>> It might be more accurate then to say that
*writing* proprietary software is immoral since you could be hurting other
people with buggy code that they cannot fix or placing people in an
unsecure computing environment they cannot make secure.
Would you also suggest that it is immoral to design a car that could cause
people to be killed, or a lock that could not be perfectly secure?
Is if moral for you to run your computer, which is made using a process that
generates hazardous waste, and poisons the planet?
If you take the argument far enough, you'll find almost everything could be
considered immoral.
Ken Elliott
=====================
-----Original Message-----
From: slug@nks.net [mailto:slug@nks.net] On Behalf Of Rich Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 3:06 PM
To: slug@nks.net
Subject: Re: [SLUG] Software and Morality (was Cheap'n good laptops for
Linux)
On Tue, November 14, 2006 2:20 pm, Jonathon Conte wrote:
>>From: michael hast <evylrobot19@cox.net>
>>Reply-To: slug@nks.net
>>To: slug@nks.net
>>Subject: Re: [SLUG] Cheap'n good laptops for Linux
>>Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:03:32 +0000
>>
>>Okay. I've been at this for a little while now. Maybe I'm being
>>thick-headed, but what part of that might be immoral? The fact that they
>>want to retain ownership of their code? Should all software producing
>>companies be forced to share their code? Wouldn't that attitude support
>>M$'s argument about Open Source supporting communism?
>
> Preface: My apologies to the list for hijacking the previous thread.
>
> Disclaimer: It is not necessarily my opinion that proprietary software is
> immoral nor is it my intent to persuade any on the list to reach a
> particular conclusion. However, I'll try to touch on a few reasons that
> some
> consider proprietary software to be immoral.
I think you fall into a trap when you assign moral qualities to objects
rather than activities. It might be more accurate then to say that
*writing* proprietary software is immoral since you could be hurting other
people with buggy code that they cannot fix or placing people in an
unsecure computing environment they cannot make secure.
To answer Mr. Hast's question: "Should all software producing companies be
forced to share their code?" I don't think anybody should be forced to
share their code, but companies do have an ethical or legal obligation to
not knowingly produce a product that is harmful and to quickly respond if
they have released a bad product. What other industry in the world can
produce products that are knowingly or accidentally defective and not be
held accountable?
Just my 2 cents...
v/r,
Rich Morgan
OpenAddict.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:30:08 EDT