you're logical reasoning is incredibly flawed. please stop arguing by way of pleading obviousness ("OMG ARE YOU SERIOUS, MY ARGUMENT IS SO OBVIOUS THAT I WONT

you're logical reasoning is incredibly flawed. please stop arguing by way of pleading obviousness ("OMG ARE YOU SERIOUS, MY ARGUMENT IS SO OBVIOUS THAT I WONT EVEN MAKE IT!!!11") > What would happen if creators couldn’t charge for their creations ... there’d be less of it the claim here is that if you disallowed charging for software, there would be less software. > Linux is how old? How much of the internet runs on it? great, linux exists and is awesome. nobody disputes that. this fact does not contradict the claim in question. the existent / awesomeness of linux contradicts claims such as: "people who don't get paid will not create things" and "unpaid creators cannot create great things". however, the original claim is none of those statements. the original claim is merely that when you don't let people charge for software, fewer people will write it. > Do I honestly have to connect the dots here? i honestly have no idea what you think the connection between the dots is.