Re: Hey, Y'all, check out my new improved "Free Software Research Paper Project" web site!
Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> R> http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/3328/paper/ That's the
> R> address. Give it a click!
>
> I found your paper rather disorganized. Its more full of musings and
> circumstantia than with any flow of arguments or presentation of
> ideas.
Yes, I agree. I was a bit "inspired", and now need to play "clean up" and polish
up the main ideas, and arguments in a more organized layout.
Criticism taken. Thanks.
I am especially looking to gather backing for how Free Software can be
beneficial to, at least Five if not more, groups of people:
1) Business People
2) Software Developers (the coders, and coding managers)
3) Systems and Network Administrators
4) Users
5) Non-Users who are indirectly affected by Software, Hardware, and other forms
of computer technology.
I would love to have people gather this information and send it to me, or if
anyone has already done such research and information gathering, I'd love to
have an URL for it. (Why reinvent the wheel? Isn't that one key aspect of Free
Software, and of information in general?) I believe wholeheartedly in the
concept of giving credit where credit is due too.
> I had two objections with the arguements put forward
>
> * stressing sharing vs hoarding as the fundamental issue is
> reductionistic; it flattens other problems and issues, such as
> economic issues, social issues, etc.
Sure there are exceptions. Notice I did not say absolute sharing and no
hoarding... but more sharing than hoarding in the most general sense is better
for all of us.
If you can expound on your reasons behind why the reverse might be better, I'd
like to hear them.
> * trying to find a basis for free software in science and physics is
> not really going to get you far; it's really a social and legal
> issue (intellectual property) which is at stake
I disagree. Physics at the root, attempts to understand nature in a mathematical
way. But mathematics is just another form of language, or communication. I think
the concept of Entropy, or the Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to Free
Software in its effects to society at large. Lower localized entropy is what we
are striving for on a most general level. Tighter, better code that does more
than not so organized, and well thought out code is but one example of low
localized entropy. This is what we want.
If you disagree, I'd like to hear your comments. I'd love for you to prove me
wrong. I don't assert that I'm always right... just that I want to strive
towards the truth. If anyone knows more of the "Truth"[tm] than I, then let him
come forward and enlighten the rest of us... please!
> Other notes:
>
> * "open spec hardware" is not new -- cf the SPI sponsored
> <URL:http://www.open-hardware.com> (?)
Actually the URL seems to be:
http://www.openhardware.org/
There is another URL: http://www.openhardware.com/ that seems to exist for some
other purpose.
Thanks for the info. I was not fully aware of projects concentrating on the
ideal of Open Spec. Hardware. I'll go check it out. And print some of it out and
digest it if it's worthy. :)
> Personally, I think free software works when interoperability is key;
> free software delivers unprecedented levels of interoperability, by
> it's nature. That's the economic basis.
Actually Free Software is good for MANY things, not just interoperability. It
produces BETTER code: more stable, more robust, more secure, more modular, more
reliable, more attuned to the users wishes and desires for the software. And the
list goes on and on... It's better at MANY different levels...
It's BETTER for the coders... It will provide for an unprecedented level of
standard of living and very very good work conditions. You don't believe me,
just wait... "I'll unload on yo a$$" and prove it. :)
Here I go:
Idea of Software Insurance. Read this. It give a basic overview of how
businesses will restructure in order to better fit the idea of GPL Free Software
development:
http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/3328/paper/the-idea-of-software-insurance-and-verification-47.html
This is a transcript of an IRC conversation on the ideas about how programmers
will get fed, or make a living from developing Free Software. I need to clean it
up into an essay proper, but it's there now, in it's current form.
http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/3328/paper/how-programmers-will-get-paid-for-writing-gpl-software-48.html
Basically I say in a nut shell "PROGRAMMER WIN BIG BIG BIG" From pushing the
adoption of GPL Free Software development. I can't stress that enough. If you
don't see the light, I'll try now to enlighten you a little more:
Imagine a world where software is developed this way (at least in a corporate
setting):
Company, or Business person X would like to tap the market by offering a
software product that generally does Y. (accounts receivable being one such
thing) But he isn't the greatest programmer, but knows how to find some.
He then searches out far and wide for Software developers who are willing to
write a software system "abcdefg" that will generally on the whole do "Y", and
development for use under the GPL, version 2.
He will even go so far as to allow each individual programmer retain full
copyright to each individually written piece of code, so long as that code is
then licensed for use under the GPL. (there are some interesting concepts
surrounding how this can be done most effectively and legally) Basically GIVE
CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE. And you will reap the benefits of EGOBOO. This also
Allows the company to "cover its A$$" if the employee decides to leave, and take
his code with him... The original company is given license to still use it,
whether he stays or leaves! Feel the power of the GPL! And NDA's will be a thing
of the past for many things and in many areas once the GPL really catches on!
(am I oversimplifying?)
But anyhow...
Now the business person, MR. (or MRS. or MISS. or MS.) "X", decides to structure
his business like so:
Hire some very qualified coders, and then allow them to vote and decide on a
leader programmer. Voting and democracy are generally GOOD THINGS. Then explain
to all the coders, and especially to the head programmer what the software
system "product" is supposed to do more of less. BUT let the coders decide how
to implement it as they see fit. Allow them to decide amongst themselves how
they want to work, when they want to work, where they want to work... within
budget constraints of course.
Tell them to write up a first "system" if you will, that is just polished enough
to attract attention. Then spread it far and wide...
The company will make *very little* money on the distribution front. It will
plan to make most if not all of it's "Bread 'n' Butter" from sales of service
and support contracts to large and medium sized businesses that have a need for
software systems that do "Y" very well.
And the way it benefits the coders is like this:
If you make most of your money on code maintenance, service, support, bug
fixing, adding customer demanded and requested enhancements, and added features,
and training,
Then you want to KEEP the best employees who are able to manage and do those
above listed things the best... and because the CODE is GPL'd other software
businesses may spring to life to service and support your very same product...
and the GPL is a way for the original first company to again "cover its A$$" to
keep others from going proprietary with the code, and then adding non-standard
extensions to it to lock you out of the development cycle.
I reiterate, "THE GPL IS *GOOD* FOR SOFTWARE BUSINESSES, AND THE SOFTWARE
INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE." I will laugh in your face if you think otherwise... Well,
ok, let me get off my soap box. Actually, I will take very respectfully any
comments, suggestions, or arguments to the contrary. As they will help me, and
the ideology surrounding Free Software and the GPL, to grow in a positive
direction. So actually, I wont laugh in your face... that was just me getting a
little bit of a "big head" sorry. But I left it in there for your reading
pleasure. :)
Anyhow, the GPL will allow many companies to spring up to service and support a
given software system, and help it to grow to fruition as a very good system to
do "Y" the best that it can. And if there are more than one company that
services and support software system product "abcdefg" then there is competition
to see who can pay the highest salaries and provide the best work conditions for
the coders... in order to lure them and keep them.
Power to the coders!!! Because they deserve it!
Now, what do you think 'bout that?
Sure I may have oversimplified a little and left out other things that might
come in to play that affects the above "scenario" but... I does sound nice for
the coders if I do say so myself...
Any thoughts?
> Furthermore, I think
> recognizing the value of free software means recognizing (as you
> discuss, but as a sideline) that intellectual property, as a legal
> concept, and as a human concept, needs to be deeply rethought.
> So that's where I'd go with your paper.
Oh yes very much so. I read Stallman's essay: "Why software should not have
owners"
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-free.html
And to tell the truth, I did in fact FULLY COMPREHEND that piece of writing, and
the ideas embodied in it. (My head is still spinning from having read and fully
comprehended it, let me tell you! Give it a read, if you haven't done so
already.)
But as long as there IS the concept of "copyright" in the US, and for that
matter in any and all countries in the world, there need to be the GPL, version
2.
--Brock Lynn
--------------------- PGP key ID: FED76A3D <brock@cyberdude.com> 4 / 5 / 1999
__ _ Debian GNU R. Brock Lynn <brock@cyberdude.com>
/ /(_)_ __ _ ___ __ www.debian.org irc.openprojects.net
/ / | | '_ \| | | \ \/ /
/ /__| | | | | |_| |> < World Domination, of course.
\____/_|_| |_|\__,_/_/\_\ ....... Debian's "'Da BOMB!" (=:]
Reply to: