Re: and visual library once again

[tmoran@acm.org]

> >   The economists point out that to the extent programs are "public goods"
> > the market will undersupply them, leaving it to government or other
> > organizations not guided by the market to pay programmers.

> >     "Public goods" is a technical economics term, not a reference
> > to GPL or "Free software".

> I don't care whether it's a technical economics term or a martian
> politics term. You used it about GPL'd programs.
   Actually, I didn't use it about GPL'd programs.  Note that the original
sentence did not mention GPL, but did say "economists point out",
which was intended to convey the information that the following quoted
phrase was one that economists use, eg, a technical (though found in any
introductory econ textbook) economics term.  As you said about words in
another thread
>This is what happens when we take words like "buy" (or "steal") that
>apply to material objects, and try to use them on information such as
  It's important to try to clarify the particular meaning of a word
or phrase.  If someone understands it to have a different meaning,
much heat and little light will ensue.

> I still want to know how Red Hat isn't part of the market.
  I see various Red Hat products listed in Yahoo Shopping, and you
tell me they pay their in-house programmers, so they sound to me
like part of the market.