On 10/23/2015 01:22 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 23/10/15 16:02, Aaron Wolf wrote: >> In other words, "When concerns about SaaSS conflict with this other >> concern, I think we should compromise on SaaSS and prioritize the >> other concern" is a reasonable argument. The unreasonable argument >> is, "SaaSS concerns happen by a matter of circumstance to conflict >> with this other concern, therefore, concerns about SaaSS are >> wrong." > I think your point is well articulated. But I fundamentally disagree > that we must reject all SaaSS *at this time*.
Well, you're not disagreeing with me, personally. We don't disagree here. I don't accept absolute dogma about any of these issues. I was just rejecting the hyperbolic level of your arguments. I think we should > instead embrace it, and build a ladder to a future where it may be > rejected. And if one accepts this opinion, as I do, one must work hard > to ensure that SaaSS doesn't trick anyone. I find my reasoning here > has many parallels with rms's reasoning with LGPL, and GNU's reasoning > with suggesting lax licences in cases where it is deemed a reasonable > sacrifice in order to encourage adoption of free formats etc. > > I do *not* think concerns about SaaSS are wrong. Indeed I exclusively > use the AGPL, and make sure that all the software I write is > replaceable, verifiable, and so forth. But presently there are too > many circumstances where I find it unacceptable to outright reject > SaaSS; kind of how I ultimately reject capitalism and currency, but > find myself unable to reconcile this view with actually functioning in > society at present. > -- Aaron Wolf co-founder, Snowdrift.coop music teacher, wolftune.com
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature