Re: non-free and users?
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 02:54:49PM +0100, Sergey Spiridonov wrote:
> >>Exactly. I hope you do not think, that non-free software is a healing water.
Raul Miller wrote:
> > No, I think it's more like a hammer.
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 08:15:10PM +0100, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:
> This is the difference in our points. I think that non-free software is
> dangerous and mostly evil like a narcotic and should be immediately
I understand that.
What I don't understand is the basis for this belief of yours.
Is it just the presence of the phrase "non-free"? Because, you don't
seem to care anything about the details.
You would have use treat freely redistributable GNU documentation under
GFDL exactly the same as we currently treat commercial software which
costs $250,000 for every CPU it runs on and another $25,000 for every
user permitted to use it.
I don't think that makes sense.
> Your point is that it can be useful like a hammer and can be
> promoted. I see no reason for you to change your mind and probably we
> can not convince each other.
I don't see any reason for me to change my mind, either.