🚀 go-pugleaf

pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:

>Well, the RMS answer to this is that designing programs is an art form,
>a creative endeavour, and people just love doing art works, maybe for
>the potential acclamation and notoriety, or maybe as an outlet for their
>desire to build something. 85% of mathematicians, actors, painters,

RMS and the GNU people copy from the existing concepts -

1. GNU emacs from Gosling's emacs
2. All other GNU utilities from existing Unix utilities.

This implies that there is no creativity in what GNU people do. They are not
creating anything new conceptually. It is an insult to the mathematicians,
actors, painters and musicians to compare the GNU progammers to them.

You are basing your argument on the premise that programming is as
tough as creating Mona Lisa or 5th of Beethoven. Programming is not -
but designing a new language or a new operating system or a new
algorithm (of good bounds) is. After that, programming is simply grunt
work. I know, because I was a programmer for seven years and now
working towards my Ph.D. in Algorithms. I made the switch because just 
programming without really making any theoretical advance was quite boring.

So, why should I be working for GNU or LPF or FSF or whatever the darn 
organiztion is? I don't have any incentive to do drudgery (i.e. 
programming/debugging) for free.

Anil
-- 
Sathsangatve    nissangatvam   From good company to no company
Nissangatve      nirmohatvam   From no company to lack of desire
Nirmohatve    nischalatatvam   From lack of desire to concentration of mind
Nischalatatve  jeevanmuktihi   From concentration of mind to liberation of life