A response to Richard Stallman

TalkBack 7 of 261:: Next »; « Previous

Thread View
Flat View

Bicycles, software, etc.: Excellent post, by the way.

I have a question that maybe you can answer. In your bicycle analogy, you mentioned that no-one can take the bicycle without depriving the owner of its use. However, where software is concerned, copies can be made which do not deprive anyone of use. But, that still leaves me with a dilemma.

Suppose, for example, that you INVENTED the bicycle. None existed before, and you were the first one to create it. You spent many hours working out the physics and engineering, you spent money purchasing the materials, and you spent many hours building it. Now, suppose again, someone came along with that duplicating machine and made a copy of it. Certainly, they have not deprived you of the use of your original bicycle, but they have effectively eliminated any possibility that you could sell the bicycle (or the designs for it) in order to recover your expenses (all but time, that is). In that case, what is your incentive (besides an altruistic desire to improve the human condition) to spend time and effort to invent other things? How do you finance your next invention?

Now, I know some will argue that you should have a "regular" job to earn money (I assume they mean greeting at Walmart; we can't all be patent clerks in Switzerland), and any idea-based invention (be it bicycles or software) should be done on your own time and donated to the human race. But, I don't think that's realistic. People throughout history have wanted a return for their investments. People have wanted to be rewarded for their hard work, and for their creativity (which is odd, when you think about it, as creativity is innate rather than acquired), and for their contributions to society. It may seem greedy, but that's the way it is. And I don't think it's going to change any time soon. How do you motivate people in the meantime to invent without reward?

Where is the incentive to spend the long hours necessary to further science? Where is the incentive to spend the long hours necessary to take software to the next level? Currently, FOSS appears to be geared more to reproducing proprietary software as free software than to breaking new ground -- and that's not surprising, as it is a "spare-time" effort for many, and the others are paid by large corporations to contribute (how does Stallman feel about that?). Corporations are going to "invent" software for one of two purposes: to save money, or to gain a competitive edge. In the first case, they have no problem with releasing the software back into the world as it won't affect their competitiveness; in the second case, that software will probably remain internal (why give up your competitive edge?). Thus, the true ground-breaking software will remain within the company; only the "replacement" software will be released. How does this further the state of software? If proprietary software had never been invented, would the state of software be where it is today? If every programmer worked on her/his own time, would we have the level of software we have today?

It's easy to criticize non-free software now, when (as you say) software and the tools to create it are abundant. But, in the early days, it wasn't until "proprietary" software (Visicalc?) came along that computers moved from the hobbyist to the corporation. And that move is what started the computer revolution. Businesses understand that it is necessary to pay for what they need (if they didn't nobody would pay for what the business produces).

Which is all a long-winded way to get back to my point (sorry). I know it's been discussed extensively in these talkbacks and in other places, but I still don't see how software will continue to advance at a rapid pace when there is no financial incentive for anyone to produce it. When we have to rely on "volunteers" to produce the software, why should they produce anything but what they need for themselves? Why should any individual programmer spend the time and effort to produce a vertical-market application? This means that corporations will have to invest in their own teams of developers to produce those applications -- like accounting software, and database software, and POS software, and so on. Some companies can afford to do this, but what about the small companies that can't afford a team of programmers (or even one programmer)? Are they out of luck? Do they have to wait until someone, somewhere, decides to write an application for them? Small companies often operate on the fringe of profitability. They can't afford to have their own developers working on applications. It's cheaper to purchase an application than to pay an employee to produce it (although that may be changing, what with overseas outsourcing and all). What do these small companies do for software?

Again, I have to express admiration for your post. I wish I could write that well (as I'm sure others do also). Maybe there's hope for these talkbacks yet.

Carl Rapson; Posted by: rapson Posted on: 01/09/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

it's not important what "we" believe, it's fact which count mgalle | 01/08/04

Interesting point John Carroll

| 01/08/04

The brings to light ParadigmOdyssey | 01/08/04

A response to John Carroll jim_oflaherty_jr | 01/08/04

Excess Capacity quietLee | 01/09/04

Now supposing Newton was a picture on the ParadigmOdyssey | 01/09/04

Bicycles, software, etc. rapson | 01/09/04

Thank you, Carl [oops, prematurely posted last one]... jim_oflaherty_jr | 01/11/04

Don't try to pigeonhole me... John Carroll

| 01/11/04

You have Pigenholed yourself Mr. Carroll Aphelion | 01/12/04

Dilemma rapson | 01/11/04

I completely understand your dilemma... jim_oflaherty_jr | 01/13/04

I'm not an obvjectivist John Carroll

| 01/11/04

Acknowledged... jim_oflaherty_jr | 01/13/04

By the way... John Carroll

| 01/12/04

I am looking forward to your response... jim_oflaherty_jr | 01/13/04

Do You Believe in Private Property Rights? P. Douglas | 01/09/04

But is software "property"? rapson | 01/09/04

Communism Redux P. Douglas | 01/09/04

Private Property is for Physical objects voska | 01/11/04

But is software "property"... wploger | 01/12/04

Yes it is...depending on where you sit Mark Miller | 01/13/04

Part 2... Mark Miller | 01/13/04

I think you misunderstood rapson | 01/13/04

I agree and disagree.... wploger | 01/12/04

why _ALL_ distribution of binaries software is worthing of money ? mgalle | 01/08/04

Because we live in an age of unchecked greed GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Because... John Carroll

| 01/08/04

The GPL can create a lot of revenue. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

Excellent Point, DonnieBoy coffeenite | 01/09/04

GPL is a valid proposition StorageGuru | 01/08/04

Some of the best and the brightest work on open source. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

Marketing gimmick? IT_User | 01/08/04

Interesting parallels... John Carroll

| 01/08/04

I think we're in basic agreement IT_User | 01/08/04

You have to pay to make it work StorageGuru | 01/08/04

Who said... IT_User | 01/08/04

inux doesn't work at the enterprise level without the proprietary add ons f NemesisNL | 01/08/04

You pay for the Windows licenses then you pay for support voska | 01/11/04

who's behind Stallman & Co? dg mh | 01/08/04

Stallman has all the money he needs, he is a great person. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

where are the money coming from? dg mh | 01/08/04

Richard Stallman is a great programmer, he could make all he wanted. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

so he is a less opressor than evil MS happy

dg mh | 01/08/04

the money is comming from ... Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

who's behind Stallman & Co? hognoxious | 01/11/04

Journalism has gone the way of the fishes GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Suppose 'nobody'' could ''SELL''''Liscences.!! ParadigmOdyssey | 01/08/04

client server jtwillia | 01/08/04

Only works if server provides something rpmyers1 | 01/08/04

Yes, that is a viable model... John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Not only viable, but common IT_User | 01/08/04

Yes, but... John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Yes, Stallman is not always right, but he gave us so much. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

I was just ParadigmOdyssey | 01/08/04

Carroll once again shows his brilliance.. Mike Cox | 01/08/04

Are you an economist for Bush?? rock06r | 01/08/04

Open source programmers are not poor. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

A couple of points Taz_z | 01/08/04

You are correct John Carroll

| 01/08/04

John, John, John... dscherf | 01/08/04

I wasn't... John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Okay dscherf | 01/08/04

But John, if programmers are making money, and it is sustainable, why not? DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

IBM John Carroll

| 01/08/04

But they are making money of of GPL code. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

Closed Source = Futile Battle serpentmage | 01/08/04

I don't agree John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Once again, for all the wrong reasons Daisy Fontana | 01/09/04

It isn't either-or IT_User | 01/08/04

NO WAY! coffeenite | 01/09/04

A response to John... avilensk1966@... | 01/08/04

I understand that John Carroll

| 01/08/04

I could agree with almost everything you said here, DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

A brief response to John Carroll's BS. dicktaurus@... | 01/08/04

Licencing tero_t_vaananen@... | 01/08/04

I agree John Carroll

| 01/08/04

extreme position ? NemesisNL | 01/08/04

Interesting Point John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Compete? NemesisNL | 01/08/04

Think further Fred Fredrickson | 01/08/04

a recipe for anarchy, not socialism. NemesisNL | 01/09/04

To Taurus John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Good! Martin Marvinski | 01/08/04

Hmmm, interesting. I thought Gates' $100 Billion circa 2000 was tops, dicktaurus@... | 01/08/04

It's HOW he got so rich which is disgusting Mikael_z | 01/10/04

I dunno ickusslime@... | 01/08/04

Look at who I respond to John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Look who John Carroll does not respond to, David Mohring | 01/08/04

Cool! Martin Marvinski | 01/08/04

Playing games John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Admit it, John, you hate Mohring's GREAT citations, never OT dicktaurus@... | 01/08/04

He hates it when you arguments are so good. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

EXACTLY GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Guilty? David Mohring | 01/08/04

Different situation Martin Marvinski | 01/08/04

A better solution... toadlife | 01/08/04

Exactly...too much truth for John GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Where in the article does it say OSS is bad? toadlife | 01/08/04

Almost everywhere, by connotation and association... dicktaurus@... | 01/08/04

It does not John Carroll

| 01/08/04

SO, if I say you're full of it, I get hot coffee in the face? Tsk tsk. dicktaurus@... | 01/08/04

That's the way John "debates" GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Heh, heh. Even Bitty_the_Ax doesn't lose it like that, eh? dicktaurus@... | 01/08/04

Well, you're just going to HATE John Carroll

| 01/08/04

I have no problem... GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Really? Mark Miller | 01/13/04

See it from my angle John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Taurus/Dick marksashton | 01/12/04

Apples and Oranges... Patrick Jones | 01/08/04

Drop it. vdraken | 01/08/04

That's true... epaval@... | 01/08/04

80% NET profit:Microsoft ripping off the consumer David Mohring | 01/08/04

What's wrong with 80%? Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

Ardian, it doesn't have to be illegal to stink. dicktaurus@... | 01/08/04

waw Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

That's not abnormal for successful software John Carroll

| 01/09/04

John you continue to fudge the facts David Mohring | 01/09/04

Conspicuous absence of links John Carroll

| 01/09/04

Conspicuous absence of critical thought Robert Crocker | 01/10/04

Some links to help... John Carroll

| 01/09/04

RE: That's not abnormal for successful software Iain_Peters | 01/09/04

Huh? John Carroll

| 01/09/04

I wouldn't knock high profit margins...if NemesisNL | 01/09/04

re: Huh? Iain_Peters | 01/10/04

Stallman is deaf to common sense and reason AtypicalZork | 01/08/04

He's just a poster boy of a hidden agenda! dg mh | 01/08/04

The programmers will do just fine, it is the glass skyscrapers DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

right... dg mh | 01/09/04

Almost all open source programmers are paid. DonnieBoy | 01/11/04

How original dscherf | 01/08/04

So does that mean... rapson | 01/08/04

Use it? dscherf | 01/08/04

It really was about using it, not selling it AtypicalZork | 01/08/04

On your points dscherf | 01/08/04

dscherf, this has nothing to do with the GPL AtypicalZork | 01/09/04

You're not making sense dscherf | 01/09/04

But it has EVERYTHING to do with the GPL dscherf | 01/09/04

The "profit" factor Robert Crocker | 01/08/04

Applying GPL to your example... epaval@... | 01/08/04

5% of all programmers are actually engaged in writing "for sale" David Mohring | 01/08/04

Applying GPL to your example... NoB$ | 01/08/04

No mistakes here epaval@... | 01/08/04

Ummm, no. Robert Crocker | 01/08/04

True epaval@... | 01/08/04

The article uses an artificial dichotomy Robert Crocker | 01/08/04

Why artificial John Carroll

| 01/08/04

what's the problem? NemesisNL | 01/08/04

Somebody better tell Gillette dscherf | 01/09/04

You're missing the point Robert Crocker | 01/10/04

Come back to reality Fred Fredrickson | 01/08/04

But Profit... John Carroll

| 01/08/04

Hogwash Robert Crocker | 01/09/04

Hog-drying John Carroll

| 01/09/04

That undermines SOFTWARE companies NemesisNL | 01/09/04

HIt the nail on the head voska | 01/11/04

Hog set, blow, and perm. Robert Crocker | 01/10/04

Coexistence Martin Marvinski | 01/08/04

How Does the Capitalist View Open Source [and GPL]? David Mohring | 01/08/04

WOW NemesisNL | 01/08/04

GPL isn't communist John Carroll

| 01/09/04

I would call its leading practitioner mildly totalitarian NemesisNL | 01/09/04

The facts and evidence defy John Carroll David Mohring | 01/08/04

Yes, his ridiculous arguments just help open source. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

Until the world changes, tangible profits still sought FilledOut | 01/08/04

Ask IBM,Novell,HP,Intel,AMD,Sun,Oracle, .... David Mohring | 01/08/04

Read back through my Zdnet posts FilledOut | 01/08/04

False Premise John Carroll

| 01/09/04

Pity you choose to ignore what could save embarrassment David Mohring | 01/09/04

A response John Carroll

| 01/09/04

Socialism has NEVER worked. No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/08/04

Nither have dictatorships based upon lies and deception David Mohring | 01/08/04

Here's why: Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

How does that invalidate my argument. David Mohring | 01/08/04

Example please. NoB$ | 01/08/04

wrong Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

Actually, you are wrong Patrick Jones | 01/08/04

not complete Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

I think you are mistaken.. Patrick Jones | 01/09/04

socialism Ardian Daka | 01/12/04

I would suggest a history class. No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/08/04

Neither does Capitolism slopoke | 01/08/04

Not a good anlogy dg mh | 01/08/04

How can the GPL and IBM be even consided communist? David Mohring | 01/08/04

IBM is the ruler, GPL is the "happy" people dg mh | 01/08/04

Huh? Robert Crocker | 01/08/04

WHAT? IT_User | 01/08/04

what what? dg mh | 01/08/04

Wow... Martin Marvinski | 01/08/04

Socialism is not a valid comparison Martin Marvinski | 01/08/04

To put it another way... No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/08/04

There's profit and there's profit NemesisNL | 01/08/04

OSS is not socialism NemesisNL | 01/08/04

Tools of applied socialism pj-xmesh | 01/10/04

Socialism Works fine voska | 01/11/04

schematics are important Jay_H | 01/08/04

Stallman in a sentence Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

In Full Context: Freedom or Power? David Mohring | 01/08/04

Copy and paste. Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

Cut and construe? Robert Crocker | 01/08/04

Welcome back Robert. Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

No difference rapson | 01/08/04

The difference is in the reasoning Robert Crocker | 01/08/04

Agreed Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

Myopia on both sides Eric Guerber | 01/08/04

Regarding profit John Carroll

| 01/08/04

What's Stallman stands for ... in his own words: Ardian Daka | 01/08/04

Plain and simple, the man is a freak. No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/08/04

No valid argument, Mr. Ad Hominem (NT) dscherf | 01/08/04

But he is voska | 01/11/04

But that's not the definition of a freak dscherf | 01/12/04

They do in my book voska | 01/12/04

So was Einstein, and they are both brilliant. DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

No, Einstien was paid for his work. No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/08/04

Actually... GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Message has been deleted. No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/08/04

Wow... Martin Marvinski | 01/08/04

Actually Daisy Fontana | 01/08/04

Hitler was brilliant, what's you point? No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/08/04

So True NemesisNL | 01/08/04

Hitler was a murderous, racist pederast. Fred Fredrickson | 01/11/04

Most brilliance dies of with age voska | 01/11/04

It's called being cynical NemesisNL | 01/13/04

Gates is "brilliant" too, and you follow him whereever GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

BTW, try not to get your angry posts deleted too often GRindinAxTaRupy | 01/08/04

Yes, Hitler is a lot like Bill Gates, here we are talking about good freaks DonnieBoy | 01/08/04

Imitate? I think you mean emulate (NM) Fred Fredrickson | 01/09/04

Name calling?!? Robert Crocker | 01/12/04

John = Clueless (as usual?) Daisy Fontana | 01/08/04

Reality check russofris | 01/08/04

Logical & lucid - so you're ignored. Fred Fredrickson | 01/10/04

More Response John Carroll

| 01/11/04

Less is more Fred Fredrickson | 01/14/04

There are other ways to generate revenue. mariomiy | 01/08/04

Wrong again! devooght@... | 01/08/04

Developers have no god given right to subsidies Brendans | 01/08/04

RS - Our greatest treasure ... Our greatest embarressment George Mitchell | 01/08/04

Journalist Misses the Point mslicker | 01/08/04

The drug company analogy is nieve. waylander_2k@... | 01/09/04

You are mostly right here. Mack DaNife | 01/09/04

A response to Richard Stallman lpletch@... | 01/09/04

Response on the ZDNet UK site John Carroll

| 01/09/04

Why the surprise John? GNU Manifesto been around since '84 Sleveless | 01/09/04

wasting electrons xman_z | 01/09/04

Hahahahahahahahahahaha Daisy Fontana | 01/09/04

Stallman has his good points though FilledOut | 01/10/04

Is GPL the commonest form of Open Source Linsensing? KSchaefer | 01/10/04

what if tivo didn't use linux JWatson77 | 01/11/04

what is and what should never be ? pj-xmesh | 01/11/04

Two basic mistakes praksys | 01/11/04

and a third one on your side Ardian Daka | 01/12/04

Freedom not be asked? praksys | 01/15/04

My View on Open Source Free Software voska | 01/11/04

Carroll's position is reasonable. Tim Patterson | 01/12/04

reasonable? NemesisNL | 01/13/04

What Really Matters? fosterd42 | 01/12/04

Mr. Stallman peculiar | 01/12/04

Let me make this clear for those who don't read JJ_z | 01/13/04

Interesting Copyright notice on Mr. Stallman's Article JJ_z | 01/13/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Breaking DB2 Platform Barriers Quest Software Are you supporting DB2 on multiple platforms? In this Quest white paper ... Download Now
Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now
Addressing Compliance Requirements for Privacy, Data Retention, and e-Discovery Trend Micro Protecting individual and financial data, retaining data, and meeting ... Download Now

Premier Vendor Content Whitepapers, webcasts & resources from our Power Center Sponsors

SmartPlanet

Thought-provoking progressive ideas on diverse topics that intersect with technology, business, and life, and matter to the world at large. Visit SmartPlanet
More from IBM
How to Drive Better Business Outcomes with Exceptional Web Experiences Download the eBook
Driving Business Agility through SOA Connectivity & Integration Read the White Paper from IBM
Linking Decisions and Information for Organizational Performance Read the Tom Davenport study

Read the original story

A response to Richard Stallman

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Premier Vendor Content Whitepapers, webcasts & resources from our Power Center Sponsors

SmartPlanet

Blogs

Product Reviews

Videos

White Papers and Webcasts

Downloads

More

ZDNet News & Blogs

Product Reviews

Product Blogs

White Papers & Webcasts

Downloads