| |||||||||||||
An Interview with Tom Lord of Arch (O'ReillyNet)An Interview with Tom Lord of Arch (O'ReillyNet)Posted Sep 28, 2004 2:38 UTC (Tue) by snitm (guest, #4031)In reply to: An Interview with Tom Lord of Arch (O'ReillyNet) by lm Parent article: An Interview with Tom Lord of Arch (O'ReillyNet)
I understand you all want everything to be free, I want a porsche.
(Log in to post comments)
An Interview with Tom Lord of Arch (O'ReillyNet) Posted Sep 28, 2004 7:55 UTC (Tue) by darthmdh (guest, #8032) [Link] Some people have goals and work for them. Other people want everything for nothing. I think this is the distinction being drawn here. What licenses like the GPL protect is "freedom". Some people believe that if they purchase something, they can do whatever they like (within the bounds of the law) with that thing. For example, if I buy a car from some General Motors company I can drive it wherever I please, not just on roads sponsored by General Motors. I can take out the 2 litre, 4 cylinder combustion engine that came with it and replace it with a battery-powered "whipper snipper" engine. Or a jet turbine. Or a french fry.Don't try to bring capitalism vs communism into this, its irrelevent. The mistaken people are akin to those who would claim they will never drive a Ford - because its not made by General Motors - and they expect GM to provide them with vehicles free of charge, with insurance, registration, and all fuel and maintenance costs, forever, included. They don't honestly care about cars or driving when it comes down to it, and most of them would advocate GM-only roads. Sensible people would obtain the vehicle that best suited their needs, would happily recompense the manufacturer for the time and effort they saved them in not having to do everything necessary to produce roadworthy vehicles themselves, and would go to the service station to perform the necessary ongoing costs of having a vehicle in the first place. Claiming the GPL is anything related to the first crowd is insulting.
An Interview with Tom Lord of Arch (O'ReillyNet) Posted Sep 28, 2004 14:48 UTC (Tue) by snitm (guest, #4031) [Link] I think you read into my statements a bit too much. My point about capitalism is that he'll be just fine in that he and BitMover are providing a product people are willing to buy (akin to your "sensible people").
Now if we were to take your GM vs Ford analogy a bit further in the context of BitKeeper.. GM and Ford will gladly sell cars to each other; even if their intent is to evaluate/use their respective technological gains to compete with each other.
An Interview with Tom Lord of Arch (O'ReillyNet) Posted Sep 28, 2004 14:36 UTC (Tue) by lm (guest, #6402) [Link] Some people have no sense of humor, I was joking. I have a wife and two kids and a VW Vanagon. The only car money I want is money to get a paint job for the van and a new engine.
If you think I'm in the SCM business for the money you are mistaken. Sure, I want money as much as the next guy but I've learned you don't need insane amounts of money to be happy. In fact, if your house is paid off, you can happily live the rest of your life on $3M or so. If you were careful and lived someplace cheaper you could do it on less. Buying a porsche != careful.
On the other hand, the mental image of sprinkling shavings while driving might bear some thought. I don't think a porsche is the answer, I think you'd want something like an old beat up yellow schoolbus. Then you bolt down the machines to the floor, open the back door, get the wife to drive, and the shavings will just naturally fly out the door into the porsche which is trying to pass us.
"A joke, son, I say, I say, I say, a joke. Are you listening to me, son?"
|
|||||||||||||