6 ms·

Its not a crazy concept , the real world non-idealized version of your statement is called tax. We pay taxes for access to free public services.

krapp 2y ago
It is a crazy concept, because taxes are coerced by governments under the threat of violence, whereas the freedoms of FOSS software are intended to be entirely non-coercive. To require compensation of any kind for access and the right to use and distribute code is contrary to the spirit of free and open source software. If people want to do that, then fair enough, just don't call if free or open source. And don't license your code under free or open source licenses if you care about getting credit or compensation or anything but maximizing software freedom.
- aleph_minus_one 2y ago
  > It is a crazy concept, because taxes are coerced by governments under the threat of violence, whereas the freedoms of FOSS software are intended to be entirely non-coercive. In doubt, you will have to enforce the freedoms of FOSS by going to a court (i.e. use the governmental "violence enforcement system"). On the other hand, if you pay your taxes "voluntarily", you won't be coerced by the government. In other words: in both cases threats of violence are involved.
- sunir 2y ago
  There is already the shared source model. What people call things is a marketing phenomenon. You can complain all you want.. and you should.
snowwrestler 2y ago
Ok but taxes that are invented on the spot by an all-powerful ruler, and imposed by surprise, under immediate threat, do not have a great history in modern society.
- vagrantJin 2y ago
  I have no clue how you extrapolated all that from my claim that free public services aren't free and are, in fact, paid for by taxpayers.
ankleturtle 2y ago
Free public services are a finite resource. Already existing software is not.
- ValentineC 2y ago
  Software maintenance is a finite resource too.
  - ankleturtle 2y ago
    Software maintenance is not already existing software though.

krapp 2y ago

It is a crazy concept, because taxes are coerced by governments under the threat of violence, whereas the freedoms of FOSS software are intended to be entirely non-coercive. To require compensation of any kind for access and the right to use and distribute code is contrary to the spirit of free and open source software. If people want to do that, then fair enough, just don't call if free or open source. And don't license your code under free or open source licenses if you care about getting credit or compensation or anything but maximizing software freedom.

aleph_minus_one 2y ago
> It is a crazy concept, because taxes are coerced by governments under the threat of violence, whereas the freedoms of FOSS software are intended to be entirely non-coercive. In doubt, you will have to enforce the freedoms of FOSS by going to a court (i.e. use the governmental "violence enforcement system"). On the other hand, if you pay your taxes "voluntarily", you won't be coerced by the government. In other words: in both cases threats of violence are involved.
sunir 2y ago
There is already the shared source model. What people call things is a marketing phenomenon. You can complain all you want.. and you should.

snowwrestler 2y ago

Ok but taxes that are invented on the spot by an all-powerful ruler, and imposed by surprise, under immediate threat, do not have a great history in modern society.

vagrantJin 2y ago
I have no clue how you extrapolated all that from my claim that free public services aren't free and are, in fact, paid for by taxpayers.

ankleturtle 2y ago

Free public services are a finite resource. Already existing software is not.

ValentineC 2y ago
Software maintenance is a finite resource too.
- ankleturtle 2y ago
  Software maintenance is not already existing software though.