[plug] [link] lwn letter - amazing....

[Craig Ringer]

>><bitter>He's probably from the "email <sw company x> and tell them that
>>they have to open source their sofware, because all information wants to
>>be free!" crowd. *arrggh*.</bitter>.
>  
> Is there such a crowd? I've always sensed a firm divide between the
> "information wants to be free, so let's make free information and talk
> about ways to make all information free" and the "lets email companies
> suggesting the benefits they could reap from opening their source" camps.

Sadly, there is such a crowd. They have mis-understood, or chosen to 
mis-understand, what's going on and have only really clicked to the "it 
should be free" bit. You and I can see the dividing line - but a lot of 
people not familiar with OSS etc can not.

>>I'm _so_ fed up with the counter-productive and immature way that some
>>of the FSF-zealot crowd behave, especially since it gives everybody else
>>a bad name.
> 
> Such as? In my experience, the FSF has been easily the most consistently
> rational, pragmatic proponent of Free Software/Open Source principles,
> while many of the leaders of the Open Source faction have given us
> confused, ambiguous, even contradictory messages from time to time, and
> certainly failed to maintain any consistency or clarity of vision and
> purpose over time.

Yeah. I have only minor issues with the FSF and agree about the 
mixed-message issues. My problem is with the raving-loonie zealot types 
who seem to think that what they're blathering on about is in fact what 
the FSF is on about. The kind who make Stallman look consistantly 
cautious and introverted. Again - they're not representitave of anybody 
but they do give the FSF bunch a bad name. I was talking to a guy the 
other day who worked for ages as one of the upper types in Boral's IT 
management, and his first impressions of the OSS/FSF bunch (which he was 
unaware of any significant difference in) was the lunatic-zealot 
component. It is not a good thing...

>>Most people, especially those not really involved with / following
>>OSS can't tell the difference between the FSF and OS philosophies,
> 
> I don't think anyone not involved with or following OSS would have heard
> anything of FSF philosophies: The Open Source "What can I get for free?"
> ethos may well have impacted on them, (because _everyone_ notices free
> stuff)

> but the Free Software "What is right and best for our society?" is
> far too esoteric to have a real-life impact on those outside the "scene".

Hoever the corrupted FSF bit where the loonies focus on the slogan ( 
which I personally dislike) "information wants to be free" and their 
desire for free stuff is definitely making an impact. They mangle this 
into "everything should be free" but drop the reasoning behind it and 
the social aspects, twisting it into "just make it free". Noticed any 
sour comments from people who've just had a collision with /. ? I have, 
and they usually quote these types. See the Baen free library's Prime 
Palavier for some examples.

> Depressing isn't it? But it's hardly a phenomenon that is limited to our
> particular political landscape.

I'm sure the Greens could sympathise...

> The problem is that once you start
> filtering those out and trying to find a middle ground, you quickly end up
> with the kind of middle-of-the-road confusion that made you so <bitter/>
> above. :(

And with this too re greens.

-- 
Craig Ringer
GPG Key Fingerprint: AF1C ABFE 7E64 E9C8 FC27  C16E D3CE CDC0 0E93 380D
	-- if it ain't broke, add features 'till it is. (or:)
	while (! broken) { features ++ ; broken = isBroken(features) }