Re: cURL author receives rude LogJ4 security inquiry

[Akira Urushibata]

Thank you for joining in the discussion which started with my message
titled "cURL author receives rude LogJ4 security inquiry".  (Date:
Mon, 31 Jan 2022)

Here is my reply to some points raised in the course of discussion.

On why gratitude is necessary, it is important to make a distinction
between the subjective from the objective.  We should not assume that
it is just one of these and fail to see the other.

Subjective:

  "I wrote this software.  It was hard work.  I do not object to people
  using it without paying me money, but I want to be recognized for my
  contribution.  As such I demand expression of gratitude from each and
  every user."
  
Objective:

  "Someone who gets something for free fails to say thanks is bound to
  fall into the fallacy that the object is not valuable.  This
  distortion of value leads to misunderstanding of technology.  Poor
  understanding in turn leads to abuse.  Modern computers and
  communication devices are powerful; they can incur significant
  damage when abused or misused to users and by-standers alike.  It is
  natural that those who understand technology to consider it their
  rightful duty to prevent such damage."
  
That said, I understand that the use of coercive measures is not a
good way to achieve the above goal.  We should look for better means.

Here I can make one suggestion.  When I visit computer events I see
people and groups busy promoting their accomplishments.  With free
software it is possible to discuss the technical inputs which went
into one's work and made that accomplishment possible.  Doing so
is one way of expressing gratitude.  Experience tells me that one is
more likely to find good allies in this manner.

---

Expression of gratitude, acknowledgment of someone's contribution
to society come together.  Please consider the following, a line of
discussion all of us must have heard, in this light:

  "The OS should be called 'Linux' not 'GNU/Linux' as Richard Stallman
  suggests.  It is true that Linus Torvalds used tools written by
  Richard Stallman to make the Linux.  But Richard Stallman wrote none
  of the source code of Linux; his contribution was indirect and by no
  means sufficient to support his claim that the operating system
  should bear 'GNU' (which is the name of the project Stallman headed)
  in its name."
  

Note that one consequence we have here is that technology is
misunderstood.  I believe that this is an epic example.  Moreover the
misunderstanding comes with the sinister aspect of throwing the
unsuspecting novice off from the path which leads him to proper
understanding.