On Sun, 2013-10-06 at 08:48 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > PS: I have found an old definition of "Open Hardware" from 1999. > IMHO well thought and interesting to read... > > http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/definitions.html > http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/ > > If we had known this before, we could have saved this long flamewar.
I find this extraordinarily hypocritical. One day you say this:
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 20:52 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> And, please give me the officially approved definition of "Open Hardware"
> by ISO or some other official standardization body. If that exists, I will
> follow it.
> Otherwise there are several personal definitions.
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 22:00 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> And I claim the right to have another idea. We are not in "1984".
> It now looks to me as some group of people tries to capture the term
> "open hardware" (althoug they mean "free hardware") and that is
> something we have to fight against - in the name of freedom...
> Well, then the open hardware movement you are representing isn't open
> to other opinions and definitions (e.g. difference between "open" and "free").
>
> Sorry, but in summary your argumentations looks quite like a dictatorship
> to me and not an area of freedom (hiding behind the word "open").
And the next day, when you've found an old definition that accords with
your view, suddenly that one definition would have obviated any
discussion.
--
Bob Ham <r...@settrans.net>
for (;;) { ++pancakes; }
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
