Can we please stop with all the chatter on this topic?  Granted the
topic has some relevance to Scientific Linux but the conversation has
run amok and I'm resorting to deleting all the emails.  And possibly
deleting something that is really really relevant.

Connie, Pat, If you have some announcement on this topic, please use a
different subject line.

Thanks!

On 01/16/2014 05:29 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Jos Vos <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:49:51AM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
>>
>>> [...] (Always remember that companies,
>>> like politicians, do not make statements to communicate information.
>>> They make statements to achieve a desired result. Their statements may
>>> happen to communicate information, but if and only if it helps to
>>> achieve their desired result.)
>>
>> It's probably because of my reading problems that I read this as
>> "companies are bad and they are lying all the time".  I know it's not
>> said literally, but that's where "reading between the lines" comes in.
>
> Is "reading between the lines" sort of like "putting words in someone's mouth"?
>
> OK, this is going to be way off topic. But what the heck, I am on a
> roll. Oh, and I will definitely be making some value judgments this
> time.
>
> Of course I do not think companies lie all the time. They tell the
> truth when it is in their interest. They mislead and lie by omission
> when it is in their interest. And they outright lie when it is in
> their interest, if they can do so without legal or reputational risk.
>
> Quick aside: Companies do care about their reputation, but not for the
> same reason you or I do. Well, unless you are a sociopath. Companies
> care about their reputation to the extent that loss of reputation
> translates to loss of sales. Period.
>
> Small companies are often an exception. They are still capable of
> behaving like human beings, acting ethically and even altruistically
> for its own sake. Large companies are not so capable, because a CEO's
> "fiduciary duty" is to generate wealth for shareholders by any and all
> legal means. Anything less would be a violation of that duty.
>
> Most companies start small and good, but have steadily increasing
> difficultly "not being evil". Red Hat and Canonical, for example, were
> unquestionably positive forces for Linux at one time. But it is highly
> questionable whether we still live in that time. I think it is very
> unclear whether corporate involvement in open source will ultimately
> turn out to be a blessing or a curse. We are just now entering the
> later chapters of that story...
>
> To summarize my world view: Small corporations are good. Big
> corporations are evil. Small government is good. Big government is
> evil. I am still searching for a label that captures this view. I am
> pretty sure "communist" is not it.
>
>   - Pat
>