Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 21:49:04 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>, "Jay Nelson" <jdn@acp.qiv.com>, <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: FreeBSD Distributions: Leveling the playing field Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.19990912213809.04abd8a0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <000501befd77$e91dea60$021d85d1@youwant.to> References: <4.2.0.58.19990912145908.04af73a0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 04:38 PM 9/12/99 -0700, David Schwartz wrote: > Would you apply that statement to human beings in general? If so, > > who is to > > judge the "quality" of the human being? Or to say that he or she should be > > treated differently -- i.e. deprived of rights -- because he or > > she is not of > > sufficient "quality?" > > Yes, I would apply that to anyone and everything. I treat human beings >differently based upon how they deserve to be treated. In fact, the virtue >of 'fairness' is pretty much defined as 'treating people the way they >deserve'. No; fairness is treating them equally regardless of what you may think they deserve. >The virtue that you are talking about, on the other hand, is 'mercy'. That >of giving people or things that which they do not deserve. This particular >virtue is one I seldom practice. I can tell, since you're mercilessly twisting what I've said. ;-) > > In the more specific case of the FreeBSD project and creators of FreeBSD > > distributions: Does it make sense to favor large companies over > > small ones? > > Or older ones over newcomers? Or established but less daring > > distributions > > over ones that try to "push the envelope?" If a distribution has > > more bugs or > > problems than another (perhaps because it attempted to add great > > new features), > > but is working to improve, should it be penalized in any other > > way than by the > > marketplace? > The FreeBSD team is part of the marketplace. The marketplace doesn't just >include consumers. Different marketplace. Again, you're applying some very twisted logic here. >It includes holders of intellectual property wielding >that property to achive that particular market outcome that they prefer. FreeBSD, Inc. does not own most of the intellectual property in FreeBSD; it's owned by the authors, and in most cases bears their personal copyright notices. The many contributors to FreeBSD did not do so in order that FreeBSD, Inc. would serve as an auctioneer for their work, "selling" it to the bidder that gave Jordan Hubbard's FreeBSD, Inc. the most money. They intended to release it for anyone's use -- in the spirit of the BSD license. For FreeBSD, Inc. to pick winners and losers is to violate their intent. > > IMHO, the answer to all of the questions in the paragraph > > immediately above is > > a resounding "no." FreeBSD, Inc. should set a level playing field for all > > would-be distributors, and then allow the marketplace to reward > > or penalize the > > products based on user experience. This is what is occurring in > > the Linux world, > > and it works fantastically. > > You are not asking for a level playing field. You are pretending to, but >you are not. Not so. Right now, the playing field is clearly slanted toward Walnut Creek CDROM. > Right now, you have a level playing field. You can ask the >FreeBSD team for things it owns as well as anyone else can. The "FreeBSD team" is different from, and much bigger than, FreeBSD, Inc. And the latter does not own most of the intellectual property in FreeBSD. It is allowed to use it by virtue of the BSD license. >What you want, >on the other hand, is a blank check. Permission to use another's property >however you please, even against their wishes. Again, not so. The express purpose of the FreeBSD project -- see the FAQ -- is to create code that anyone can use for any purpose. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.0.58.19990912213809.04abd8a0>