[Fsf-friends] Re: FREEDOM, PHILOSOPHY and FREEDOM SOFTWARE

Harish Narayanan harish@gamebox.net
Sat May 8 09:24:41 IST 2004


Tarun Gaur wrote:

> Misquoting was a subtle expression ... seems like understanding the 
> concern is a bit difficult for you here.

Yes, it is rather difficult. When someone says something, and it's open 
to interpretation, people interpret it the way they know how. That is 
not misquoting.

> Were we talking about monopolies of the vendors .. I think here mahesh 
> agrees with me ... it was a matter of choice that i excercised and you 
> did not.

Sure, I said probably didn't try hard enough. There were many good 
options, and I deliberately chose the one which didn't come with free 
software.

> Seems like you have something to do with Red Hat. Are you working for 
> them or sell Red hat boxes ... Just plain curious (like you were .. 
> not changing the subject lines)

I have nothing to do with RedHat. I don't sell their boxes, and I most 
definitely don't work for them. I'm still a student.

> If you are not ... it would really help the philosophy and the cause 
> for you to focus on GNU/FSF.

It was, however, the distribution I cut my teeth on, so I do have some 
obvious affinity. I was focusing on the GPL. You were painting them as 
this company that has questionable business practices because they're 
charging exorbitant amounts for their server line. I was pointing you to 
the sources of that line of products, signifying compliance with free 
licenses, that is all.

> Sorry again here friend, but seems like you have graduated from your 
> experience to your parents experience.

This was about showing you just making great software so it's accepted 
doesn't necessarily imply that you're spreading the philosophy. I wasn't 
trying to say, "Here is an experience involving non-techies. Look, it is 
a pleasant one."

> You seem to pick up sentences that suit a useless argument

I wouldn't call them useless, but then wouldn't anybody? I'm not going 
to pick sentences that hurt my argument now, am I?

> Did I ever say that philosophy is not imprortant.

No, you didn't really "say" anything. Just like you've implied end user 
experience is not top on my priority list (and hence not worth arguing 
about, which explains their conspicuous absence in my responses). I 
didn't "say" that either.

> Please elaborate on what do you mean by "What my aim is" ... still i 
> will answer ... My aim is to ensure that end user experience - 
> especially negative is not repulsed. They are helped and philosophy 
> reaches the masses through each one of them ... each single one of them.

No need to elaborate. That was the sort of answer I expected, and it 
makes sense. Our differences exist at a more fundamental level, no real 
point carrying on this discussion anymore. Good luck and Godspeed.

Harish | http://wahgnube.org/




More information about the Fsf-friends mailing list