[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word
From: |
Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) |
Subject: |
Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word |
Date: |
Mon, 08 Nov 2021 09:04:03 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Roundcube Webmail/0.9.2 |
On 2021-11-04 10:06, dick wrote:
There is nothing insidious with such a paint
And yet, free software rhetoric emphatically characterizes nonfree as
"causing
harm in a way that is gradual or not easily noticed," which is
Merriam-Webster's
definition of "insidious."
The paint in the example would only be insidious if, say, it appeared to
mix
correctly initially and looked fine upon application to the surface, and
then
the surface turned pitch black several months or years later.
It's not insidious if the mixture turns black right in the paint pot.
Particularly so if the data sheet for either paint warns against it.
If there is no warning, and there is a delayed reaction, then it more or
less meets
the definition of insidious.
- "Freedom" is really the wrong word, dick, 2021/11/04
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2021/11/04
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, dick, 2021/11/05
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2021/11/04
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, Jean Louis, 2021/11/06
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, dick, 2021/11/14
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, Jean Louis, 2021/11/06
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, Jacob Bachmeyer, 2021/11/14
- Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word,
Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) <=
Re: "Freedom" is really the wrong word, Jacob Bachmeyer, 2021/11/04