...that private individuals and private industry would _never have come up with these things_ on their own...if they had been given their tax dollars back and been allowed to invest them where they saw fit. I would argue just the opposite, that they would have come to fruition either (A) faster or (B) more efficiently (in terms of capital allocation) without government "aid."
In economics, this is known as "opportunity cost." You can either spend your money how you see fit, or give it to Uncle Sam to spend on your behalf.
Never thought I had it in me. Yes, AC, I do agree that there are more important things in life than money (getting laid, for just one instance). And perhaps I was doing a bit of Hasty G (a "nice" Hasty G, tho:-) on the poor guy. But this is an opinion I hear time and time again re: Bill Gates.
I have read one of his biographies (_Gates_) and, yes, I am aware that:
1.) He was born into a wealthy and well-respected Seattle family. 2.) He went to an exclusive prep school (Lakeside), and later to an exclusive university (Harvard). 3.) He is fairly smart (800 on math SAT, upper 700's on verbal, 800 on three Achievement tests)
Which of these three does he truly "deserve"? If you agree with John Rawls, you would say none of them. If you agree with me, you will say he deserves all of them. His father (Bill Gates II) has the right to spend his money any way he wishes, including his son's education. And he is just as deserving of his IQ as you are of yours.
...sense of life than they do about Bill Gates. According to you, money is obtained through "luck" -- either you have it or you don't, right? So money is not that important to you, as it's just a crapshoot as to who has it and who doesn't.
I guess the terms "earning money" and "making money" mean the same to you as "stealing from someone else" or "winning the lottery." Maybe if you understood the meaning money a little better (or had to _earn_ it yourself), you would have more respect for it.
Are you out of college yet? Do you live with your parents? Have you had to earn your own money to survive? Maybe money would be more "important" to you if you did.
...that was a very inspiring speech you just gave, but I don't see how it is relevant to the very specific critique of the license that Bruce made.
This isn't about politics (BP was only one of THREE people to sign the document); it is about protecting the investment that programmers who spend their "free" time (time is never free) on these projects are not left high and dry when a company like I.B.M. or Apple decides that there is some remote possiblity for an IP suit -- so they must destroy all copies of the code they have worked on and relinquish their hard work to Apple/I.B.M. so they can continue to use it in their commercial products.
Pretty simple to me. It is the same reason that Golgotha Forever switched to the more-restrictive GPL after Crack.com released their code under the restriction-free GPL. I don't want some game company (maybe a competitor to the company that I work for in my day job) taking my freely-contributed code and using it against me -- AND keeping it secret/proprietary!
Yeah, so let's just stick with RPG/ILE, right. This guy is an AS/400 fanatic, I can tell. Sure fella, data validation in the OS...brilliant idea. That IBM midrange philosophy is just so forward-thinking.
"IBM operating systems may not be user friendly...but at least they are slow."
Slashdot Mirror
Sue the gun manufacturers for shooting deaths. Yeah, that makes sense.
shane
http://www.linuxiso.org
There you go. No reason to take time out of your busy day to write prose extolling the virtues of Linux.
...that private individuals and private industry would _never have come up with these things_ on their own...if they had been given their tax dollars back and been allowed to invest them where they saw fit. I would argue just the opposite, that they would have come to fruition either (A) faster or (B) more efficiently (in terms of capital allocation) without government "aid."
In economics, this is known as "opportunity cost." You can either spend your money how you see fit, or give it to Uncle Sam to spend on your behalf.
shane
...monopolies. Janet Reno and Joel Klein should be suing themselves for protecting this ridiculous monopoly.
"The only lasting monopolies have been government enforced."
-- Alan Greenspan (Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board)
shane
...monopolies. Janet Reno and Joel Klein should be suing themselves for protecting this rediculous monopoly.
"The only lasting monopolies have been government enforced."
shane
Never thought I had it in me. Yes, AC, I do agree that there are more important things in life than money (getting laid, for just one instance). And perhaps I was doing a bit of Hasty G (a "nice" Hasty G, tho :-) on the poor guy. But this is an opinion I hear time and time again re: Bill Gates.
I have read one of his biographies (_Gates_) and, yes, I am aware that:
1.) He was born into a wealthy and well-respected Seattle family.
2.) He went to an exclusive prep school (Lakeside), and later to an exclusive university (Harvard).
3.) He is fairly smart (800 on math SAT, upper 700's on verbal, 800 on three Achievement tests)
Which of these three does he truly "deserve"? If you agree with John Rawls, you would say none of them. If you agree with me, you will say he deserves all of them. His father (Bill Gates II) has the right to spend his money any way he wishes, including his son's education. And he is just as deserving of his IQ as you are of yours.
shane
...sense of life than they do about Bill Gates. According to you, money is obtained through "luck" -- either you have it or you don't, right? So money is not that important to you, as it's just a crapshoot as to who has it and who doesn't.
I guess the terms "earning money" and "making money" mean the same to you as "stealing from someone else" or "winning the lottery." Maybe if you understood the meaning money a little better (or had to _earn_ it yourself), you would have more respect for it.
Are you out of college yet? Do you live with your parents? Have you had to earn your own money to survive? Maybe money would be more "important" to you if you did.
shane
...that was a very inspiring speech you just gave, but I don't see how it is relevant to the very specific critique of the license that Bruce made.
This isn't about politics (BP was only one of THREE people to sign the document); it is about protecting the investment that programmers who spend their "free" time (time is never free) on these projects are not left high and dry when a company like I.B.M. or Apple decides that there is some remote possiblity for an IP suit -- so they must destroy all copies of the code they have worked on and relinquish their hard work to Apple/I.B.M. so they can continue to use it in their commercial products.
Pretty simple to me. It is the same reason that Golgotha Forever switched to the more-restrictive GPL after Crack.com released their code under the restriction-free GPL. I don't want some game company (maybe a competitor to the company that I work for in my day job) taking my freely-contributed code and using it against me -- AND keeping it secret/proprietary!
shane
Yeah, so let's just stick with RPG/ILE, right. This guy is an AS/400 fanatic, I can tell. Sure fella, data validation in the OS...brilliant idea. That IBM midrange philosophy is just so forward-thinking.
"IBM operating systems may not be user friendly...but at least they are slow."
shane
I took it myself from Dexter Kozen in SP 96 :-)
shane