Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> __/ [ Linonut ] on Saturday 03 February 2007 04:25 \__
>
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, [H]omer belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>
>>> Like I've said before, freedom can only exist so long as it is
>>> protected, but Weinberg, it seems, is more interested in protecting
>>> his wallet, than his soul.
>>
>> That's the point some people seem to miss about Stallman. He doesn't
>> give a rat's ass about companies being able to make money off of
>> GNU/Linux.
>>
>> He just wants to have an operating system that is truly his, and that
>> others can say is truly theirs.
>>
>> Even if all companies dropped GNU software like a hot potato, GNU will
>> still thrive. Quite enough people benefit from it, even ignoring those
>> who use it to make commercial-style money.
>
> Yes, I agree with all the points made here (also [H]omer's). There is a push
> to 'massage' Linux and make it profitable by allowing commercial trends to
> take over and permitting compromises. Just look at the deal with Novell.
> Then, look at the item I posted this morning... about Microsoft 'hijacking'
> a Linux conference in Asia. Not even a conference that promotes freedom can
> take place without Microsoft's supervision and agenda. Amazing! It is _not_
> the first time this happens. And Microsoft now "sells Linux" to companies
> and providing its "support", or "permission" (IP), or "endorsement". This
> should _NOT_ be tolerated. The FSF certainly sees where it's going and folks
> like Weinberg (think Stuart Cohen who was probably pushed closer to the
> cliff, so to speak, after he praised the Novell/Microsoft deal) do not
> help.
Charging some moneys for good SW does not be making it like the evil of
MS. It is common sense to all.
Are you not paid money some times for services to students?
|
|
