From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4ACBF613.2020609@conducive.org> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:59:47 +0800 From: W B Hacker User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090823 SeaMonkey/1.1.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> References: <18f3fced1ebb90eb9c977b47bbcce424@vitanuova.com> <7276.1254874793@lunacy.ugrad.cs.cmu.edu> <13426df10910061724o643cdfb1i93895fc67d5a5b6f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <13426df10910061724o643cdfb1i93895fc67d5a5b6f@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] /sys/include/ip.h 5c(1) Topicbox-Message-UUID: 82b41486-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 ron minnich wrote: > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Dave Eckhardt wrote: > >> For something "nobody would want to do", there sure are a >> lot of hits for "pcs750.bin". > > It's the difference between "nobody would want to do it" and "we don't > want you do it" ;-) > > ron > To me, the 'meat' of the issue is not open vs closed - but rather the evolutionary point wherein it is no longer about preserving a superior concept, but the coming of a sort of circling of the wagons mentality because resistance to change or innovation, preservation of 'backward compatibility', 'our way', 'standards' and 'incremental improvements' are all valued more highly than taking risks of major change to adapt to a benefit centric world that doesn't really care about the history or prestige of any given company or 'way'. They just want 'stuff that works better' - and more cheaply, to boot. As early as the 1960's, the term 'intellectual incest' was being applied, and IMNSHO it seems to fit many F/OSS projects as easily as closed, commercial ones. Bill Hacker