Hacker News Reader

Comment by kiba | Hacker News Reader

When I compare the more calculus of capitalism and propreitary software against Stallman's dogmatism, it's obvious to me that capitalism is utlimately more moral and does more good.

Free software have nothing to do much with capitalism. Stallman probably agree with the idea of competition improving life. What he disagree with is what he called combat.(Or what I least remember from reading one of his essay) Rather than improve over your competitors and sell great stuff to customers, you seek to annihilate your competitors by unethical means and gain control over your customers.

View on HN

"Free software have nothing to do much with capitalism."

So why does the GPL make it so difficult to make any kind of money. Many of the supporters are also against any and all forms of commercial software.

"What he disagree with is what he called combat.(Or what I least remember from reading one of his essay) Rather than improve over your competitors and sell great stuff to customers, you seek to annihilate your competitors by unethical means and gain control over your customers."

His answer to this is to force everybody to the same level (IE: as soon as a company improves their software, all competitors should get those improvements).

So why does the GPL make it so difficult to make any kind of money. Many of the supporters are also against any and all forms of commercial software.

How many Free software supporters did you count said they're explicitly against profiting from software?

Beside, if GPL make it difficult to earn money, than it's a pure side effect.

"How many Free software supporters did you count said they're explicitly against profiting from software?"

Do I really need to keep count? Look at any discussion involving the GPL.

"Beside, if GPL make it difficult to earn money, than it's a pure side effect."

A side effect? I just don't believe it. Stallman and many people from the community are very focal about being anti-corporation and anti-profit.

If you can't see this, then I don't know what to tell you.

Do I really need to keep count? Look at any discussion involving the GPL.

I have not detect any anti-business bias in the discussion where I was involved. I didn't hear free supporters hating the profit motives in the time I been around.

A side effect? I just don't believe it. Stallman and many people from the community are very focal about being anti-corporation and anti-profit. If you can't see this, then I don't know what to tell you.

The FSF sold software packages in the past. Stallman keep saying that he isn't opposed to software developers not being able to make a living.

Ever consider that your views of the world might be colored about what you think you see in Stallman and the others?

Now, it seem that you and I hold the same views about business and the profit motives. The only difference is that I don't see free software as antagonist to the profit motives and the ability to make a living, partly because I actually try to make money off free software and free content.

Red Hat is making pretty good money supporting GPL'd software, over $700 million in FY 2010.

that's support. I'm talking about selling software. There's a difference.

What is the difference? Is it possible for the difference to not matter?

Selling support implies that your software needs support and beyond needing it, your users need the support enough to pay for. This creates quite a disincentive to make your software intuitive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com