3 ms·
This must be a joke. Of course open source people don't like to spend. The whole GPL thing was made by Stallman with the instruction: let's pay for work not fo
by lordkrandel 4y ago
This must be a joke. Of course open source people don't like to spend. The whole GPL thing was made by Stallman with the instruction: let's pay for work not for intellectual property. You completely miss the anti-capitalist value of "free as in speech". Many people do develop BECAUSE it's free of charge. If enterprise bunisesses die, I don't care much, because part of the strength of Linux is that it was made by hobbists as a hobby, and no corporation held its development back.
So yes, not paying for OSS is actually what you MUST do to keep its most important feature: freedom. Freedom from the laws of capitalist markets.
- jqpabc123 4y agoThis must be a joke. No joke --- what this article really amounts to is an admission that open source is largely a self defeating concept at odds with reality. More and more companies are choosing to simply ignore open source licenses. Lacking the real world resources needed to defend them, these licenses risk becoming impotent and meaningless. Reality is that defending and sustaining anything of significance in the real world of capitalism requires resources. And in the words of Linus Torvalds, "Reality sucks, deal with it".
- lordkrandel 4y agoYes, but Opensource's not born for capitalistic reasons, and if it has to be "insignificant in the real world" then let it be. "Success" is not something necessary. "At odds with reality" just means that you don't understand it. But there still are things in life money can't buy.
- jqpabc123 4y agoThere are a lot more things in life that no money can't buy.