The stupid question is the question not asked | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Regarding the open source vs. commercial closed-source question, I think the difference is important when judging risks associated with the use of the software in question. New legislation (as opposed to existing laws regarding false advertising and liability) should take this into account.
If a vendor sells you a black box that they say will turn bananas into monkey dung, then all you have is their word on this. If you can look inside the box and see that there's a monkey inside waiting to be fed a banana, well then you have a reasonable expectation that the box will do what you've been told, without ever having to risk a banana. Open source palpably changes risk assesments. Matt In reply to Re: OT: Software & Liability
by mojotoad
|
|