Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: Free Software vs. Open Source: Where do *you* stand?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 09:00:15PM -0600, Jan Depner wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 22:23 -0500, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> > A song, novel, poem, picture, all have representations that are not
> > integers. In particular, they are objects (though I contend
> > that the relevant fact is that they are not integers).
> >
>
> Any song, picture, or novel can be represented as an integer or a
> series of numbers in the same way. Check out Michael F. Barnsley and
> Iterated Fractal Systems.

Here's the thing though (and this will become more clear in my next
paragraph) - a representation of a song/picture/novel/etc *does not
function* as a song/picture/novel/etc. A computer program is unique
in this aspect - it IS its integral representation.

> > Since there is no difference between some big integer and a computer
> > program, you must defend a copyright against either use. You have a
> > computer program and I am doing math. I email you my results, and it
> > contains the number of your program. I am using your program without
> > a license. After all, *you have no way to tell that I am not*.
> >
>
> This is so specious it doesn't deserve an answer. Are you trying to
> say that there is absolutely no creative process involved in
> programming?

Not at all! I think I wasn't clear with my claim. I am making a
careful distinction between an actual computer program (ie, the data
that my computer actually executes), and the code that we write when
we program.

> What you're doing is called reverse syllogism.

There are cases when a reverse syllogism is a valid argument. In
particular, this is a true statement:

> All programs are an integer. That is an integer, therefor it is a
> program.

Of course, I never said it was necessarily a useful program.
The problem I see with making a distinction is an epistimological one.
How can you ever tell the difference? [1]

I think I might write a piece of software that demonstrates this.
I've been thinking about. It's very easy to write a shell script that
prints the integer a program makes.

But I couldn't find anything that does the reverse, because the vast
majority of integers almost certainly don't do anything interesting.
But in principle it should be easy.

> I definitely accept ownership of software. If I didn't I certainly
> wouldn't be writing any open source software since ownership and
> copyright of that software is what protects my code from being usurped
> by any company around and used without my permission. Is that what you
> are advocating, that all software should be public domain so that
> companies that don't release source code can just steal it and hide it
> from you? Brilliant!

No - I too accept copyrighting of software for pragmatic reasons. The
reasons you identifed are really good ones. It's also the status quo
and it's really hard to get by otherwise.

I just find this to be a very difficult arguement to resolve. When
someone asked about a distinction I've thought about a lot, I thought
I might stick my idea out into the world ::-)

> A program is an artistic object or at least it can be. Any program
> that is above the complexity of "Hello World" will be programmed
> differently by any two programmers. My assumption from reading your
> responses is that you are not a programmer. I've been programming
> professionally (i.e. I get paid for it) for almost 30 years.

I am a programmer, though not professionally at this point. My
degree is in mathematics, philosophy, and computer science. I guess
you've also figured I'm strong on the philosophy ::-)

I don't deny the creativity in software development at all. I'm just
busy being creative in other ways right now!

[1] You know some logic - are you familiar with the proof of Godel's
Incompleteness Theorem? If so, we're at the point after arithmetic
has been Godel-numbered: we can no longer distinguish between an
integer and an arithmetic statement.

-- 
Ross Vandegrift
ross@email-addr-hidden
"The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who
make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians
have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine
man in the bonds of Hell."
	--St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37