If the truth is offensive, I'm not sorry to offend you in this way.
What other reasons have been given in opposition of free software? They're
always rooted in "But, I HAVE to make money." generally followed up silently
with "Lots of it." which is all the aforementioned qualities wrapped up in
My point, which you are taking out of context, was not offensive at all. It
was merely providing a vehicle in which your mind can conceptualize the
modern decimation of information and the staunching of the free flow of
ideas as the world quickly patents, copyrights, and tucks them away where
nobody else can use them.
That is the largest facet of the FSF's push. Not to take food from your
mouths certainly. Not to force any of you into an unreasonable lifestyle
just to make a point (RMS does that enough for all of us). But to try and
provide for the people a conceptual understanding that all information
belongs to humanity - not to individuals. Benefit from the glory of
discovering something new by putting your name on it - but don't hide it
behind legal jargon where it can ONLY benefit you.
Let's say I came up with a new algorithm for rendering polygons. It turned
out to boost a 50% increase in frame rate, was a simple change to the modern
driver architecture, and could work with all the newer video cards if they
used my algorithm.
Is it fair for me to hide that piece of code behind a patent and then sell a
video card (or license to a single manufacturer) that has the proper
drivers, hailing it as a 50% better performer than it's peers (when it's the
same, with a better driver) JUST to make money?
This means a technology which is simply an extention to the current
technology - in which we ALL share has been suppressed and delivered only to
those who have the money to afford it. I make a lot of money, sure, but the
world of technology as a whole didn't improve from my advance.. Just my
Wouldn't (looking at it from a FSF point of view now) it have been better if
I took the algorithm, put my GPL or LGPL license on it for all to use, see,
and gain from. Now I make a big stink about it to all the video card
manufacturers, perhaps even contract with them to build the patch for the
drivers to their cards ($), definitely support them in migrating to the new
technology ($). Now everybody's video cards run 50% faster, and my name is
at the tip of every video card manufacturer's tongue when they think of
their increased performance. I will not starve, because my advances are now
widespread which means my name is also widespread and jobs will not be
difficult to find.
If everyone shared every technological advance they ever made with everyone
else, imagine the software you would have today. Imagine what CS would look
like, act, and perform with the big boys in technology delivering their
"secrets" to the masses. Would THEY starve? The innovaters? The people
truly working for the future? Nope, because the innovaters would be the
first to market with a product that has these new technologies enabled in
them, but it wouldn't stop the technology from advancing.
I'm not for giving everything away for free, people.. I'm for keeping things
real. Technology shouldn't be owned, it is a byproduct of the human
syndrome. It stems from our race's desire to know, to learn, to build, and
to explore. If we keep the maps we draw to ourselves, the world will remain
a very large and un-navigatable place. If technology moves from mind to
mind at the speed of thought (light, the internet, insert other clever
metaphore here) we can move quickly on the grid. Now, the new
IMPLEMENTATIONS that use these technological advances will be where the work
is spent and the revenue is made. Who wouldn't want that?
The best of the best: A 3d engine that was compiled from the best
technology of all the world's 3D engines. The best Collision detection, the
best event management system, the best OO. Everything. (Everything CS wants
to be, yeah?)
Is this scenario possible under the current laws, restrictive licensing
arangements, and distribution methodologies? No. Why? Because those who
made "the best" algorithms and technology will keep a hold of it for as long
as possible in order to keep their "competitive advantage" and revenue
stream. Instead of focusing on using the best of the best to create the
best GAME, APP, what have you, they focus on keeping the technology secret
and building proprietary apps utilizing the technology we're not "allowed".
For the love of all that lives and breathes, people, they've started issuing
patents for MATHEMATICAL FORMULAS. Math, the language of the universe, the
stuff from which all things can be related to and described - is being
carved up and handed to large corporations as if they created it from the
cosmos themselves. If this isn't offensive to you, to see what once was
free to all being taken away from us piece by piece, what is? And what
better metaphore to describe what it's like to see technology and advances
being gobbled up and hidden behind restrictive covenants? What once was
free for anyone who could dream it, to buildit - now you had better be sure
you paid the right people in order to make your dream come true.. BAH!
Kudos to ID for releasing the sources for Quake & Doom to the public,
without which I can gaurantee you CS wouldn't be as far along as it is now.
Kudos to all of you in the Open Source community who give a lot for little
return. Perhaps the next generation of programmers will not be forced into a
"If I don't make money on this, I'll starve" mentality which many of you
suffer so badly. If so, it will only be a natural thing to them to share
their ideas. Try and conceptualize if you can, a world without money..
What other reason would someone hoard the best of the best?
I think the only ones in this world who would "starve" from a free flow of
technological information would be the lazy, the weak, and the incompetent.
(Not to mention the modern government strongholds, but that's for another
time.) It would soon be seen (when the doors flew open wide) that those who
can make a difference - will. Those who simply ride on the backs of others,
won't and will spend their time playing legos with the things the rest of us
build for them to play with.
Call it "socio-political" hype if you would like. Idealistic visions have
always been frowned on by establishmentarinists, and if dreams and ideals
are snuffed out because "it doesn't make me money" then the dream wasn't
strong enough in your mind.
You can all go back to playing with your legos again.
Ken / WhiteGold
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 2:06 AM
Subject: Re: [CsMain] Discussion with Richard Stallman about CS/PS2 port
Post by firstname.lastname@example.org Post by WhiteGold
Hmm... Somehow my argument has been morphed from "Stop giving other people
crap for their opinions, just because they're not yours" to "you are all
evil capitalist bastards.." How odd. I have yet to even step once onto the
offensive here either.. Obviously some of you have issues they need to delve
"Selfishness, greed, avarice (all things necessary for a good
capitalist) benefits only the individual, and in the end takes AWAY from humanity."
Call me crazy, but this seems like a somewhat offensive statement.
Besides, if you point _is_ to stand up against people who "give crap" for
others opinions, how about blasting Mr. Stallman for his attitude toward
Post by email@example.com
Sign-up today at http://www.themail.com/ref.htm?ref=898251
Crystal-main mailing list