Re: Conflict of interest in Debian
On 15/10/14 22:08, berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote:
>
>
> Le 15.10.2014 12:09, Brian a écrit :
>> On Wed 15 Oct 2014 at 10:41:12 +0200, berenger.morel@neutralite.org
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Le 15.10.2014 09:11, Jonathan Dowland a écrit :
>>> >On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:51:07AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>>> >>Check out what single company has 30% of the gatekeepers. Surprise,
>>> >>surprise.
>>> >
>>> >Damned for their success. We want Linux to be successful, but woe
>>> >betide any
>>> >company that actually gets us there...
>>>
>>> Maybe you want.
>>> But I think that most users just want it to work fine and
>>> efficiently, which does not necessarily imply being sold massively
>>> around the world.
I would have 'thought' all users want "it" to be "useful" - but surely I
miss your point? (was there a point? I can only work with the words you
write and it reads like sophist rhetoric, assume the first nonsense is
not and it follows that neither is the second). As far as I'm aware
Debian has *never* been sold anywhere, nor are there plans to - did I
miss another meeting down the docks?
>>
>> He's doing some of the work on Debian; others work with different
>> distributions. They get what they want. Users get what they want.
>> Everyone's a winner. :)
>
> Maybe. But, when someone tries to sell stuff a lot, to have a big market
> share, then that guy must take a large target, which leads to systems
> which might become less stable or less efficient. And if that guy want
> to keep his market, then he'll have to avoid people escaping his stuff,
> this is why vendor locks exists.
I could quote you Adam Smith on commerce and conspiracy - though I
seriously doubt he ever meant there are no non-business conspiracies. He
was smarter than that.
But it'd be more pertinent to note that servers cost money to run and
Debian (and the FSF) do a good job of not allowing any contributions in
labour or money to control it's production or direction. To allow the
former would be both foolish and ignore the nature of Free Open Source
Software. I can't think of any distro that doesn't accept assistance
from business.
With the possible exception of Hairshirtix (forked from
SelfFlagellantOS) but I'm pretty sure they haven't produced any actual
working code. ;)
> Definitely, I hope that Debian won't take that road.
Likewise, and I'm sure Intel don't want RedHat driving anymore than
RedHat want Google in control - even if IBM was prepared to let them,
and in the end it's still down to the programmers. And can only buy so
much with a paycheck. (last time I checked Linus gets paid to work on
the kernel).
> It it does, then,
> I'll switch. I'm taking a look at netBSD, even if I guess that I'll have
> a hard time being successful in feeling as comfortable with it than with
> Debian.
Here's a good place to start your "looking":-
http://www.netbsd.org/contrib/org/
Kind regards
Reply to: