From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2013 18:06:18 +0200 From: tlaronde@polynum.com To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <20130907160618.GA469@polynum.com> References: <20130907151434.GA12603@polynum.com> <0880bf189805c83e7795605426d53309@proxima.alt.za> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0880bf189805c83e7795605426d53309@proxima.alt.za> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: [9fans] Closed nix development is an insult Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7c3dfa06-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 05:46:24PM +0200, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote: > > (Communism: give me your watch and, in fair exchange, I will tell you > > what time it is.) > > The misunderstanding here is that conventional ownership does not > apply to intellectual "property"; The algorithms are "intellectual" (and a lot---a lot!---of what we use now is due to men who lived centuries ago; who had thought about things that were no use at the time and that we find ready, now, for contempory use). The "implementation" is not "intellectual"; it is an actual thing. And whoever codes knows that there is a long way from a sketch or an algorithm to something that works efficiently and reliably. (And there is a multiplication of software "projects" that had a "fabulous! New! Amazing! Cutting edge" "description"---the description of a panacea---that had not produce anything actual, except billions of losses.) The "gratis" software has not been "gratis" for the ones who have written it. It took time. The bulk of the difference is here. -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C