>While at present there are no viruses, trojans, spyware and other things
>of note on Linux, it is wrong to expect people to switch on this basis.
people is already switching on these basis
>It is realistic to consider that as Linux is used more and more,
>these things will happen with Linux. This argument will not stand
>the test of time, as many other things will not.
There are technical diferences in / design model / social model /
development process / error correction/ between windows and gnulinux. It is
easier to develop these kind of attacks in windows by now. Nothing will
stand the test of time, but windows will not survive long time, linux
neither, but 3 or 4 more years than windows.
>But my opinion is that if someone agrees to a contract, they are bound by
>that contract.
There are more things than a contract, there is a law, copyright law,
applied to a non intelectual work, as a binary code.
>To people who do not feel accountable for their own actions, Free Software
>and Proprietary software are just things to be used. They
>didn't care about anyone's rights from the start - so how can you give
>them more rights? Does anyone think that the children who play games
>really want the source code, and that they really care that giving it to a
>friend breaks some licensing agreement?
A lot of people do not care about politics, even they dont vote, but they
have rights.
Some childrens will want source code, probably future programers. Now they
are hackers, and they are learning how to change scores and things like that.
Not all the childrens open they toys, and try to rebuild they, but the ones
that do, will be future engineers.
Some people cares, other not, some people want to read source, others want
to know that they can even if the will not do by themselves.
>The difference has a lot to do with accountability, and it's a cultural
>issue. It has nothing to do with viruses, worms, trojans, spyware or cost.
Someone ask why are people changing, a lot of people is changing because of
cost,viruses, etc.. These are the driving forces of the change. There are
more important issues, as you mention.
>What one does with liberty, with freedom... that is what this is about.
to build a better world.
>They will co-exist, because they are not competing systems. Free
>Software is simply what software was before proprietary licensing came
>along, enforced by copyright. Proprietary software will be around as long
>as people do not wish to find themselves accountable.
Microsoft agree with me, that only one model will survive.
This point is an economy issue. Two thing that do the same, one cheaper.
>Free Software means rights, it means responsibilities... it means
>knowing what your software is supposed to do instead of a large company
>telling you what your software should do. Many people simply
>don't care - either out of ignorance or out of intellectual laziness. I
>see it as senseless to argue with people about their operating system and
>how it impinges on my freedom - their individual software does not impinge
>on my freedom.
A lot of people dont care about politics, but we live in a world without
slavery now (allmost). The world changes, even if a lot of people dont care.
Diego Saravia
Este archivo fue generado por hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Jan 4 10:02:49 2005 AST