Am 03. Jan, 2005 schwätzte Trent Shipley so:
> On Monday 2005-01-03 00:18, der.hans wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> > I guess that would encompass my idea of commodityware, the point where
> > a software tool becomes ubiquitous and has little cost. I generally
> > term this by functionality, e.g. web browser, text editor, GUI widget
> > set. There can be sub-fx()s, of course :). For example, tabbed browsing is
> > becoming commodityware if it hasn't already reached that plateau.
> >
> > Most Free Software, once it hits a certain level of usage, becomes
> > commodityware, but it's really about web browser rather than mozilla,
> > konqueror, elinks, etc.
> >
> > That functionality becomes infrastructure. The nice thing is that it's
> > mostly modular infrastructure configurable to individual preferences.
>
> Infrastructural software, commodityware: Ok. close to the same thing.
>
> > > Thus, from the standpoint of industry, gratisware is not at issue, though
> > > a lower the initial price point for anything is desirable. Libertyware
> > > is not at issue, industry does fine without liberty--just look at the
> > > PRC. What is
> >
> > PRC?
>
> People's Republic of China. Industry does well, liberty--perhaps not so well.
>
> > I agree that the superhighway metaphor doesn't quite fit. Neither does
> > comparing FOSS to water ( well, maybe, if you've read Cat-a-lyst from Alan
> > Dean Foster ).
> >
> > We need something that is:
> >
> > * freely available to all people/organizations
>
> Ok.
>
> > * has no limit on how much raw material ( such as copies of Free Software
> > in its current state ) is available
>
> This is typical of all data-centric goods: information.
Yup. We could possibly include air as a metaphor because it's generally
not limited. Those of us in the desert know that water is limited, though.
> > * probably has a maintainance cost
>
> Ok.
> > * is customizable, but might have an associated cost for customization
>
> Ok.
>
> > * can be given away, even with customization
>
> Hmmmm. I need to think about this.
It's the nature of Free Software.
> > * generally doesn't have adverse environmental issues to be considered
>
> Lack of DIRECT adverse environmental issues.
Hmm. I'll have to think about that, but will concede to your point for
now as it seems prudent.
> > * might be considered a basic building block for societal advancement
>
> Definitely. I would emphasize economic advancement.
While I believe that Free Software is indeed leading to economic
advancement those who believe they're losing money due to Free Software
would disagree. Being that your more restrained on this and more
knowledgeable maybe I should just shut up and nod :).
> > * can easily be created by most anyone
>
> I do not know about *easy* to create or "by anyone". I would agree that any
With a little training it is.
alias ls='ls --color=auto'
Now they're programming ;-).
I would agree that a novice creating something large and significant isn't
likely, but, then again, I've learned several really cool tricks from
newbies who just didn't know better.
> person (human or corporate) CAN (in principle) create free-infrastructure
> software, and that once created and published there are VERY low barriers to
> acquisition and low barriers to deployment.
>
> > * can't be taken away
>
> How so?
GPL says so :). Theoretically law can change or there can be a court case
or more against Free Software in general or some particular piece of Free
Software, but barring legislative or court action our software is safe.
> > * can be translated :)
>
> Wouldn't this be subsumed as modification?
Yes and no. I can't translate a new book and sell the translation. I guess
that's still a modification. The point was mostly just an obnoxious
interjection :).
> > Maybe Free Speech:
>
> More like free press?
Free Press might work as well. I'll have to think about it.
> > * everyone in the .us has it[1]
>
> Some benefit more from it than others.
Same with Free Software.
> > * there's no limit on raw materials, e.g. words don't wear out
>
> Dead trees, TV wasteland, Radio oligopoly concentration. Micromedia
> preaching to the converted.
Dead trees only comes up in a manifestation of Free Press. Free Speech
and Free Press can also use 100% recycled electrons, such as are in this
email :).
TV and on are examples of controlled media and stand as a case against
Free Press being a good metaphor for Free Software.
> > * use the language or lose it, so there's some maintenance cost
>
> Use the right or lose it...
Yes. If we stop using Free Software it will go the way of the dodo bird.
> More, have you see the cost of meaningfull access to the free press. Very
> expensive that.
Yes and no. A library Internet connection and you can get to Wikinews,
NPR, BBC, der Spiegel, CNN, al jazeera, etc.
Yes, most of those cost lots of money to create. The money isn't
necesarily born by those reading the news. Wikipedia is community-based,
al jazeera is supported via some rich dude, NPR gets community-based
financial support and BBC gets heavy gov't underwriting.
> > * create new words or strange grammar, but they might not be understood
>
> Your show WILL be canceled.
Whereas a Free Software project essentially can't be cancelled. It might
not be included in a distribution, but that doesn't prevent people from
working on it. There have usually been several kernel projects Linus won't
allow into the official kernel source that are still actively worked on
and available as patches.
> > * easy to give away as pure words or as quotes
>
> Yes, all too easy. That's why we invented copyright laws.
And it sucks that we've allowed companies to copyright or trademark plain
words such as 'word' or 'bookshelf'. Free Software specifically allows
reuse, though.
> > * mostly no environmental issues, but there are extreme cases such as
> > yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater
>
> No DIRECT environmental issues. (look at all the lovely cell phone towers)
Another case against Free Press. It's not an issue for Free Software.
I guess it could become one if AOL decided to start including debian on
their CDs...
> > * need to communicate in order to improve society
>
> Depends who you ask.
Those wanting to reduce the planet to a new asteroid belt aren't really
trying to improve society :).
> > * easy to create new words or quotes
>
> Again all to easy. That's why we invented trademarks.
>
> > * once the language is learned, it can continue to be used
>
> Yes. And it can be difficult to suppress (eg. Turks trying to outlaw
> Kurdish.)
>
> > * Redefreiheit :)
>
> Huh?
"Free Speech" translated to German :).
> > > My understanding of the term "superhighway", however, does not include
> > > just freeways (like Interstate-10) but also toll roads and turnpikes
> > > (like the New
> >
> > Maybe it should just be 'language' rather than 'Free Speech'.
>
> Maybe....
>
> > >
> > > Beyond that, the reader will note that the PLUG Development discussion
> > > expected the big winners from the growth of FOSS available as
> > > commodified, standardized, free infrastructure were not the digitally
> > > disenfranchised, but huge established companies like GE, GM, and Walmart.
> > > Perhaps, freeways and
> >
> > Hmm. I hope my point was not that the huge companies will be *the* big
> > winners, rather that they are making great gains due to FOSS and that
> > their economic reliance on FOSS will pit them to defend FOSS against
> > things like patent claims. I think the big winners will be all who benefit
> > from FOSS, which, in the end, will be everyone :). Yes, Virginia, even the
> > proprietary software vendors, even if they won't admit it :).
>
> Most proprietary software vendors may win from ever-more-FOSS, but *some* will
> be road kill.
Companies that don't adapt to new economic and business climates are
generally doomed to fail.
> In theory everyone will benefit from FOSS that is true.
>
> Of course, another social "theory" notes that some animals are inevitably more
> equal than others.
Sounds like children of politicians and mandatory military service.
> Everyone will NOT benefit equally from FOSS, and in practice some will be
> worse off.
There are few people who will benefit as much as I have from FOSS. There
are also few people who have embraced it as much as I have. If you stop
breathing you won't benefit from the ready availability of air. Those who
will be 'worse off' will still benefit, even if only indirectly. Free
Software is leading the way to lower technology costs for at least some
companies, which means they can sell their products for less money. If
the company is big enough, then competition must also cut back on costs
due. Since walmart is saving money by using Free Software most everyone
in the .us is benefitting from Free Software when shopping. Yes, that's
stretching it a bit, but it's still a valid point and a major way that
Free Software is helping everyone.
ciao,
der.hans
--
# https://www.LuftHans.com/ http://www.AZOTO.org/
# A t-shirt a day keeps the noose (tie) away. - der.hans
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)