George Dyson Quotes

The Mozilla project is big in terms of lines of code and complexity.

Content zips around the Internet thanks to code - programming code. And code is subject to intellectual property laws.

I've never regretted not making Linux shareware: I really don't like the pay for use binary shareware programs.

The biggest challenge for open source is that as it enters the consumer market, as projects like WordPress and Firefox have done, you have to create a user experience that is on par or better than the proprietary alternatives.

People sometimes ask me if it is a sin in the Church of Emacs to use vi. Using a free version of vi is not a sin; it is a penance. So happy hacking.

When I first got into technology I didn't really understand what open source was. Once I started writing software, I realized how important this would be.

As of today, the Postfix mail transport agent has almost 50,000 lines of code, comments not included.

I think the wonderful thing about vi is that it has such a good market share because we gave it away.

Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer, I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business.

GNU, which stands for Gnu's Not Unix, is the name for the complete Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give it away free to everyone who can use it.

The True-GNU philosophy is more extreme than I care for, but it certainly laid a foundation for the current scene, as well as providing real software.

I changed the Linux copyright license to be the GPL some time in the first half of 1992. Mostly because I had hated the lack of a cheaply and easily available UNIX when I had looked for one a year before.

Talk is cheap. Show me the code.

When it comes to software, I much prefer free software, because I have very seldom seen a program that has worked well enough for my needs, and having sources available can be a life-saver.

I think operating systems work best if they're free and open. Particular applications are more likely to be proprietary.

I think that Microsoft will increasingly feel margin pressure from Linux as well as people saying: well actually the applications that really matter to me are not on my PC. And so they're going to be able to extract less of a monopoly rent, so to speak.

I'm not of the opinion that all software will be open source software. There is certain software that fits a niche that is only useful to a particular company or person: for example, the software immediately behind a web site's user interface. But the vast majority of software is actually pretty generic.

Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches.

People are still crazy about Python after twenty-five years, which I find hard to believe.

If you think about computer programming, it's as antisocial as it gets.

The name Firefox is not part of the open source licence, and that's why it's important to us.

Companies have been trying to figure out what it is that makes open source work.

What's kept Java from being used as widely as possible is there hasn't been an Open Source implementation of it that's gotten really widespread use.

Many days I don't write any code at all, and some days I spend all day writing code.

C is peculiar in a lot of ways, but it, like many other successful things, has a certain unity of approach that stems from development in a small group.