From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2007-07-24T23:09:12+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby Editor

On 7/24/07, John Joyce <dangerwillrobinsondanger@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 5:04 AM, Brad Phelan wrote:
>
> > Chad Perrin wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 06:49:59PM +0900, Brad Phelan wrote:
> >>> However it always stuns me when software geeks come with
> >>> arguments as previously posted because we are meant to be
> >>> abstract thinkers. However I keep hearing the same old argument
> >>> along the lines of `if I can't kick it, it has no value and
> >>> should be free.`
> >> I don't recall anyone saying anything of the sort.  Maybe I'm just
> >> not
> >> thinking abstractly enough to know where you got that.
> >
> > 'governmentally enforced artificial scarcity model where software
> > is treated as physical product units.'
> >
> >
> > What does this mean other than that software has no inherent
> > monetary sale value other than that artificially imposed
> > by government control?
> >
> Which is exactly the kind of half logic that would debunk all
> 'governmentally enforced' rights, property or otherwise.
> They're all artifices imposed by social constructs. Some of them work
> and some don't. If they don't work, they're ideally changed/fixed.
> But the ideal Star Trek world of no money and free and equal access
> to everything is not going to happen any time soon.
Luckily, just call me Lt. Broccoli ;)

But changing it, is just what we are trying to do, by small steps, and
saying that slavery is bad but is a reality was true some day too,
right?

Just my 0.02 �

Robert
>
>


-- 
I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java.
I just didn't know it would be called Ruby
-- Kent Beck