Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : William
Date : Mon Sep 26 2005 12:28 pm

"Antoon Pardon" <apardon@forel.vub.ac.be> wrote in message
news:slrndjfi1q.2ko.apardon@rcpc42.vub.ac.be...
> Op 2005-09-23, William schreef <Reply@NewsGroup.Please>:
> >
> > History - there for anyone to read and interpret.
>
> You show no evidence. You only assert there is evidence.
> So I find your statement that I prefer my belief system
> over the evidence at least premature.

Since we both have equal access to the available evidence,
but only one of us has asserted that they've studied it,
I kind of think you do prefer your belief system. By your
own assertion, anything I feed you will be biased, but you
don't seem inclined to do any looking on your own.

You made the original assertion, it's been challenged,
your turn. Were I in your position, I'd have hopped over
to Google and checked out a few high profile inventors
and/or inventions and come up with a little support.

Here're some starters:
    John Harrison (chronometer)
    George Westinghouse (hundreds, but most of his early
        work was railroad-related)
    Joseph Jacquard (loom)
    Samuel Colt (revolver)
    Elias Howe (sewing machine)

I would argue that most of these people were responding
to market opportunities with profits in mind. (Harrison
was responding to a prize offer, but a large market for
timepieces was obvious as well.)

But just refuting these won't support your argument very
well, you need to find evidence of a trend; something
suggesting a majority were not profit motivated to begin
their work.

BTW, I didn't bother mentioning Edison - too obvious.

> Well but until I actually studied this evidence and form
> a valid opinion, you can't expect me to be convinced, can
> you?

I don't actually expect you to be convinced. -Wm

.