a construction of a non-parasitic, non-capitalist model gruby kardigan damski of creation and production, on the lines of the ancient "community" or 'tribal" efforts, the model of mutually helping and mutually benefiting individuals. If I save tens of thousands with, say, GCC toolchain plus OS and utilities, I will give back something of my efforts.3. The danger of GPL is well-recognized by the parasites, the Corporations. The essence of corporate world order, so to say, is to create economic parasitism and deflection of profits from the natural, technological flow of activities.
as there is a danger of MS later claiming some patent rights or imposing restrictions or incompatibilities.I would agree that the comments from "What_GPL_means" come across as especially rant-ish. I'm never too happy with comments that seem to be more about rambling stream-of-consciousness than actually addressing anybody's points. But I'm leaving this comment to stand as a representation of this czerwony sweter damski point of view. If other comments come in of similar length and lack of focus, I will take the liberty of moderating them.re What_GPL_means – There's a valuable thread in your posting I believe.
rather than a worse one? Shouldn't, to return to the thrust of the argument we're sweter damski długi having, FreeBSD be prospering in the bloom of collaboration, rather than left for dead? Maybe, in fact, the things Apple has given back aren't really very related to or important to FreeBSD at all?I don't think that makes it more or less valid from a business point of view, but the use of it in public organizations is a very useful addition to the discussion. The downside is that the code can't be used in a business to build the economy of Brazil unless the government allows dual-licensing.
Does Brazil allow a proprietary license of the software as well szary kardigan for companies to use in commercial products? I think such a dual-license would be a great basis for innovation and a flurry of new startups. Everyone starts with a good platform of software and can build whole new industries upon it! And if the core is still GPL, and evolving, more and more companies can enter as time progresses, but the existing companies could have some "secret sauce" that would differentiate them and give some people some good work and jobs!Actually, I think popularity is a reasonable metric to use.
given that the argument we're having involves comparing the amount of collaboration happening over each software project. What is "collaboration", other than having many disparate companies using and contributing to your source code? Should we compare the number of patches from outside companies to each? I think we both know that Linux comes up winning in every metric. If the amount of collaboration happening is something you're indifferent to, are you perhaps answering a different question than the one Daniel's post has raised?Maybe you don't want to use popularity as your major criteria for sucess.
So the truth is, there's a GOB of cross-pollination betwee kolorowy sweter n the two. OpenBSD is a bit different, but OpenBSD has a different set of criteria than the other BSDs and Linux: Security, Security, Security. Oh, did I mention Security? So you can probably get away more with looking at OpenBSD separately than the others, but the idea that you can completely separate the other BSD's and Linux is insane.Oh, okay, that makes more sense. I contribute to X, and would prefer it to be under the GPL instead of BSD, because there are regular instances of companies taking the X code and producing non-free work on top of it.