[CS-FSLUG] GNU believers

[Aaron Patrick Lehmann]

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 11:48:59AM +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 03:10, Aaron Patrick Lehmann wrote:
> > I refuse to be held accountable for the actions of others. If this
> > exploitation is wrong (which I'm not sure it is), then I'm not the
> > one who did it. Sure, I made it possible, by choosing to allow
> > derivatives to pick their own liscense, but I didn't force it.
> 
> Hokay, now follow t through to its conclusion.
> 
> Say you leave a box of spraypaint tins on your letterbox, some flouro, 
> some stoveblack. Now along comes a bunch of children, who swiftly egg 
> one another into taking the tins and spraying your neighbours' walls 
> with them. Are you at fault? There's no law (yet) against leaving 
> spray-paint on your letterbox.

Nope, I didn't do the vandalism.  I might be responsible for littering, as I
left all these items on my letterbox, which is the property of either the
government or my apartment complex.

> 
> Now replace the spraypaint with pistol and box of matching ammo, and 
> re-run the simulation. Who's at fault?

Well, I imagine in some jurisdictions, a gun liscense implies proper policing
of the weapon.  I imagine that I would be responsible for criminal neglect, at
the very least.  Of course, the circumstance you've detailed is not only
contrived, but inapplicable.  After all, the children in question aren't using
the weapon to develope a new kind of gun.  Your scenario seems to apply more to
a developer-user situation.  Is Fyodor responsible for the harm people might do
with Nmap?

> 
> > Meanwhile, if I had released under a more restrictive liscense, then
> > I would have to accept resposibility for the liscensing scheme of
> > derivatives, since I was the one that chose it.
> 
> You chose it here, too. BSD is a choice.

But I didn't choose the liscense of derivatives...  Unless I misremember the
nature of the BSD liscense (which is possible).  I do not plan to use a
liscense that makes any requirements as to the nature of the liscense of any
derivative code.  If the BSD liscense does not meet that requirement, I'll find
or make one that does.

> 
> > It seems analogous 
> > to free will in general.  God has given us, His derivatives, the
> > ability to do good or evil.  Some will do good, and others evil.  Is
> > He responsible for the evil-doers' actions?
> 
> Yes. And so are they. He has done no evil, and yet He is also 
> responsible.
> 
> However, He has evidently judged the consequences of _not_ letting this 
> charade play itself out as being more harmful than diminishing His 
> immediate responsibility by supernaturally curtailing it.

Hmm.  So reality as we know it is a charade in the eyes of God...  Possibly
there are bigger issues here than the relative merits of RMS's gift to
humanity.

> 
> Cheers; Leon
> 
> --
> "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone," says the Lord God.
> "Turn, then, and live" -- Ezekiel 18:32, NRSV
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ChristianSource FSLUG mailing list
> Christiansource at ofb.biz
> http://cs.uninetsolutions.com

-- 
Sometimes you stay the course;
Sometimes the course stays you.