The crux;; Re: [yavor at doganov.org: Re: Defining Free Software Business]
sam at liddicott.com
Tue Jun 27 21:52:56 UTC 2006
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> You find some of us talking about evils that you or the FSF don't
> need; but we need them and we know people who need these evils.
> No, you don't.
So you think I'm going to get someone to convert an access database
without using a tool that DEPENDS on access? And even worse if I write
or support such a tool?
> You should write free software alternatives and simply
> not use the non-free ones.
I think you may not have noticed that most of my so called troll was
talking about the tools needed to move people away from using non-free
tools. You may not have noticed but I think most of those still bothered
to follow this thread will have noticed. They can draw their own
conclusions which will be reflections on the idiocy of one or both of us.
> You have the tools. RMS didn't.
The tools mostly being the gcc chain, I get the idea. I'm grateful; but
all Mr Jones who has not quite got round to paying for MS Office Pro yet
can hear is "wha wha wha." He's still trying to get his head around
access and the FSF are telling him to use a C compiler to convert to
anything else - anything at all- anything will do as long as it is GPL,
preferably also GNU.
> The rest of your mail is just trolling.
Well, I call your response troll, and unlike you I can say why:
I explained how some non free software must be used in ways to move
people away from non-free software to free software, otherwise they will
not choose to move. This to me is valuable support of free software and
will bring the MONEY to free software porting and development.
You respond by saying "stop using non-free software, use free software"
- this is what I am TRYING to get OTHER people to do, and I'm showing
you that the only path they are willing to take is not cold-turkey
because they would be out of business.
It flatters me that you think I am a troll, I cannot simulate the logic
or stance that you are coming from.
I believe that the only understanding we have in common is the use of
some pronouns. I cannot understand why you think a genuine and relevant
post is a troll but I have noticed your trend of cutting from replies
anything that detracts from your responding attack so that you can
dismiss it in absentia, rather than point out individual flaws.
It appears that you do not even believe that my reasons are genuine for
thinking that "only free software from now on" will exclude great good,
it appears that you believe I am faking this stance in order to generate
I am almost determined to pay my FSF membership to Debian instead, the
main blocker being that it is too hard to donate money to Debian (or was
the last time I tried).
Since talking to you I have become convinced that nothing more that the
FSF does (apart from license compliance) will ever be relevant to me or
anyone I know; the FSF has done its job of freeing up development tools
and providing the GPL, it is obvious that the work of bringing free
software to the commercial world must be done by a different
organisation who can at least distinguish the possible from the ideal. I
now realise that the GBN will never be relevant in this work, the GBN
will do nothing more than promote consultants who are already members of
the FSF to accidentally explain to hundreds of businesses the commercial
impossibility of them ever moving to free software.
More information about the Discussion