Re: value of open-source in the driver community (was "how to execute a process...")

NTDEV
1

Bill Casey wrote:

By the sweat of my brow and force of my intellect (no sniggering!) I have
managed to stay in business for myself for almost 30 years. So why should I
be forced either directly or through reverse engineering to make both past
AND future intellectual work product not only FREE but FREELY available?

Nobody’s saying that they should give away their software for free. Giving
people read access to your source is lightyears away from GPL’ing it.

How the hell am I and thousands like me supposed to make money? Are we
supposed to DONATE our time and thoughts.

Nah, just like you have so far. It’s a matter of documentation really. I’m
sure you all have had the pleasure at one time or another to be frustrated
by some undocumented return value, behavior or bug in some driver your
software existentially depended on. USBD happens to stroll in my mind. It
really blows your day if you are forced to reverese-engineer some piece of
software without which you don’t have a project.

Bottom line is that these “penguinites” as you so politely call them are
nothing more than lazy, thieving, stupid, fascist, bottom-dwelling
scavengers. They want to impose their socialist world-view (that software
should be free) on all of us. They want it free because in the final
analysis they are cheap assholes cloaked in the mantle of world saviors.

Yes, open source is a different philosophy from closed source. No,
open-sources are not generally thieves, nor are they lazy, stupid or
“fascist”. That’s the dumbest argument I’ve heard in a while. I would have
thought that there were better manners among people who are capable of
writing kernel-level software. Alas, it seems I’m wrong.

Burk.

Burkhard Daniel

mtronix Precision Measuring Instruments
xxxxx@mtronix.de * www.mtronix.de

2

Bill Casey wrote:

Peter:
I think it is your view of these people that is naive. Granted SOME of
them may be good and kind and altruistic. But by and large they are simply
trying to “shoplift the pooty”. I mean why pay when you can join hands
together and try to collectively (Soviet collectives anyone?) foist guilt
upon software developers for having the effrontery to charge ACTUAL MONEY
for their efforts? How many software ads are there in Linux Journal?
Virtually none. What does that tell you? It tells ME they are ripping off
every piece of code they can get their grimy little hands on.
Forget the rosy picture - many are political do-gooders with an agenda.
That ‘agenda’ is to help themselves to as much free code as they can get;
they don’t care if it hurts anyone else - they simply want their free code.
Next they’ll be saying “all hardware should be free” - I mean where does it
stop? I guess they think EVERYTHING should be free.
Mostly, however, they are running home at night after working at their
no/low-tech jobs to see what they can get for nothing. Oh yeah, since (mea
culpa) once upon a time I played the drums too, I also think artists should
get reimbursed for their efforts - perish the thought!

And where, exactly, did you get all of that wisdom? I’ve worked with open
source people in the past, and none of them is even remotely like the
fictional people you’re describing here.

You really like your cold-war foe images, don’t you?

Burkhard Daniel

mtronix Precision Measuring Instruments
xxxxx@mtronix.de * www.mtronix.de

3

Bill Casey wjc-at-virtualscsi.com |ntdev/1.0-Allow| wrote:

[…lots…]

Oh, goody. Our very own troll. Haven’t had to resort to…

*plonk*

… yet in this list.

–
Steve Williams “The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
steve at icarus.com But I have promises to keep,
http://www.icarus.com and lines to code before I sleep,
http://www.picturel.com And lines to code before I sleep.”

4

Bill Casey wrote:

>Nobody’s saying that they should give away their software for
>free. Giving people read access to your source is lightyears away from

GPL’ing it.

THIS is good - “read access to your source” - like that doesn’t give them
WRITE access to copy it!

It’s a matter of what exactly you permit in your license agreement. Of
course those with a lot of criminal energy will take that code and re-use
it, but you can still go and sue them. Letting people see your code DOESN’T
mean you yield all your rights on it. Not having access to source won’t stop
those with who really want to from copying from you; it will just make it
harder.

>Yes, open source is a different philosophy from closed source. No,
>open-sources are not generally thieves, nor are they lazy, stupid or
>“fascist”. That’s the dumbest argument I’ve heard in a while. I
>would have thought that there were better manners among people who are

capable of

>writing kernel-level software. Alas, it seems I’m wrong.

Gee, a .DE return address! Why am I surprised? Was it the word fascist
that got you? Like it isn’t fascist to impose your opinion/world-view on
everyone else? Notice I said impose not share. You guys in the Open Sore
twilight are DEMANDING that all source be free and open. What is that?
Benevolent dictatorship?

Great. So now we’re being personal.

And what makes you think that I’m an Open Source puritan? In fact, I am
making a living out of writing system software. But that is beside the point.

You keep doing a very dangerous thing: you think in black and white. In your
world, either all source is closed and you protect it with your gun (quite
literally, I’d assume), or else all source must be free.

Get a grip! The world has lots of gray shades in between.

Again: Letting people SEE your source is not the same thing as letting
people TAKE your source. But more eloquent members of this list have
elaborated on that better than I ever could. If they have no impact on you,
what can a guy from a .DE domain hope to accomplish? I give up on you.

Burk.

PS: That “other” guy from .DE was also me. Just so your rants hit the right
person! And yes, I do live in Berlin, and though I’m too young to remember
the airlift first-hand, it is well known to me. I just wonder what exactly
the Berlin airlift has to do with the discussion here? Am I to understand
that to mean that the US equals Closed Source and the rest of the world
equals open source? My, that is so lame.

–
Burkhard Daniel

mtronix Precision Measuring Instruments
xxxxx@mtronix.de * www.mtronix.de