🚀 go-pugleaf

dtynan@borax.kbss.bt.co.uk (Dermot Tynan) writes:
> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Lieutenant 030) writes:
> > If you approach a software author (because the program itself can't talk)
> > you'll almost certainly find that he is similarly willing to be paid some
> > hourly rate in return for which he'll explain exactly how his program does
> > what it does, so that you can go away and do what you like with that
> > knowledge.
> 
> Get a life!  I challenge you to call up Ms. Programmer at Lotus Inc,
> and discuss with her the finer points of lotus.c, and see where it gets
> you, at any price!

Funny, a few months ago you might have used Apple as your example.  But
of course, these days they're discussing things with IBM.  And of course,
people have paid Lotus to discuss details of how their applications work.
That's how standards like the Lotus/Microsoft mail standard came about.

> On some other points, there is nothing wrong with the use of "Free
> Software Foundation".  It is a lot more accurate than saying "Free Mars
> Bar" with every two packs of detergent.  Or, perhaps, that America is a
> Free country.  If that's the case, I'll have Texas, please.  Language
> (particularly English) is very inexact.

The examples you cite are all examples of the word "free" being used in
a conventional (dictionary) sense.  The word "free" in "Free Software 
Foundation" is not.

> very popular.  However, given your whimsical concerns about the GPL,
> I don't think we can expect you to give away source, now can we??

I don't know what you expect, but it seems not to be based on the rest of
this thread.


mathew

-- 
Just another would-be Mac owner put off by Apple's monopolistic practices / If
you know where I can buy the CD "In Mysterious Ways" by John Foxx, please send
me email / Message for Kodak: Bring back Dan Bredy! / My PGP RSA public key is
available on request / Desperately seeking CD of "U2" by Negativland / 4 lines