Diego Saravia wrote:
>MESSAGE ORIGINAL
>>>people is already switching on these basis
>>
>>And people are switching back as well, for lack of support. Raising
>>expectations is a dangerous thing, and can have a nasty boomerang effect.
>
>The numbers I know shows an important gnu/linux growing, off course always
>will be people going backwards.
>
>I know a lot of propietary software with worst support than free software,
>but there is an important opportunity in supporting people to migrate.
>
>Raising expectations ... I love to raise expectations.
If you raise expectations above the reality, then you create a whiplash
effect which is very negative.
>>But a contract supercedes a law since it is an agreement between two
>>or more parties.
>
>Never. At least in argentina. You can not change a public law by a private
>agreement. You can not sell yourself for example.
Then tell me - is a copyright license legal in Argentina? Even the GPL
is a private contract based on copyright law.
>>Accountability is key. One cannot be free without paying the price of
>>responsibility; one cannot gain independence otherwise.
>
>You talk about freedom as a comercial product. If you must pay a price,
>you are not free.
You put words in my mouth. One must always pay a price to be free. I
really don't think you understand what Freedom is.
>>I never spoke of politics,
>
>accountability, responsability??? you are not speaking about politics?
You confuse politics with government.
>>but I believe you are falling into the folly of politics and democracy
>>being one and the same.
>
>I dont think so
It's become apparent.
>>Verily, democracy was established to minimize and counter politics. Of
>>course, so was Communism.
>
>minimize? counter? I dont understand your point.
>democracy is a way to structure politics, could be others, war as example,
>Von clausewitz ... says I think.
Wrong. Please research the origins of politics. Then please research the
origins of democracy, communism, etc.
>>What is a 'better world'? Ask 10 people, you will get 10 different
>>answers. Most of them won't include software.
>
>sure!
>but, probably they will include freedom, and in a digitized society there
>will be no freedom with propietary software, with DMCA, with soft
>patentes, with palladium - DRM, etc.
>a lot of people dont know this, but it is not lesser true because of that.
>Its our fault, off course. Our work is to let people know.
Diego: Please give your definition of Freedom.
>>Agreeing with your enemy doesn't make you right.
>
>off course not, only a signal.
A signal that can also mean you are wrong, therefore it is a poor indicator.
>>They are two things, but they are not the same. Consider fruit: both an
>>apple and orange are fruit, but one does not eat them interchangeably.
>
>In your owns words, people want their jobs done, both kinds of soft could
>do that.
>
>>>>Free Software means rights, it means responsibilities...
>
>I am not sure about responsibilities. I am thinking about that, but I am
>not convinced yet. I have a lot of rights that do not depend on my actions.
>Human rights for example.
If you want freedom without responsibility, you do not have freedom.
>>their individual software does not impinge on my freedom.
>
>yes, their software could do a lot of nasty things, could spy on you, only
>for example.
No, their software cannot impinge on my freedoms.
>>Everyone cares about politics, nobody cares about government.
>>Politics is about maintaining castes.
>
>For me politics has a broad meaning.
This is the problem.
Taran Rampersad
Este archivo fue generado por hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Jan 4 10:02:49 2005 AST