Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cwjcc!ncoast!allbery
From: allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: What does free mean.
Message-ID: <1990Mar14.234322.16167@NCoast.ORG>
Date: 14 Mar 90 23:43:22 GMT
References: <1151@mtxinu.UUCP>
Reply-To: allbery@ncoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery)
Followup-To: comp.sources.d
Distribution: usa
Organization: North Coast Public Access UN*X, Cleveland, OH
Lines: 26

My main problem with the FSF philosophy, is that it devalues my time.  If I am
not able to get money to put food on the table---or even have a table to put
food on---I must do something for which I can earn money.  The FSF proposes,
however, that my main saleable commodity must not be sold, and intends that
that philosophy become *the* philosophy.  I conclude that I'd better go get a
job as a bricklayer.  Of course, if that leaves me unable to write software
because e.g. too tired or not enough time in the day, etc., too bad.

Or I can work to stop the FSF's position from being accepted in general; which
will no doubt get me into a lot of trouble with people who prefer not to think
about the sudden increase in the rolls of the unemployed if the FSF gets its
way.  (*They*, of course, need not worry about it; *they* get grants.  Faugh.)

Not to mention the fact that I can find quite a few more things to do with my
time than recreational programming.  If I'm even remotely like other program-
mers, there's liable to be a sharp drop in the number of new programs.

The FSF may win the moral victory; but everyone else will lose in that case.
This is, of course, to be desired; or so I gather from the FSF's philosophy.
(sarcasm on) I'm glad to hear it.  (sarcasm off)

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery (human), allbery@NCoast.ORG (Inet), BALLBERY (MCI Mail)
ALLBERY (Delphi), uunet!cwjcc.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery (UUCP), B.ALLBERY (GEnie)
BrandonA (A-Online) ("...and a partridge in a pear tree!" ;-)