kafpauzo said:
People tend to interpret the defaults as a very strong recommendation.
When people are uncertain about the consequences of touching a setting, many
will see the default as a recommendation that you should disobey only if you
have a really compelling reason, and only if you have
I hate to say this here, but Mark Shuttleworth is a businessman, a
company leader, not exactly what I would call a free software leader.
And that's fine! But we need to know what we're talking about. Even
launchpad is not free software (yet), one wouldn't expect from a free
software leader to
Mark, I do think that Chip Bennett has a strong point. In this spirit,
the next step would be mp3 codecs already installed, with a notification
that you can uninstall them if you don't agree with the terms of use.
After that, maybe full proprietary pieces of software, again, with the
option to
Here's an idea if you absolutely want to keep firefox under these
circumstances (which I'm against), present the EULA on installation (or
during upgrade), with a note that, if you don't accept you can use a
renamed version of firefox. Then, if someone clicks I don't agree,
firefox is not installed
This striked me as the right time to re-read the Ubuntu philosophy as written
on ubuntu.com:
http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy
All of the text is interesting in relation to this conversation, for example:
For Ubuntu, the 'free' in 'free software' is used primarily in
