On 2008-02-08, John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> wrote:
> bobbie sellers wrote:
>> Some people are not interested in anything but the use of the computer
>> for non-computing purposes,
>
> Tom Newton writes:
>> So you should be using Windows or Mac.
>
> He should be using whatever is most suitable for his purpose and is within
> his budget, For many only Linux meets the latter requirement.

I disagree. And to back up that disagreement, I won't help her.

You may do as you wish.

>> You, and others like you, are nothing but thieves.
>
> That is libel, and a lie. If you don't want anyone using your software
> without paying you in some way do not release it under a Free license which
> grants everyone permission to do exactly that.

That's not the issue. All that free software exists because people took
the time to learn linux from others who took the time to learn linux
and then created that software instead of tutoring newbies on groups
like this.

It's one of the ways to do your fair share.

Sure, anyone can use the software, but we don't have to help people who
aren't contributing their fair share.

Who are only taking.

>
>> You want all the advantages of Linux but don't want to do your fair share
>> of the work.
>
> It costs Free Software authors exactly nothing when people use their
> software. Therefor there is no reason to impute an obligation to pay for
> it in any form.

You seem to be fixated on dollars and cents. I am not talking about
a spread sheet, I am talking about the cooperative endeavor that has
resulted in the Linux/GNU/non-GNU operating system.

>
>> You aren't here to give and take, you are here to take.
>
> It is _software_. No matter how many copies people make the author still
> has everything he had before they made them. There is _no taking_.

Yes there is. That author would not have had the knowledge and skills
to write that software if a lot of people hadn't assisted him/her
along the way.

People who were giving as well as taking.

>
>> So go back to the Windows/Mac world and pay for technical support.
>
> Many people and organizations stand ready to sell him technical support for
> Linux.

Yeh. And they are greedhead traitors who will destroy Linux if we let them.

They promote technnocracy, dependency, and ignorance, not the
independence and decentralized knowledge/skillbase that gave rise
to Linux.

Remember their first attempt to take over Linux?:

http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=116445

The frontal assault didn't work, and now they are focussing on sneaking
in the back door by making Linux "user friendly".

Those are the people behind KDE/Gnome/freedesktop.org, who are
being financed by the corporations who hate open source free
software and and OSes they can't control.

So they finance the creation of Windows-clone artificial interfaces
like KDE/Gnome in order to create a new generation of psuedo-Linux
runners who don't know Linux, but only know KDE or Gnome.

Who are dependent on the tecnocrats and their corporate sponsors and
won't be able to do anything when their software is suddenly non-free
and non-open source, and Linux is just another Mac/Windows OS.

The local LUG (Linux Users Group) is entirely controlled by yuppy puppies
who want to make money with their Linux skills and do everything they can
to make newbies utterly dependent on them, pushing just one distro and
KDE and teaching the newbies that the command line is scary and dangerous
and not for mere mortals like them.

They make me want to puke.

_Those_ are the kind of people you are defending.

Tom

--
calhobbit (at)
gmail [DOT] com