>
> We're speaking to Linux and Unix users here and to say that they don't
> need to care or be aware of the issues we are talking about isn't
> correct.
>
> Otherwise, you can disregard any thread in this mailing list that  
> talks
> about such issues and continue going with the lowest cost vendor.

course, if they go out of business, you may wish you could maintain  
the software they sold you...

jim