3 ms·
That's actually a much better reason that what's been used before. As for non sequitur, it's not. There is no moral comparison, i'm just saying that practica
by sametmax 9y ago
That's actually a much better reason that what's been used before.
As for non sequitur, it's not. There is no moral comparison, i'm just saying that practicality beats purity and that we all do it so advocating purity is defintly not credible.
- cyphar 9y ago> i'm just saying that practicality beats purity and that we all do it so advocating purity is definitely not credible This is like arguing that a member of the Vegeterian Foundation should buy chicken rather than chick-peas because chicken is easier to cook. Or because the chick-peas are being produced using animal fertilizers. There are many criteria by which you can evaluate software. Usability is one of them. Software freedom is another. The GNU project proritises the latter over the former. More importantly it's got nothing to do with "purity". I really don't understand how people are surprised that the Free Software Foundation prioritises Free Software as a criteria over anything else.
- sametmax 9y agoNo that's fair enough.