Re: How to write a "proper" math document

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg120127] Re: How to write a "proper" math document*From*: Richard Fateman <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu>*Date*: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 07:31:43 -0400 (EDT)*References*: <201107041044.GAA02461@smc.vnet.net> <iuukk8$epi$1@smc.vnet.net> <iv1aho$smk$1@smc.vnet.net> <iv45e4$eu9$1@smc.vnet.net> <iv6hfq$sc2$1@smc.vnet.net>

On 7/8/2011 2:09 AM, Peltio wrote: > Richard Fateman wrote > >> While I agree that Mathematica could be improved, I think it is pretty >> speculative to say that it would be better if Mathematica were free and >> open source. I'm in favor of paying programmers and mathematicians. I >> doubt that you get the best results from students who have to deliver >> pizzas in the evenings to pay their rent. > > I can see your point here, but I believe the biggest advantage of free > software (as in free speech) is that everyone who _needs_ an > improvement _for him/herself_ is free, if he or she is able, to develop > and add the code that make an application better or more useful. With a Gnu license, that person is compelled, if distribution is contemplated, to give that improved code away. And continue delivering pizza. A disincentive. As you say, making a deal with the owner is an alternative which may or may not work. It's essentially socialism vs. capitalism. There is also nothing special about software here. Why not lobby in favor of all intellectual "property" being made free, including music, books, newspapers, drug patents, etc. But this is off topic for this newsgroup. RJF

**References**:**Re: How to write a "proper" math document***From:*dr DanW <dmaxwarren@gmail.com>