3 ms·

> If you actually wanted quality, you'd pay them for it with your time and/or money. To large extent, its true. But still I expect that the mechanic servicing

by fiedzia 10y ago

> If you actually wanted quality, you'd pay them for it with your time and/or money. To large extent, its true. But still I expect that the mechanic servicing my car for some reasonable price will not disconnect breaks and I will not have to pay extra for not being killed. Whatever cost is required for that should be included in the base price, as I cannot imagine someone not willing to pay for it.

akiselev 10y ago
> But still I expect that the mechanic servicing my car for some reasonable price will not disconnect breaks and I will not have to pay extra for not being killed. That's not even remotely comparable because that would be fraud or some other crime. You can safely assume that your open source software are not malware. That's all you get for "free." In fact, you explicitly agree to use software all the time that has this in its license: THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
- fiedzia 10y ago
  > That's not even remotely comparable because that would be fraud or some other crime. I consider work of substandard quality to fall into the same category. Maybe not to the same extent, but still. If I am using software you created for me (that I paid for) and it has a flaw that exposes my data that you could have prevent with proper quality standards, its a fraud for me (in the "unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities" part of definition). > You can safely assume that your open source software are not malware. That's all you get for "free." You get nothing for free obviously. But I assume we all here are getting paid, open source or not.

by fiedzia 10y ago

akiselev 10y ago

> But still I expect that the mechanic servicing my car for some reasonable price will not disconnect breaks and I will not have to pay extra for not being killed. That's not even remotely comparable because that would be fraud or some other crime. You can safely assume that your open source software are not malware. That's all you get for "free." In fact, you explicitly agree to use software all the time that has this in its license: THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

fiedzia 10y ago
> That's not even remotely comparable because that would be fraud or some other crime. I consider work of substandard quality to fall into the same category. Maybe not to the same extent, but still. If I am using software you created for me (that I paid for) and it has a flaw that exposes my data that you could have prevent with proper quality standards, its a fraud for me (in the "unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities" part of definition). > You can safely assume that your open source software are not malware. That's all you get for "free." You get nothing for free obviously. But I assume we all here are getting paid, open source or not.