Title itself slightly misleading
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| vainrveenr Nov 25, 2008 5:26 PM EDT |
Schroder's main message in this piece is arguably more of an energetic appeal for others to more actively contribute volunteer efforts for Linux than it is to define "Freedom". In point of fact, and directly related this piece's title, is the clarification of "Free" which immediately precedes the quote Schroder brings from Richard Stallman famous Four Freedoms: Quoting:"Free software" is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of "free" as in "free speech," not as in "free beer."(http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html ) Free as in beer" seems a more amenable phrase for those who wish to USE and cooperatively SHARE the very commodity/code in question, yet at the same time honor the legal restrictions on the commodity/code chosen by the creator(s) of such. It is a MUCH less alienating phrase to use than "cheapskates" for those who wish to overcome the knowledge-barriers to understanding this whole GPL concept and who wish to use and learn Linux other than being given that "free as in beer" Ubuntu CD --- this is a clearly positive sense of "free". OTOH, "freeloader" has a decidedly negative connotation compared to "free beer", the former of these perhaps much more obviously used by those who generate code (or a commodity such as a non-PDF book?) and wish to make a pragmatic PROFIT from this. One might ask whether those who so heatedly use the term "freeloader" are themselves really engaging in a type of Protectionism? For those much closer to the former "free as in beer" camp who actually DO wish to create, use, and share non-code creative works, there is the very fine Creative Commons license, http://creativecommons.org/ As written in the CC 'About' page: Quoting:Too often the debate over creative control tends to the extremes. At one pole is a vision of total control — a world in which every last use of a work is regulated and in which “all rights reserved” (and then some) is the norm. At the other end is a vision of anarchy — a world in which creators enjoy a wide range of freedom but are left vulnerable to exploitation. Balance, compromise, and moderation — once the driving forces of a copyright system that valued innovation and protection equally — have become endangered species.(from http://creativecommons.org/about/ ) "Balance, compromise, and moderation".... excellent words to use indeed for CC's cookbook recipe of for-profit use together with "free as in beer for certain uses". Schroder appeals to others for Quoting:artists, designers, documentation writers, community builders, helpful patient people to do hands-on work with newbies, teachers, distributors, computer fixers, programmers, bug-finders, evangelists, organizers, financial supporters, and so on.So in order to remove the knowledge-barriers for all of these folks, when then can one expect the managing editor of LinuxPlanet to continue to Walk the Walk by making the entire material of her fine Linux Cookbook freely available on her site http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplane, hmmm ??? ... and Knowledge itself must decidedly remain "free as in beer" here. |
| tuxchick Nov 25, 2008 6:01 PM EDT |
Sigh. I don't know why you keep pecking at this-- it's a bogus assertion, and I am officially not deigning to dignify it with an answer. |
| jdixon Nov 25, 2008 6:13 PM EDT |
> ...freely available on her site [HYPERLINK@www.linuxplanet.com] hmmm ??? Being the managing editor does not make it "her site". |
| vainrveenr Nov 25, 2008 7:01 PM EDT |
Quoting:it's a bogus assertion, and I am officially not deigning to dignify it with an answer.Obviously, a fait accompli in that "its" answer has already been deigned to be dignified by at least one person's reply.... and an assertion perhaps publicly documented as not so "bogus" after all... Can one plausibly assert from this very answer that the infamous author of the Linux Cookbook is and will remain loathe to freely publicize the knowledge within this ... and for the clearly-intended and pragmatic benefit of the volunteers called upon above ?? Assuming for the moment that the author's refraining from this positive action is unquestionably and utterly ethical (to directly use the author's term as presented), how else then can the author who so fervently Talks the Talk effectively recruit such volunteers ?? Of course those besides the author are "free" to share their answers here as well, in order to fill the official and unofficial void. |
| azerthoth Nov 25, 2008 7:51 PM EDT |
vain we get it, your in the freeloader camp. |
| dinotrac Nov 26, 2008 8:36 AM EDT |
Carla's premise is nice but wrong. Free software is not limited to, but definitely includes free as in freeloader. Freedoms 0 and 1, the basis of freeloading, are not dependent on 3 and 4, the basis of sharing. In both license and philosophy (if you take the 4 freedoms to be a philosophy of free software), freeloading is just fine. But here's a question for all thee who disdain the loaders of free: Why get your nose out of joint and why presume that freeloaders server no valuable purpose to the community? When somebody gets his/her company to use free software for a project, it increases the reach of free software. It creates employment opportunities. It createst -- most importantly of all -- the basis of network effects. That should not go under appreciated. Microsoft Windows and the software that run on it do not dominate on the basis of technical excellence. A big part of their power is network effects -- ie, everybody uses it. One cool thing about free software is that people who put it in place and really use it to do things give back whether they want to or not. It's in the nature of the beast. |
| jdixon Nov 26, 2008 10:06 AM EDT |
> In both license and philosophy (if you take the 4 freedoms to be a philosophy of free software), freeloading is just fine. Agreed. Not to make too much of a point, but the posters here, myself included, are not your average user. We usually have years of experience with Linux and a number of installs under our belts. We're capable of decyphering documentation that most users would find impenetrable, and even (on occasion) translating that into plain English for others. Not everyone can give back to that extent. Some people will always be just users. The best they will be able to do is say "Hey, I tried Linux, and it works great for me" to the other people they know. That is not an insignificant thing, and if they do that, they've done their part to help the community. |
| tuxchick Nov 26, 2008 11:53 AM EDT |
jdixon and dino, what you describe is also a way of contributing back. So you agree with me and I win again! Yaaay! High-five! ;) |
| tuxchick Nov 26, 2008 12:24 PM EDT |
I've been mulling over vrainveer's post, and there are some interesting points to ponder. Sorry for the peeve, vrainveer, but hardly a month goes by that someone doesn't whine at me about how wrong it is to get paid and make a living and evil things like that. So I'm chronically grouchy on the subject. Still sorting out the thoughts, I just wanted vrainveer to know I'm thinking. (Hence the occasional cries of pain.) |
| NoDough Nov 26, 2008 12:50 PM EDT |
Vain, I admit that I haven't read Carla's books. (Sorry, Carla) However, I'm sure it would be possible for you to amass the knowledge and experience that Carla has and write an equivalent work to be shared freely. P.S.: You're so vain, I bet you think this post is about you. |
| flufferbeer Nov 26, 2008 2:09 PM EDT |
With a subject of free as in beer or freeloading, it's too tempting not to avoid this thread ;)
@vainveern and others
One thing you should more carefully ponder on is that those who ARE contributing already to Linux such as tuxchick have to earn a living and support themselves financially. That's the reality of it. Contributing back to the community comes AFTER you can bring in the dough (sorry to have to use this expr NoDough!) So tuxchick and other authors have too little financial incentive to make the books they've published for sale available to freeloaders and free-downloaders. I'm reading it as azrtoth writes, that this is what your bringing out. I'm guessing that If O'Reilly publishers find out clear evidence that tuxchick's books are being scanned and fileshared online with her knowledge or even distributed on the LinuxPlanet blog, they'll scream RIAA-Criminal at her in the blink of an eye. I.e., she just CANNOT share her complete books' info in any free way. @tuxchick, At the same time as all this, I do see vainrveenr's points and more. Here is a mostly cleared-up email sent to me after the person viewed some of the top opinions --- begin quote --- read all the posts ya4sure freebeeer could2B this here this bud's 4u, I likeit now that's sharing !!!!!!!!! go tell alt-0thers that sackb**** is ripe ready 2freelood the nocost info that alt-0thers share4her all 2sell her next book.oy vee sqeezez moi! such a bigg *** hippoc$it thief loserck! --- end quote --- Points I see from this in clear English and w/o getting insulting here are a) that the writer feels that you yourself are a freeloader when you are calling for others to volunteer their own free time and efforts for the primary advantage to you of selling your own books and b) that you are a hypocrite for not practicing what you are calling for Now I'm definitely _NOT_ agreeing with this person's viewpoints, just that some of us can very well _understand_ it just as for vv's and dinotrac's POVs. 4c |
| dinotrac Nov 26, 2008 2:27 PM EDT |
TC - You are now officially qualified to run for high public office. Go get 'em. NoDough - I have not only read, but reviewed (you can find it on slashdot and some other places) Carla's Linux Networking Cookbook. It is my humble opinion that Carla's efforts are worthy of a little coin. It is also my humble opinion that she should send some my way for drumming up business. Just a thought. |
| NoDough Nov 27, 2008 10:34 PM EDT |
Apparently my sarcasm was a bit too subtle. Here's the line: Quoting:I'm sure it would be possible for you to amass the knowledge and experience that Carla has and write an equivalent work to be shared freely.The point being that Carla put a great deal of time and effort into gaining the knowledge and experience necessary to publish her books. If that knowledge and experience didn't have value (i.e. wasn't "worthy of a little coin") then vainrveenr wouldn't be so anxious to liberate it. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!