I have to read this paper from this communist, toe-cheese ea

You might say, “How do I change this recipe to take out the salt?” and the great chef would respond, “How dare you insult my recipe, the child of my brain and my palate, by trying to tamper with it? You don't have the judgment to change my recipe and make it work right!”
“But my doctor says I'm not supposed to eat salt! What can I do? Will you take out the salt for me?”
“I would be glad to do that; my fee is only $50,000.” Since the owner has a monopoly on changes,the fee tends to be large. “However, right now I don't have time. I am busy with a commission to design a new recipe for ship's biscuit for the Navy Department. I might get around to you in about two years.”

File: 1473615932935.jpg (357KB, 500x707px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 500x707px

>>58678273
Have you ever read the Communist Manifesto?
It's really outdated and makes RMS look like Adam Smith

Signing a typical software license agreement means betraying your neighbor: “I promise to deprive my neighbor of this program so that I can have a copy for myself.”

A programmer may describe enthusiastically the work that he finds technically exciting; then when asked, “Will I be permitted to use it?”, his face falls, and he admits the answer is no.

I'm raging more and more with every paragraph

>I have shown how ownership of a program—the power to restrict changing or copying it—is obstructive. Its negative effects are widespread and important. It follows that society shouldn't have owners for programs.

Fuck me, murder and pedo laws are obstructing too, aren't they? Fucking idiot

Thread's DOA, but this fucking last one argument for making people work for free must be here for posterity.

There are some lines of work that few will enter except for money; road construction, for example.
There are other fields of study and art in which there is little chance to become rich, which people enter for their fascination or their perceived value to society.
When it is true at a given time that most people will work in a certain field only for high pay, it need not remain true. The dynamic of change can run in reverse, if society provides an impetus. If we take away the possibility of great wealth, then after a while, when the people have readjusted their attitudes, they will once again be eager to work in the field for the joy of accomplishment.

Free software sucks

>>58678273
>Communism as was practiced in the Soviet Union was a system of central control where all activity was regimented, supposedly for the common good, but actually for the sake of the members of the Communist party. And where copying equipment was closely guarded to prevent illegal copying.
>By contrast, the author states to be working to build a system based on voluntary cooperation and on decentralization.
>Thus, if we are to judge views by their resemblance to Russian Communism, it is the software owners who are the Communists.

Dis nigga be trippin balls

File: 1340423283361.jpg (15KB, 434x308px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 434x308px

>>58678273
He believes U.S. patent law is communist.