[pp.int.general] Why Free Software misses the point

[Andrew Norton]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 5/12/2010 8:32 PM, Radosław Nadstawny wrote:
> Dnia 2010-05-12, o godz. 23:08:34
> Boris Turovskiy <tourovski at gmail.com> napisał(a):
> 
>> Ahoi,
>> I've finally finished my critical article on Mr.Stallman's and the
>> FSF's viewpoint. It may be of interest for Pirate Parties which have 
>> difficulties with accepting FSF's philosophical reasoning while not 
>> knowing what their answer should be.
>>
>> http://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Benutzer:TurBor/Stellungsnahmen/Why_Free_Software_misses_the_point
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Boris
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
> 
> 
> I know what's the viewpoint of a casual user here - he/she wants a tool
> to do the job and do it well, with minimal effort on user's side. It's
> understandable and perfectly OK.
> 
> But consider the fact, that with most of proprietary software, you
> can't really know, whether your tool, while performing its job, is not
> secretly acting against you - e.g. spying on you. It's a matter of
> trust - whether you trust your tools' providers enough.
> 

And who do you put your trust in with free software? some anon coders?
unless you check every single line of code first, all the time, you have
no trust. You can't turn around and say 'he said it was ok' and expect
it to mean anything - for all you know, he's the one that slipped in the
bad code.

> The choice between proprietary and free software is often one between
> convenience and security. These two almost never go together, so it's a
> natural tradeoff. I can only hope that as free software's development
> progresses, the only significant difference remaining between it and
> proprietary software will be the one of security.
> 
> As for me, I don't trust corporations. They have no conscience, no
> sense of guilt. Their sole purpose of existence is making money, by all
> means they can get away with. History confirms it well. So, I prefer
> using free software whenever possible.
> 

On the other hand, they are a legal entity that accepts responsibility
(willingly or not) for their code. If it does something really bad, they
will be made to pay. You can't say the same about free software. If
office does bad things, I can sue MS, ditto photoshop with Adobe or
Solidworks with Solidworks Inc. Who is accepting responsibility for,
say, Inkscape? Who will be made to take responsibility for any mess that
inkscape might cause? Answer  - no one. Proprietary software companies
have that as an incentive NOT to do bad things. Whats the incentive to
stop some person doing that with free software? There isn't one.

You're left trusting people that have no legal responsibility, no
ramifications if you trusted them unwisely. No guarentee that they're
even capable of makign a statement to be trusted. How many would trust
me, if I said a piece of free software was clean and great and secure?

Andrew

> 
> Radek
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJL600RAAoJECjjuYTW3X5HnxoIAL6DziAq1v/8j/ENqb8tVP9C
XrrdUdwgjL3UNIWasLmTggU0iOkcr5Pj0x42fARPnZKqGua6ORKB+I+6uUjdqcQD
ZE6giCeRIaJ5v+ZQXEabs6ZA+c2DYg8eFlLG1GYDstDmszQSzfQVROdffTQ6NAYC
WW/cgjAlMj4HbDZlWcsV9/i7OaOHzMN9hiTzkI0MWS4iCVbfE9JebvI0XX9OoOk9
1MFPOeEOSXBmL2H+KTKfbi5DIMWaMAbJRQ5AcLNjBda34WW5ONNXgO/ORn9UoXA1
CBVO1kFeWjb6OOQ4CLuGDopet7PHIkHWdIsBTotq8fM1x5xP9BeFhu/jpR6iSRQ=
=eCII
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----