Re: How do Free software developers get money?

[mike3]

David Kastrup wrote:
<snip>
> Going beyond sustainability is not useful in the long run for any goal.
> It may be unethical not to donate blood to people in need of it.  But
> that does not mean that one is a bad person if one does not let oneself
> be drained completely.  

No, it doesn't. So you're saying that one does not have to do _nothing
but_ free software, especially if that interferes with other important
things, right?

> The creation of proprietary software is a
> sterile act.  It creates nothing permanently useful, but it also does
> not destroy anything.  If it is the most efficient use of your time to
> create the resources for creating free software, so what?  If that still
> annoys you, work on changing the rules of the world rather than
> pretending to be able to ignore them.

So then what _exactly_ is considered _wrong_ according to Gnutian
(for lack of a better term) morals & ethics -- ie. what is actually 
_harmful_? As you say, it's not merely the _creation_ of the proprietary
software, so what is it? The _distribution_ of the proprietary software?
Encouraging other people to use proprietary software? Not contributing
new Free software, ie. creating only proprietary software (in which case
why all the critique against companies that create both proprietary and
Free software)? All of the above? Does what you've said mean it is okay
to create proprietary software to make money that then will be used for
beneficial purposes? Is the under-discussion creation of the proprietary
software a "necessary evil" and hence is excused? What exactly is going
on here? I'm sorry but I'm confused.

And where did I "pretend to be able to ignore" the rules of the world?