Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #29279

Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing?

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 17:04:10 -0400, Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de>  
wrote:

> Free market economy theory tells you that competition drives
> costs down.

Wrong.

Free market economic theory tells us that competition drives
*prices* down.

Prices and costs simply aren't the same thing.  Competition doesn't
change the costs of inputs.  Competition, without collusion, generally
lowers prices for consumers, i.e., reduces net profit for the companies.

> The marginal costs of software have always been close to zero
> (additional copies are cheap), so software, once developed,
> is dirt cheap.

Dirt isn't cheap here, but the metaphor is well understood.

> If there is a free market, of course.  The mercantilistic way
> [copyrights] works means that there is no free market.

Are you thinking of patents? ...

> Well, copyleft is a game-changer, and it results in a way more
> free market than before.

Free?  Free in what sense?  Free from profit?  Yes, I'd agree on that.

"... way more free-from-profit market than before."

Yes, that's known as sarcasm.

It's wholly unspecified as to *what* became "free" in "way more free":
brain cells, hair coming out, laughter, pants, love, beer, spittle, etc.

> The cost of software is the cost of writing the first copy.  Ok, there
> are some costs of deployment, and there is the "works for me" effect,
> which means that it doesn't yet work for everybody else, and you have
> to fix the bugs that show up only on other's computers.
>
> But in the end, the job and the task which needs payment is to create
> and maintain the software, not the copies.  And as long as people want
> and need better software, and as long as those experts who write software
> are a scarce resource, money will flow.  This is a law of free market
> economy.

You claim that "money will flow" because "experts who write software are
a scarce resource."  That's true.  It's even more true if the software is
closed source and so the quantity of available experts are even fewer.
You say it's the "law of the free market economy".  It's true, whether or
not it can be qualified as a "law."  Yet, despite all that, just above,
you claim that copyleft makes the market "way more free ... than before."
Am I to assume that "economy" has been excised from "free market economy?"
You clearly support capitalism, yet claim socialism is better.  Ironic.

>>> Let's first get our facts straight.  I write free software.  It is
>>> also commercial software.  There is no intrinsic conflict between
>>> freedom and commerce.
>>
>> Tell that to Microsoft. Or Oracle. Even better, tell that to Sun. If you
>> can find anyone, that is.
>
> Sun did a lot of free software stuff, and was doing quite well.  Oracle
> bought them, because Oracle wanted to have one of their free software
> product: Java.  It's still free software.  Seems you don't have a
> conclusive argument.
>

What?  Oracle bought Sun for the cash flow from their maintenance contracts
and retained cash.

>> FFS! Like someone is
>> putting a gun to one's head, forcing people to buy a particular software
>> product. You are free to NOT buy whatever the hell you like.
>
> Actually, Stallman was opposing to the law which made software  
> proprietary
> by default (this was a pretty new law back then, before, software was not
> under copyright).  There was no choice.

I'm really wondering what law that was since that's always been the case
for state law in the U.S.  It's also that way with international law.  It
wasn't always that way with federal law.

The problem with your argument here is that if Stallman truly was opposing
copyrights, he'd be supporting the concept of *not* having *any*  
copyrights.
Instead, what Stallman created was a *license* for a copyright holder which
only retains minimal rights for the copyright holder.  This license can  
only
be used with copyrighted works!  There are many ways you can view  
Stallman's
license.  One of those ways is that it convinces a copyright holder to
forfit their wealth to others who haven't earned it and don't deserve it.
In legal circles, this is called "fraud" or "conversion", i.e., a con or  
theft.

Also, I think you're conflating "proprietary" with "copyrighted".

> He was the one who actually gave us the choice back.  We can now decide
> if we buy proprietary software or get free software instead.  He hacked
> the copyright system so that this could become possible.

If you "get free software instead", and therefore _clearly_ need and want
better software, just whom is paying the salaries of the scarce experts
who write that software?  You didn't...  Charity?

Supporters of free software always do this.  They say: "Look it's free!"
Then, they turn around and support capitalism in their next breathe saying
that "money will still flow [somehow]."  I don't get it.  The two are *not*
compatible economically.  You can't *not* pay for something and also expect
experts who expect to be paid to code it for you.  Someone must pay them
to work.  Who?  Why?

> [That] wasn't a brilliant contribution.

"This" means your contribution.  "That" would mean his contribution.

No offense intended, since you're exceptionally easy to offend and drive
into an insane rage, but your contribution wasn't much more brilliant than
his: confusion of patents with copyrights, irrational circular arguments,
misunderstanding of economic theories, etc.  Maybe, you should refrain from
ranking the contributions of others.  It seems your not qualified to do so.


Rod Pemberton

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-01 00:10 +0100
  Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? David Kuehling <dvdkhlng@posteo.de> - 2014-04-01 06:34 +0200
    Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 00:19 -0700
  Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-01 15:53 +0000
    Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 13:12 -0700
      Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-01 23:06 +0200
        Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 14:42 -0700
        Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 18:04 -0700
          Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? David Kuehling <dvdkhlng@posteo.de> - 2014-04-02 09:41 +0200
            Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-02 12:27 +0200
              Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-02 10:35 -0700
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-02 20:49 +0200
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-02 16:44 -0700
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-03 05:12 -0500
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 04:14 -0700
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-03 08:26 -0500
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-03 23:04 +0200
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-04 02:36 -0400
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-04 03:38 -0500
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-04 15:19 +0200
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-04 18:03 -0400
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-05 09:12 -0500
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-05 15:37 +0100
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-07 23:25 -0700
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-08 06:13 -0400
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-03 12:39 +0100
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-03 08:33 -0500
                Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-03 10:47 +0000
  Re: Maximum heap memory available to GForth when allot-ing? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-01 16:36 -0700

csiph-web