Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

University Challenge (Announce)

posted by kerravon E-mail, Ligao, Free World North, 27.03.2022, 10:58

> Hello kerravon,
>
> > If the people in this thread aren't willing to make
> > the sacrifices required to start a company and add
> > that value to society, then don't complain about
> > others doing so, and using the cheap input costs of
> > public domain code. That is in fact exactly what
> > they should be doing.
>
> Why is it so important to you that someone "start a company", or contribute
> to someone starting a company, in order to be considered as adding "value
> to society"?
I didn't make such a claim.

Why don't you start arguing with something I
actually said rather than continually creating
red herrings?

> Was Harriet Tubman, for example, any less a contributor to
> society, because she was not incorporated in Delaware?
No idea who that was, so I have no opinion.

> > What I understand is people complaining about
> > companies in capitalist societies when those
> > companies provide employment and make progress.
>
> Sorry to break it, but "we" can jolly well "make progress" in our own ways.
> We can jolly well write code, and release code, on our own terms.
It may or may not be making progress, but it isn't
allowing companies to use code without restriction,
thus allowing them to make progress.

If you don't care about that, or actually dislike
the idea of that happening, then so be it.

There are people who don't care about all sorts of
things, but I don't want to list examples because
apparently that is off-topic.

> I am quite sure my libi86
> code is already quite usable, and quite useful, as it is now. I do not
> need to hold out hope for some Hypothetical Start-up Inc. to adopt the
> project or whatnot. Because why would I need to?
I didn't claim you needed to do that.

> This is something you just need to wrap your head around.
No. You need to stop creating red herrings.

> > It seems that he, and apparently people in this
> > thread, have a belief that the world is filled
> > with "greedy corps" "exploiting" people (which
> > would apparently include me).
>
> Well, what do you call a rich person who expects other people to simply
> hand over their work which they had done for free?
Another red herring. I don't know of any rich
person who expects such a thing to happen.

If someone like me comes along and does it of
their own free will, then sure, the rich person
can make use of that. That's not exploitation.

> Someone who can "make
> the sacrifices" of registering a business corporation, but does not want to
> pay for something that has value?
No-one made such a claim. Yet another red herring.

> I reject the idea that my worth only exists in relation to some
> Hypothetical Start-up Inc.
Another red herring. I made no such claim.

> Actually, no; I have an inherent right to
> exist; while Hypothetical Start-up Inc. is not a natural person and has no
> inherent right to exist.
I didn't make any claims about this.

> > Work with the system, instead of trying to
> > overthrow it.
>
> Think of it as working alongside, in parallel to the system.
Fine. So the companies need to develop their
own software from scratch (and pass the costs
on to the consumer) because you want to exist
in parrallel to them instead of cooperating
with them, because (insert reason here).

> > > (#2) if we were to start such a company, then we would
> > want
> > > to enjoy such a benefit, and because
> > I don't understand this claim, but it doesn't sound
> > like something I said.
>
> Well, it does, to me. :-|

I doubt it is something I said. Why don't you
quote my actual words so that I understand them?

> > > unlike the current
> > > behemoths like Microsoft and Google which are powerful and kind of
> evil.
> > No, I didn't call those companies evil. They are
> > obeying the law, which is all I expect of them.
>
> Then why would you want to compete with Microsoft? Obviously there has to
> be something you do not like about them. You might want to figure out what
> that "something" is...
No need to "figure it out". I already know.
Microsoft is a monopoly. Not really through
any fault of their own. It's just a natural
phenomenon, and often the government will step
in and break up the company because they know
it is not good for competition.

For whatever reason the government hasn't been
willing to do that, so I have taken matters into
my own hands to do my best to provide a BASE of
software that can be used to compete with
Microsoft without restriction.

Rather than create a "parallel" system that is
dependent on jackasses on the internet (and I'm
not claiming to not be one of those) instead of
a commercial enterprise trying to build a
reputation.

BFN. Paul.

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 427 users online (1 registered, 426 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum