OK, it makes sense to me that you might resent not being able to freely execute software you write if that software depends, in some essential way, on some other software that you do not have full / free access to.
I assume there are many examples that could illustrate this. It doesn't have to depend on theorems or math or software. The pathetic graduate student might invent a machine that (for example) sequences genes. He doesn't get to take it home. Or he might contribute to the development of a patent. He doesn't own it (probably). Or he writes a paper and publishes it in a traditional journal. He can't (officially, legally) makes copies of it and give it away (unless he retains copyright). At least for the time being, refusing to ever use intellectual property that is non-free is kind of restraining. Especially if you watch TV, listen to the radio, or read newspapers and books. RJF On Monday, February 10, 2014 9:56:54 AM UTC-8, kcrisman wrote: > > > > On Sunday, February 9, 2014 1:37:27 PM UTC-5, rjf wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, February 7, 2014 9:17:23 PM UTC-8, kcrisman wrote: >>> >>> So, in the Sage/GAP/etc. urban legend, some pathetic PhD student proves >>> a theorem, and then upon graduating can't afford the software it's >>> implemented in. >>> >> Doesn't make sense to me. >> "Implement a theorem"? >> A theorem is a (true) statement. >> > Sometimes it is accompanied by a proof that it is true. >> >> > > I was, of course, referring to the possibility of a theorem which proved > that a certain algorithm worked. > > Nice argument for open source. I have no reason to disbelieve it, and >>> have seen very similar quotes attributed to someone from the GAP project. >>> But in the spirit of a Russian Olympics... trust but verify. >>> >> >> The possibility that GAP is needed to run an algorithm is an argument in >> favor of GAP. That >> is, GAP provides an apparently unique capability -- one that is required, >> at least at the moment -- >> to do something of interest. >> >> > True but not what I was talking about. The problem is that, at least in > principle, if one proves an algorithm works (as a theorem, let's say) and > then it's implemented, perhaps even by that person, in a software package > they (or certainly their students) wouldn't have access to, that strikes me > as unfortunate. Something intellectual was produced there. But IANAL and > especially not an IP lawyer, so I will rest that there. > > On a related note, I couldn't exactly find in the quote in the GAP article > where it said this actually *happened*. It just made it sound like "were > this to happen". Was I missing another reference to this where it > explicitly happened? > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
