If you have a business I'm guessing you have a blog, a website etc etc. I'm guessing you use openSSL and a myriad of other open source projects. His point was: keep making money off of your closed source product (great! good for you), but the software that you use which has good open source options, use them and donate a bit of money if they provide you value. I'm a businessman and I can figure out value for money, so you should give it a try. Also, I have morals.

I'm very familiar with the enclosure acts. In your opinion though, is common land a good analog for software, and other places where the term is bandied about? Surely there must be some differences (internet, software, etc etc can be copied at will and is post-scarcity, land is a resource which is best managed carefully ala permaculture, enclosure, hedgerows, coppicing etc etc)?

Oh so basically you've bounded the debate? Are you being paid for your time spend propagandizing? By the way, it is in the best interest of the state (undoubtedly the most powerful entity in the US) to make everyone think that the only options are different flavours of itself.

Regardless, you have to explain what "lawful" means. I don't care about legal this and changed-the-constitution-100-years-ago-now-its-lawful. Because morally, there's no difference between taxation and thieft-at-gunpoint-threatened-with-kidnapping. Other than 400 years ago, we did it with swords and gallows and dungeons and now we've made it a bit cleaner. Morally, the difference between a "noble" passing a law that he can rape your wife on the first night of your marriage and then take your money for the rest of your life, is exactly the same as changing the US constitution to allow the state to tax in like manner.

Please reply. With a MORAL argument. Not a legal one. Do you really think that I could take you back in time before The State (blessed be thy name) made stealing wrong (but not the legal kind) and killing wrong (but, again, not the legal kind) and the shoot you in the head, just because it was not legally wrong? Is there no room in this world for morals? Are you saying that if you took your family sailing, and happened to get blown to an island outside of the US EEC zone, that anyone who found you could just steal, rape, kill at will? Because, in your opinion, it's not "legally" wrong? The only problem I have with statists is that I've never met one with a moral compass, and that's sad

Stop using the water analogy. The technology is fundamentally different. Using QoS, we can control the priority of packets which are on a shared line. That is impossible with water droplets in pipes. If it were possible, I would support it. Because 1. I'd pay less money for "hard" water for rinsing, but a little more for "soft" water for the washing mashine 2. water utilities would be much better run, with better services, tiers, etc.

I don't see anyone complaining about socializing (through legislation) the grocery chains to ensure that they build stores in places which some social justice warriors deem to be necessary. We know how such central planning works out, and we as a globe have decided to leave grocery stores to the free market. Despite the fact that poor rural areas don't have hipster eco expensive grocery stores. Oh the humanity!!!

Taken to their logical conclusion, your arguments would have us forcing every style of every grocery store to build in the stupidest of locations. What I don't get, is if social justice warriors and socialist thieves (from the common good) think it's so important to have grocery stores in poor rural areas, why don't they get off their asses and actually do that (by commercial or co-operative or whatever means available). Why is it necessary to force OTHERS to do your bidding?? (through the genuine threat of violence through law). Oh, and btw I think my analogy is valid for purpose: if you think that the internet is more important than nutrition for the purpose of given everyone a fair start in life, get a grip on reality man. Get outside your comfort zone. If you spend time trying to help people who are mentally STUNTED for all aspects of human life, even the ones outside the intarwebs, then come back and try to repeat your arguments.

did you just imply that openstack is a way to avoid bloat?

this. if one more dipshit tells me i should use docker instead of lxc, i'm going to try harder to find out what real value it adds. lxc already did all the heavy lifting. i pray to got that docker folding like a house of cards is the trigger that pops this bubble. there are honest ways to make money in open source, but this sure ain't it

wow fanboy much? are the coreos devs idiots? 'cause i've met them and they seemed smart. also, i've foregone docker in favour of just lxc. am i an idiot? do you want to tell my clients? they will too a multinational, laugh you to the curb

No. The EU forces me all the time to do things I don't want to do, and I have no choice. I have, and did choose to stop using google services over a period about a year. Totally weaned from google about 12 months ago now. I might starting using them again now. But the point is I HAVE A CHOICE

i forgot a significant comma there. sorry

tireless people at bigcorp have no job security because they are a threat to be fired asap

this.

hahahahahahahahaha nope. not even close. here's a hint: would you tell you younger brother to spend 4 years doing those "projects" or 4 years solving problems for the real world and a couple hours doing open source problem solving at night? yah, i thought so. if you say you picked the former, you're lying. or don't have a younger brother. source: been in industry for 15 years, running business in london for 3 years now.

your generalisations might be terribly wrong. i moved from NA to western europe and i find people very dull. niether interested in serious subjects or cat videos.

i could say everything (yes everything) that you said and i did the opposite move. maybe things are just clamping down on both sides of the pond? i think its the increase in the power of the state, but i'd like to be wrong (because that would be hard to fix: they hace the guns and will soon have the press). am i wrong?

Really? So you're claiming that you were instead sidestepping his question, and misleading everyone into thinking you were on about actually answering his valid point? You REALLY want to make that claim?

How can a rational human prefer to be thought a troll and a moron over just simply ignorant?