[ILUG-BOM] My two bits about the Aazad and the Commercial

[Q u a s i]

Folks,
	I think Philip said "It's okay to use windows if you use a pirated 
copy.  Just don't pay Microsoft for it."  come come, people! Was he really 
serious?  No one, repeat, NO one is forcing anybody to use Microsoft 
products.  People use them because they, for various reasons, find no 
better alternative.  Microsoft are within their rights to charge anything 
they want for any part of their products (someone mentioned that you get 
the OS but not the API).  If you do not like that but still buy them, then 
it is you who is the sucker, not them unethical.

	Microsoft is a company like any other.  It is a commercial venture who has 
to look after the prosperity of its shareholders.  They also have to 
protect themselves from the competition by devising schemes and strategies 
to beat them.  In this they are no different from any other company (take 
the example of the Cola wars).  In this business environment, the stronger, 
smarter one survives.  Very much like nature.

	RMS is a person.  More than that he is an academician. He is one of that 
breed for whom creativity is reward enough - that is their life passion.  I 
have lived among academicians all my life.  There are scientists and 
researchers who sweat and work their butts off, expanding the frontiers of 
science and human understanding - on a flat salary.  Is it possible to 
imagine a Mathematician selling his proof for money to different 
Universities?  Why, the mathematician who developed most of game theory, 
John Nash jr., on which much of modern economics is based, did not become a 
millionaire (or receive _any_ monetary benefit out of it).  Here it is 
learning for the sake of the thirst, not money.  Even as near as till 50 
years back all pure sciences used to enjoy this kind of freedom.  The 
freedom of not only sharing but distributing knowledge.  RMS feels 
computers also fall into this category, he being part of the breed.  I for 
one agree with him.  Whatever, if ever, work I do in this field will be 
there for all.  But why do we insist that everyone should follow this way 
of life.

	Trade and commerce are as old as our civilisations themselves.  They have 
their valid place in society.  For eg. Edison and the founder of Gillette 
tried and failed many time before they perfected and _sold_ their 
products.  There were some like Vincent Van Gaug who painted to pass the 
time(to keep his sanity maybe?) and there were other who did it because 
some King commissioned them.  Both is art.  The point is, the driving force 
for some is money and for someone something else.  We cannot call one 
correct and the other wrong.  To make use of intellectual property for the 
better of all or the better of oneself has to be the decision of the 
intellectual himself.

	For whatever cribbs I have read about Microsoft and proprietary software, 
the best answer I can think up is the GNU & OpenSource movements 
themselves.  These happened because someone (many ones) were dissatisfied 
with the situation and took steps to change things.  It brought a lot of 
like minded people together, and they worked for the good of all.  What is 
most, MOST important IMHO, is the availability of freedom for such 
behavior.  People were free to choose.  and they choose to change 
things.  Other chose to stick with Microsoft(etc.).  Both have their 
reasons and I feel both are right.  As FSF is _free_ to choose and decide 
its ideology and strategy, so is Microsoft _free_ to choose its 
priorities.  And so are you _free_ to choose between them and the others... 
This is the real freedom.

	Does a restaurant, who has a popular special dish, disclose its secret 
recipe?  If people feel that they do require the source code for further 
modifications (I seriously doubt the number outside of computer crazies) 
and if Microsoft(etc.) refuses, then they have alternatives.  They should 
and often do ignore/boycott Microsoft.  But then because Microsoft does not 
agree with your point of view does not mean they are wrong.  They never 
said that they are in the knowledge sharing business.  They are making 
software which will enable you to use your hardware in such a way as to 
increase your efficiency(their claim), do things you could not otherwise do 
(mind you, here I mean for eg. the 'act of sending email' not the software 
to do it), and be more productive, then they are within their right to sell 
this software - with all strings attached.  If there is any other better 
alternative to them available, they will be wiped out of the market.

	As for exorbitant charges, compare vegetable prices at Kurla and Santacruz 
(W).  People often charge because a lot of people pay.  Red Hat dares to 
charge Rs2000+ for their manuals (does it cost so much to print?) because 
they have made a name and can.

	In society people are driven by various things - ego, pride, creative 
urge, credit from others, lust or money, need for money, philanthropy 
etc.  So long as these things adhere to the common moral code of conduct we 
all agree to, we can smirk at some of them but we cannot call any of them 
wrong.

---------------------

what is it that we live this whole life for?
as a human being, I feel that creating something is about the only thing...
to live life day in and day out in a mundane routine is not for me...
I should make a difference... walk a new path... or die trying...
To want is to sin, I feel... want is recursive... with no terminating 
condition.
The path is dangerous... but to walk it is itself a victory.
knowledge is decocted essence of information...
Wisdom is decocted essence of knowledge...
for this we shall strive...
long live the revolution...
"break on through"

quasi