Patent problems plague Linux

TalkBack 41 of 67:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

If you believe that about Open Source and Capitalism, you will love this:

As I understand it, the whole point of living in a capitalist society is our ability to make a buck.

From: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/GLOSSARY/CAPITAL.HTM

Capitalism is a difficult, problematic term; it applies to a diversity of phenomenon spread across disparate historical cultures with substantially variable world views. However, the term is an Enlightenment European term used to describe European practices; so the term "capitalism" means more than just a body of social practices easily applied across geographical and historical distances, it is also a "way of thinking," and as a way of thinking does not necessarily apply to earlier European origins of capitalism or to capitalism as practiced in other cultures.

The earliest forms of capitalism?which we call "mercantilism"?originate in Rome, the Middle East, and the early Middle Ages. Mercantilism might be roughly defined as the distribution of goods in order to realize a profit. Goods are bought at one site for a certain price and moved to another site and sold at a higher price. As the Roman empire expanded, mercantilism correspondingly expanded. But the contraction of the Roman empire from the fifth century onwards also contracted mercantilism until, by the 700's, it was not a substantial aspect of European culture, that is, European economies tended to localize. Arabic cultures, on the other hand, had a long history of mercantilism, living as they did on the trade routes between three great empires: Egypt, Persia, and later Byzantium. As Islam from the seventh century A.D. onwards spread like wildfire across Northern Africa, Spain, the Middle East and Asia, Arabic mercantilism assumed an unprecedented global character. The medieval Europeans essentially learned mercantilism from their Islamic neighbors, evidenced in large part by the number of economic terms in European languages that are derived from Arabic, such as tariff and traffic. From the 1300's, Europeans would begin expanding their mercantile practices, resulting in a social mobility hitherto unseen in European culture as well as pushing Europeans, as it did the Muslims, to explore distant parts of the globe. The voyages of discovery were entirely driven by mercantile ambitions.

As time went on in Europe, mercantilism gradually evolved into economic practices that would eventually be called capitalism. Capitalism is based on the same principle as mercantilism: the large-scale realization of a profit by acquiring goods for lower prices than one sells them. But capitalism as a practice is characterized by the following:

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

Capitalism as an economic system
There is much debate over how to define capitalism. Some proponents of capitalism (like Milton Friedman) emphasize the role of (presumably efficient) free markets, which, they claim, promote freedom and democracy. For many (like Immanuel Wallerstein), capitalism hinges on the elaboration of an economic system in which goods and services are traded in markets, and capital goods belong to non-state entities, onto a global scale. For others (like Karl Marx), it is defined by the creation of a labor market in which most people had to sell their labor-power in order to survive. As Marx argued (see also Hilaire Belloc) capitalism is also distinguished from other market economies with private ownership by the concentration of the means of production in the hands of a few.
According to Karl Marx, the treatment of labor as a commodity led to people valuing things more according to their price rather than their usefulness (see commodity fetishism) and to an expansion of the system of commodities. Marx observed that some people bought commodities in order to use them, while others bought them in order to sell elsewhere at a profit. Much of the history of late capitalism involves what David Harvey called the "system of flexible accumulation" in which more and more things become commodities, the value of which is determined by their exchange rather than by their use. Thus not only are pins commodities; shares of ownership in a factory that makes pins become commodities; then options on shares of stock become commodities; then portions of interest rates on bonds become commodities, and so on. The predominance of commodity speculation in modern capitalism very much shapes its results.
The following example introduces many of the ideas involved in capitalism. When starting a business, the initial owners typically provide some money (the Capital) which is used by the business to buy or rent some means of production. For example, the enterprise may buy or rent a piece of land and a building; it may buy machinery and hire workers (labor-power). The commodities produced by the workers are sold by the capitalist, who pays the workers a portion for their labor, pays other overhead costs, and keeps the rest as profit. If more money is needed than the initial owners are willing to provide, the business may to borrow a limited amount of extra money with a promise to pay it back with interest -- in effect it may rent more capital. The business is granted a degree of legal authority, and control, over a set of factors of production (as economists call them). The business can register as a corporate entity, meaning that it can act as a type of virtual person in many matters before the law (see Companies for listing of such entities). The owners can pay themselves some of the income derived from the business (Dividends), sell shares of stock in the company, or they can sell all of the equipment, land, and other assets, and split the proceeds between them.
Traditionally, capitalist economies have had corporations working along the lines of the above example existing in parallel with other types of organisation such as governments, sole traders, partnerships and sometimes cooperatives, credit unions, and other entities. Observers do not always agree which of these organisations, or which features of them are part of capitalism, although most often companies, or many features of their operation, are included as part of the definition.
Additionally, many of the characteristics and techniques of business workings in the above example existed before capitalism, and many have continued to be added. So this leaves much room for debate. However, many people agree that it was around the time when share-trading in corporate bodies became common and widely understood that capitalism can be said to have begun, even though there is often disagreement that it was the share-trading itself that defined capitalism. Such share trading first took place widely in Europe during the 17th century and continued to develop and spread thereafter, although the word "capitalism" itself did not come into use until the 19th century.
One can view shares as converting company ownership into a commodity - the ownership rights are divided into units (the shares) for ease of trading in them. In a similar way, one can view bonds as a commoditisation of debt. Other financial instruments have come into being since the early years of capitalism that have commoditised fluctuations in markets, future prices, classes of items, and many other things. Increases in communications technologies have helped facilitate an increase in the number and availability of financial instruments, and the ease of trading.
In the bulk of capitalist economies, a predominant proportion of productive capacity has belonged to corporate bodies such as companies. Therefore, to a large degree, authority over productive capacity has resided with the owners of companies. Within legal limits and the financial means available to them, the owners of each company can decide how it will operate. This normally includes deciding the following things (among many others):
? which land production will take place on,
? how many people to employ,
? what activities employees will do,
? which machines and tools to use for production.
In larger companies, authority is usually delegated in a hierarchical or bureaucratic system of management. When company ownership is spread among many shareholders, the shareholders generally have votes in the exercise of authority over the company in proportion to the size of their share of ownership.
Importantly, the owners receive any profits or proceeds generated by the productive capacity that they own - sometimes in the form of dividends, other times in the form of profits being re-invested in the capacity that is owned (and "capital gains"). The price at which ownership of productive capacity sells is generally in rough proportion to the profits currently being generated and/or expected to be generated by that productive capacity in the future. There is therefore a financial incentive for owners to exercise their authority in ways that increase the productive capacity of what they own. Various owners are motivated to various degrees by this incentive -- some give away a proportion of what they own, others seem very driven to increase their holdings. Nevertheless the incentive is always there, and it is credited by many as being a key aspect behind the growth exhibited by capitalist economies. Meanwhile, some critics of capitalism claim that the incentive for the owners is exaggerated and that it results in the owners receiving money that rightfully belongs to the workers, while others point to the fact that the incentive only motivates owners to make a profit - something which may not necessarely result in a positive impact on society.
Characteristics of capitalist economies
Economic growth
Capitalist economies have shown an erratic but sustained tendency towards economic growth, when measured as an increase in GDP. They have on occasion been through nearly disastrous periods (such as the Great depression), and some have argued that it has only been government intervention that has prevented capitalist economies from collapsing, while others maintain that it was government intervention that caused such disasters. The former argue that it is only government intervention that has enabled capitalist economies to ever grow at all, or even that economic growth in capitalist economies is not due to capitalism itself, but exists despite capitalism - perhaps due to some other reason such as increased scientific knowledge, or some form of 'imperialism'. Others have argued that the natural tendency of capitalism is to continuous growth and that government intervention in the form of subsidies and taxes is the cause of depressions. Yet others argue that growth, or often growth without enough freedom, is a bad thing. Still others argue that modern capitalism has been a disaster because of its other effects besides the growth of GDP. Further discussion on these points might be found in following sections. Nevertheless, good or bad, because of or despite capitalism, it can be seen from history that there has been a sustained tendency for capitalist economies to grow over time.
It should be noted, however, that many economic systems that have existed for significant periods of time have also exibited economic growth. Thus, although such growth is an aspect of capitalism, it is by no means unique to capitalist economies.


Sure, a few people get squished along the way, but hey, that's social Darwinism.

From: http://www.ioa.com/~shermis/socjus/socdar.html

The Misapplication of a Biological Theory
But, for our purposes, it is the use to which some people made of biological evolution which concerns us. Some simplified the idea to "survival of the fittest." Others believed that an identical process took place among human beings. They believed that white Protestant Europeans had evolved much further and faster than other "races." And some, especially the followers of Herbert Spencer, took it one step further. Human society is always in a kind of evolutionary process in which the fittest- which happened to be those who can make lots of money--were chosen to dominate. There were armies of unfit, the poor, who simply could not compete. And just as nature weeds out the unfit, an enlightened society ought to weed out its unfit and permit them to die off so as not to weaken the racial stock.
This idea eventually led to a variety of practices and beliefs, e.g., Nordic Racism, used by German anthropologists and later Nazi theoreticians. It also led to eugenics in which, it was believed, the unfit transmit their undesirable characteristics. A breeding program for human beings would see to it that the unfit did not transmit their undesirable characteristics.
Another application of a biological concept to human behavior was the notion that any attempt to provide welfare for the poor was a tragically misguided mistake. Feeding or housing the poor simply permitted them to survive and to transmit their unfitness to their children, who in turn would pass it on to their children. A spurious piece of sociology about two families known as the Jukes and the Kallikaks purported to trace a race of criminals and prostitutes to two persons in the Revolutionary War. This study was used for many years to demonstrate that "inferiority" was inherited.
Many in our culture did not bother to read Spencer, Darwin nor did they realize the oversimplification of eugenics. But that is not the point. The point is that a piece of ideology got into American life and assumed considerable importance. What is also significant is that some, e.g., wealthy industrialists, believed that what they were doing was supported by science. Yes, they said, the caucasian, European-derived male industrialist was at the apex of evolution. And yes, they said, it is undesirable to provide, as public policy, governmental support for any plan that would perpetuate racial weakness.
Other social theories competed with Social Darwinism. By the 1930s, the New Deal created a climate in which the government was responsible for a "net" that would not allow any individual to lapse into abject poverty, homelessness on a wide scale, hunger or destitution. However, in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan was elected on a platform which declared that New Deal policies were responsible for poverty, crime, and all other social problems. Government, Reagan kept on repeating, was not any part of a solution to the problem. Government was the problem. Therefore, a good many policies based upon the "net" concept were weakened or simply eliminated.
As we approach the millennium, it is not accurate to say that 19th century Social Darwinism, "Reaganomics," New Deal philosophy or its manifestation in the economic policies of President Clinton is now dominant. A fair assessment is that all of these ideologies can be found within our society--as public policy and as belief structure. The ability of conflicting, incompatible social philosophies to live side by side, even within the same person, (cite) explains why there is so much unresolved conflict, why it is difficult for a given bit of social policy to achieve permanence. why, as many have pointed out, there is considerable poverty in the wealthiest society in the world.

As a whole, the system has worked pretty well for a few hundred years. Now traditionally in the technology business, taking something that someone else developed\invented and creating a product that you make money from is stealing. However, in the open source community you never say the word stealing because it's just the rapid advancement of technology or some other line of crap.

So we can dump DNS for the most part (and URLs, URIs, URNs, etc.), as this is based upon ISC BIND,an Open Source product used in the primary DNS servers around the globe and created by Paul Vixie? How about LDAP (created at the University of Michigan as a lightweight interface or replacement for X.500) which is the basis for Microsoft?s Active Directory, OpenLDAP (http://www.openldap.org) , Sun Directory Services, now part of Solaris 8 through current, ?? Damn, all those companies didn?t have any original thoughts and copied students work, even Microsoft?

In the end, what you're really doing is taking advantage of other people's work because you are too greedy and lazy to come up with anything original on your own.

Microsoft Word started life as a wrapper for Wordstar (meaning that it was only a front end, maybe a copy). There are countless products from both camps (open Source and proprietary/commercial) that barrow ideas from each other for ideas, To this day, people use Visicalc derivatives (copies), Longhorn includes a Unix subsystem called Services For Unix, which is derived from work done by the BSD developers (See: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20030927090008 and
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/interop/sfu/pthreads0.mspx )
Text from: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/interop/sfu/pthreads0.mspx

What is Interix?
Interix is a UNIX environment for use on current Windows platforms. A complete Interix system is composed of several functional components: a subsystem, a collection of utilities, and a Software Developers Kit (SDK). The subsystem is like a UNIX kernel in that it provides the fundamental UNIX operating system functionality?the calls such as the read and write, process creation and management with the fork, and exec functions as well as the signature UNIX mechanisms like signals, named pipes (fifos), symlinks, job control and shared memory. The SDK allows one to build or migrate UNIX source code applications so they will execute on a Windows system. Many of the applications provided in the Interix environment are open source utilities from various UNIX distributions such as OpenBSD, FreeBSD and GNU. Many of these utilities were migrated to Interix by simply recompiling using the original source code.

See also: http://www.openbsd.org/ , http://www.freebsd.org/ , http://www.gnu.org/


The patent violations are just a symptom of the bigger problem, a complete lack of creativity and talent on the part of the open source community.

Have fun defending that theory with the links here! You can start with: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/interop/sfu/pthreads0.mspx

From September 27, 2003 (not that long ago):

Richard R Charron writes:
"I installed MS Services for UNIX 3.0 at a client's site, fired up a C Shell, did a "strings * | grep -i bsd" and what do you know... OpenBSD!"

Script started on Sat Sep 13 01:12:33 2003
Script flushing every 30 seconds
$ uname -a Interix burnt 3.0 SP-7.0.1701.1 x86 Pentium II/Celeron/Xeon (rev0x0501)
$ pwd /bin
$ strings * | grep -i bsd $OpenBSD: strlen.c,v 1.3 1996/08/19 08:34:19 tholo Exp $
$OpenBSD: strlen.c,v 1.3 1996/08/19 08:34:19 tholo Exp $
$OpenBSD: strcpy.c,v 1.4 1996/08/19 08:34:14 tholo Exp $
$OpenBSD: strncpy.c,v 1.2 1996/08/19 08:34:22 tholo Exp $
$OpenBSD: strncmp.c,v 1.3 1996/08/19 08:34:21 tholo Exp $
$OpenBSD: strlcpy.c,v 1.4 1999/05/01 18:56:41 millert Exp $
$OpenBSD: memchr.c,v 1.2 1996/08/19 08:34:04 tholo Exp $
$OpenBSD: memset.c,v 1.2 1996/08/19 08:34:07 tholo Exp $
$OpenBSD: at.c,v 1.20 2001/01/17 19:29:06 deraadt Exp $
$OpenBSD: panic.c,v 1.5 2000/11/17 18:40:50 deraadt Exp $
$OpenBSD: parsetime.c,v 1.9 2000/01/05 08:06:25 millert Exp $
$OpenBSD: perm.c,v 1.1 1997/03/01 23:40:12 millert Exp $
$OpenBSD: fts.c,v 1.15 1998/03/19 00:30:01 millert Exp $

Posted by: B.O.F.H.   Posted on: 08/06/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• VMware Infrastructure: A Guide to Bottom-Line Benefits VMware Frustrated by the costs of maintain ever larger data centers?or building ... Download Now
• The Impact of Virtualization Software on Operating Environments VMware Today's use of virtualization technology allows IT professionals to ... Download Now
• Reducing Server Total Cost of Ownership with VMware Virtualization Software VMware VMware virtualization enables customers to reduce their server TCO and ... Download Now