Re: [Somewhat More OT] Closed source software Was [Re: Hmmm. A question. Was [Re: Debian is losing its users]]

[Hal Vaughan <hal@thresholddigital.com>]

On Saturday 05 April 2008, Chris Walters wrote:
> Hal Vaughan wrote:
> | On Friday 04 April 2008, Chris Walters wrote:
> | ...
> |
> |> If RMS is basing his ideals on the GNU charter, I don't think he
> |> read it clearly enough.  "Free: As in freedom".  This should apply
> |> whether a person wants to use pure open source software, closed
> |> source software, or a mix of both.  This is freedom.
> |
> | That is how you and most others would define freedom.  It's not how
> | he defines it.  How you define that word makes a big difference.
> |
> | Hal
>
> That is true - how is word is defined does make a big difference. 
> For example, if I define the word "freedom" to mean slavery, and the
> concept of "human rights" to mean "the right be be only a slave, or a
> slave owner", then I am attacking the language by altering
> fundamental definitions of word, and concepts.

Yes, it is an attack on the language, since the other discussion (in 
terms of software) is a matter of degree and freedom is slavery is 
dealing with exact opposites.  (Where have I heard that phrase about 
freedom and slavery before?...)

> I know that he doesn't define freedom as I and most others do, but I
> hope that he and those others are in the minority fringe.

I would think so, but I also think this is a minority fringe that has 
created benefits for the rest of us.

Hal