[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery??? |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:59:23 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.5 (celeriac, linux) |
>>>>> "Samium" == Samium Gromoff <address@hidden> writes:
Samium> At Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:21:01 +0100,
Samium> Peter Conrad wrote:
>> "directly affected" does not mean that 0% enforcement implies
>> 100% fraud. Therefore, my argument that contracts don't
>> *require* the possibility of enforcement holds.
Samium> You are here discussing an economical plausibility of the
Samium> "contracts and enforcement" issue.
No, he's not; what he wrote is a theorem about several well-known
models in economics. It's tautologically true except in unrealistic
cases. Now, Tom says "this contract is ethically bad because enforcing
it is a misuse of social resources." If contracts by definition
(Tom's) involve state enforcement, then use of social resources has
been stipulated, and Tom's burden of proof is greatly decreased. So
the _mere possibility_ of contract without enforcement is important to
the _ethical_ argument.
Samium> My perception was we were discussing ethical aspects of
Samium> it.
This is an ethical issue.
Where Peter's apparent line of argument fails is that I doubt that any
current proprietary vendor would be in business if the consumer
contract were a gentleman's agreement. However, the burden of proof
on Tom is still greatly increased, because there is a set of models
where non-trivial amounts of contracting can be supported at
infinitesimal actual enforcement cost based on a "reputation" for
enforcement.
Samium> Sidenote: i strongly believe that ethical but
Samium> !obviously_economical wins in the long term
Samium> _economically_.
What is obviously economical to me may not be at all obvious to you.
;-)
However, you'd better watch out for the contrapositive: if we can show
that proprietary software wins in the long run _economically_, then
free software is unethical. You'll end up arguing Gates's side. :-)
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Charles Duffy, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Charles Duffy, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Peter Conrad, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Charles Duffy, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Tupshin Harper, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Peter Conrad, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Samium Gromoff, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Samium Gromoff, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Samium Gromoff, 2003/11/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: Slavery???, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/11/24