Re:GPL good; BSD better (for tax-funded stuff) (Score 1)

You seem to think that just because free software developers don't require payment for their contributions, that no one else should be able to ask for payment on theirs. That's a very restrictive way of thinking... play my way or I'm taking my ball and going home.

Heh, if it's my ball, it's my ball. I (paid/worked/whatever) to get it... Why should I give it away for nothing with the expectation that the person I give it to is just going to sell it and not give me anything in return? Sure, it's "benevolent", but...

Or, to put it more succinctly...

If you want to use my code, return the favor and let me use yours, or rewrite it (expend the time I used) to solve your problem.

Granted there are quite a lot of notable exceptions, but a lot of scientific advancement has come as such... People standing on the backs of others to advance the SOTA (state of the art). If you can privatize what's been created with public funding, all you're doing is reaping a profit by using someone else's work. Creativity and general usefulness decline as you get lost in the money chase... Good lord, just look at all the lawyers and tax lawyers needed now just to sustain and keep control of a good idea! Isn't there something better (depends on your definition I guess...More useful? Guess the question is, for who?)

Whereas, if you have to publish and allow to use the work that you put into things, as everyone has done before you, the general knowledge pool expands. Which, in turn, provides more advancement and knowledge and in turn, new dimensions (by expansion and metaphorically ofc) to look towards for...gasp! profit!!!

But what about corporations, you'll declaim. Easy, if they want profit, let them work to do it, instead of recycling what's already been done in a new and prettier way. Let's face it, considering the "general knowledge pool" I was speaking of earlier, there's always (been and will be, if certain famous mathematicians have anything to say about it) unexplored and uncharted places to look and do your own work with to make money. :P

PS. In the above it's easy to say, "But that's what copyright/patents/etc are for!". Exactly, they give an individual (or company), the right to profit exclusively for a limited time. As I think we've all seen (and this may ofc be a relative effect) technologies advance, increasingly... As more tech advances, the more there is to learn... I don't think the existing rules of copyrighting/patenting should even apply anymore. Granted, they're needed, but let's put some thought into it and shorten the time sole owner has it. Communications has gone from riding on a horse or boarding a ship to cross oceans, to nearly instantly. Progress is being made and information and increasing education is being made available (now, if anyone will look for it...go MIT!) at a staggering rate. There are some interesting theories/thoughts/conspiracies out that that one of the roles of government/authority/etc is to prevent technology from advancing too rapidly for us/governments/the race/etc to handle without fragmenting and causing more harm than good. Granted, this is an extremist viewpoint, but consider this...

How lost would someone have been if they were put on ice for 100 years and revived today? Now go back 300 years and repeat. Technology is advancing rapidly and again, by mathimatical and logical expansion, it will:

* Never "run out"...There are always new ideas out there...
* Continue to advance at a more rapid pace, unless major setbacks or a limiting factor intrudes.

Wow, have I gone far afield here...Sorry for the rambling... And so called "deep thinking" (have *you* ever thought beyond your own existance much?) like this depresses me, as I don't see many ways out without major upheavals for us as a race, and we're running out of time on this Earth without major changes one way or the other, and in my own lifetime as well, imho. I do try to think that about every now and again...and shudder.

J