Microsofts new way of bashing Linux

[Andrew Zajac]

On 6/17/06, Alexander Jacob Tsykin <stsykin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > And this is different from the FLOSS business model how?
> >
> firstly, I have learnt a great deal about programming and running linux
> completely by myself, without subscribing to anything or paying for a
> single
> course.



So what?  I have seen surgeons perform new procedures reading from a text.
Sure, they had to pay for med school and it costs a lot to run an OR.  But
this is analagous to you having to buy your computer and pay for internet
service.



> > Huh?  Just because you teach something doesn't make you own rights to
> it.
> > You can even have a sugical procedure named after you;  it still does
> not
> > allow you to charge royalties to others when they perform it.
> >
> no, but nobody can perform it unless you choose to teach them how to do
> so,
> and sell them the necessary equipment, effectively giving you this control



That's why I picked the example of surgical technique.  Usually, you don't
need new technology but do new and innovative things with existing
instruments, so that eliminates the material goods as a confounding idea.

Example:  The classic way to treat an aneurysm of the ascending aorta is to
replace the valve and the aorta together.  A doctor named Tyrone David
developed a new way of doing that that preserves the valve so that you don't
have to replace it.
http://www.adetec.net/chirurgie/index.php?page=dissection
There are maybe a hundred people in North America who can teach that
procedure to another doctor.  Only one of them in named Tyrone David.


> > All of these already occur, including talented doctors who can';t
> perform
> > > procedures because they can't afford the courses or equipment.
> >
> > But not that they cannot afford the rights to perform certain
> procedures.
> >
> the practical difference seems to be negligible



In the same way that free beer and free-libre are different?  There are lots
of people who cannot run any proprietary software because they don't own a
computer.  Okay.

Really, there are lots of examples of innovations in technique that require
no new intruments or technology.  Intellectual property, if you will.  I
think that's an accurate comparison to software in that both are based on
ideas and best shared and improved.



azz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/attachments/20060617/2529e5e2/attachment.htm