🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <D0yWVPAZXJG2Ewin@dlsl.demon.co.uk>
           jason@dlsl.demon.co.uk "Jason Clifford" writes:
> In article <907545396snz@vision25.demon.co.uk>, Phil Hunt
> <philh@vision25.demon.co.uk> writes
> >But you do already use Open Source software, if your Organisation:
> >line is anything to go by.
> >
> >So how can you be sure yuo won't be using other Open Source software
> >in the future.
> 
> So what? I use FREE software because I hapen to agree with the
> principle, but primarily becuase it is the best available solution to my
> requirements.

yes, and the reason it is often the best solution is that the Open 
Source development model often produces good code. The reasons for
this include: OS software is often looked at by lots of eyeballs,
thus reducing bugs, and with OS software, you don't have to reinvent 
the wheel as much as you have to with closed software.
 
> >In any case, the principle is well established that people have to
> >pay taxes fro everything, they can't opt out of paying a particular
> >tax because they don't use the services funded by that tax. (Or 
> >rather they can, provided they leave the country).
> 
> For necessary social services, yes. Are you trying to argue that
> computer software is such a necessary social service?

It is certainly the case that good-quality software is necessary
to run a modern society. So yes, computer software is a necessary
social service, and should be funded publicly, for the same reasons
that education and roads are.
 
-- 
@@--Phil Hunt-----------------------------Don't fear the penguins(*)--@@ 
@@  [*] Disclaimer: this is FREE ADVICE, and is distributed in the    @@
@@  hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; note also  @@
@@  that this advice may not apply if your name is Gates or Ballmer.  @@