You’re ignoring the creation costs and only focusing on the distribution costs.
The creation costs are the issue here. Red Hat didn’t change things because their CDN bill went up.
The creation costs are the issue here. Red Hat didn’t change things because their CDN bill went up.
to pay for stuff already made is not an economically productive activity. it doesn't create any more value. and this is even worse over digital assets;
also, this is why I was observing a distinction between digital goods which won't change (most media expressions) and software which needs updating
I consider this an open problem; but I have a minority view, as I always get downvoted when stating this position.
as I see this, the current hollywood strike is consequence of failure to acknowledge what I'm saying. and it'll keep getting worse. the problems in academic publishing are also an expression of this things I keep saying. I'm starting to get tired of saying this shit. not only do things not change, but they keep getting worse.
I suppose property over [blank] asserts itself over the digital to the decrement of most and the advantage of few. I see it slipping away... what could have been. what we could have had with the internet as we seem to chose (and I'm dragged along) to a world where everything is a service subscription and a few lucky ones collect rent forever; I guess they already do and always have, but now they will also do it over digital assets. capturing for themselves the technologically provided boons of the digital and internet technology
That's a mis-characterization of what's going on here.
Red Hat makes RHEL. Then it (used to) goes *the extra step* of debranding RHEL, removing trademarks, and publishing it to git.centos.org.
Red Hat is not (and cannot) prevent you from getting your hands on digital assets. It just stopped going out of their way to provide you an easy (almost) 1-click way to clone their product for free. You want to create a clone of RHEL? Sure the upstreams are all available, do it.
it's not. it's a point made in a much more generalized context of discussion.
we're mixing different levels of generalization in this discussion, hence the discussion is broken and useless.
there's no redhat, there is only IBM.