Sharing files between Ubuntu 6.06 and Windows XP Pro - best disk format to use

[Eric Dunbar]

On 09/02/07, Sridhar Dhanapalan <sridhar at dhanapalan.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, "Eric Dunbar" <eric.dunbar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Though, if you want to be picky, the GNU licence is not "free" either.
> > It doesn't allow you to do whatever you wish with it -- there are
> > restrictions placed upon your use and distribution.
>
> That's a matter of perspective.
>
> BSD licences, for example, seem to take a 'freedom is anarchy' approach. You
> are free do do whatever you want with material placed under those licences,
> including changing the licence to something completely proprietary. I could
> take FreeBSD, rename it, call it something else, and close the source off
> entirely.
>
> The GNU licences, in contrast, are based on a belief that freedom should be
> protected, so that nobody can remove those same freedoms from others. It's
> somewhat akin to the philosophy that 'the price of freedom is eternal
> vigilance'.
>
> A developer is entitled to ensure that his/her code remains free, not only in
> its first degree of separation, but throughout its lifespan, regardless of
> alterations, combinations and forks.

I find the BSD model more respectful of the end user than the GNU model.

The GNU model is an authoritarian model which shows its end users (in
all sense of the word) less respect than the BSD model -- the end user
is not trusted to make their own decisions. They are restricted in how
they use, modify and appropriate the code.

In contrast, the BSD model is ultimately a free (capital-f) and
democratic[1] model of software development in that it trusts the end
user (again, all sense of 'user') to make the right decision that is
appropriate to their needs and/or the needs of the community. This is
scary, but this is also where the greatest progress comes from.
Dictating norms and values goes a certain distance to establishing
order in any endeavor, however, allowing the participants to find
their own way ultimately results in a more fulfilling and robust
enterprise.

The one model is built on trust, the other on distrust. Ironically,
the way I see it, the BSD model is not so very different from the
proprietary, closed model that it claims as its nemesis -- both are
founded on a distrust of the end user (for different reasons, mind
you).

[1] At first I thought you meant the popular, yet less useful meaning
of anarchy (as in chaotic), but as I wrote this response, I realised
that the political meaning (as in messy but the ultimate in
representative democracy) was perhaps what you meant, and infinitely
more appropriate.

Eric.