Re: non-free and users?
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 09:55:57PM +0100, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:
> My vision is based on the fact that most users do not care about
> software freeness. Most of them are not acquainted with such complicated
> issue as software freeness, source codes etc. So, educated in this area
> software developer(distributor) is more responsible for the software
> which he provides. Especially if he is well known and popular.
My vision is that free software greatly benefits computer literate people,
with less benefits as literacy declines.
>From my point of view, the people who don't care much are also the people
who don't get as much beneft. They get some [they aren't completely
illiterate], but not as much.
Furthermore, the natural benefits of free software means that in many
cases there will be more of it than of non-free software. There are
exceptions [where non-free software has some benefit], but most of those
exceptions result in highly proprietary commercial software -- which we
can't distribute at all.
Or, try it this way: our "non-free" software is more like "mildly
repressed" than "without freedom".
If Linux were on the majority of all desktops, I might buy into the
idea that getting rid of non-free would benefit the majority of users.
But, right now, the so many users use stuff so much less free than our
"non-free" that that concept seems a bit silly.