I hadn't paid attention to Lunduke, was he always this off with his thinking? He completely disregards societal benefits to libre software (apart from educatio

I hadn't paid attention to Lunduke, was he always this off with his thinking? He completely disregards societal benefits to libre software (apart from educational advantages). Libre software's bigger impact on my life has been my way of thinking: on morality, on digital liberties, on sharing and societies. He supposes that everyone is in it for the money and that money can only come from all users paying for the software (otherwise they don't value that software). He begins with > I've been an advocate for "Free and Open Sourse Software" for a long, long time and ends with: > That same software should also provide source code — at least in some form, in some way. At least most of the time. Of course there are arguments for paying for software either individually or collectively through various ways. Unfortunately, the author does not take under account _at all_ how and why gratis software works now, the relationship basis of libre & gratis, examples of FLOSS gratis software that successfully has well fed developers and other where development stalled due to money. There is a multitude of interesting ways to look at this issue but this is not one of them. It basically reads "you should pay for all software you use, otherwise you don't appreciate it". And it doesn't even deeply go into that either; would the user pay once and have a lifetime license? Would they pay for updates? Would everyone globally pay equally? He mentions 20$ for the browser but not everyone lives in a $ country. Pff, a waste of time this article.