Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : Arthur J. O'Dwyer
Date : Wed Sep 21 2005 04:10 pm


On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Chris Sonnack wrote:
> Arthur J. O'Dwyer writes:
>>> So, if you develop your own touch, that means that the value of beer is
>>> now partly determined by that effort.  If, however, you copy my touch,
>>> which takes a lot less effort, that means you have decreased the value of
>>> beer by your act of copying.
>>
>>    So in your view: Making a copy by expending a lot of effort is hard
>> work, and is all right. Making a copy by expending little effort is easy,
>> and is theft.
>
> Which we both, I think, agree is incorrect.

   Which "which"? Theft is incorrect, or my phrasing of Willem's view is 
incorrect? I agree that theft is "incorrect," but obviously you and I 
disagree significantly about what the precise meaning of "theft" is.

> It's such a simple equation.  Taking something of someone else's without
> their permission is theft.  Period.

   Almost. Obviously, I can take apples from an apple tree without thieving 
from the tree; which means that we need a more rigorous definition of 
"someone." Not to mention "of someone else's." After all, surely you don't 
believe that might makes right, possession is ten parts of the law, and so 
on?  And remember, David is strenuously arguing against the recognition of 
certain kinds of concepts (words, art, algorithms, democracy, the 
color blue) as "property" at all --- which means that we disagree on the 
meaning of "something" as well!
   Not so simple, is it? :)


>> I don't think the amount of effort expended in the commission of an act
>> should determine whether it's theft or not.
>
> Agreed.  It is, IMO, a factor in its value.

   Okay. As I pointed out, David and I are on record as believing that the 
labor theory of value is hogwash. So I think I'm going to have to pass 
on this one.

>> For example, consider a "beer genius" who can just effortlessly create
>> new and innovative beer recipes off the top of his head any time he
>> feels like it. Nobody else can make a living the old-fashioned way
>> anymore; is the beer genius "stealing" from the oldsters, because he
>> can effortlessly render their efforts useless?
>> (My answer: obviously not.)
>
> Agreed.  However consider the fact that our beer genius probably spent
> considerable investment *becoming* a beer genius.

   No, he didn't. I'm the one postulating this thought-experiment, and I 
state that our beer genius' powers came to him fully fledged without any 
apparent cause. He's the Ramanujan of beer. /Now/ is he a thief?

-Arthur
BTW, I guess it should have been obvious why this thread just got a 
surge of activity: yesterday was Talk Like a Pirate Day!
Speaking of redefining the meaning of words, I'm just waiting for the
day when a person who breaks weak crypto is referred to as a "ninja."
Because ninjas are even cooler than pirates. ;)

.