en to zh_CN translation catalogue (25 entries)

note: type: Content of: <title>
en: Funding Art vs Funding Software - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
zh_CN: 资助艺术与资助软件 - GNU 工程 - 自由软件基金会

note: type: Content of: <div><h2>
en: Funding Art vs Funding Software
zh_CN: 资助艺术与资助软件

note: type: Content of: <div><address>
en: by <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a>
zh_CN: <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a> 著

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I've proposed two new systems to fund artists in a world where we have legalized sharing (noncommercial redistribution of exact copies) of published works.  One is for the state to collect taxes for the purpose, and divide the money among artists in proportion to the cube root of the popularity of each one (as measured by surveying samples of the population).  The other is for each player to have a &ldquo;donate&rdquo; button to anonymously send a small sum (perhaps 50 cents, in the US) to the artists who made the last work played.  These funds would go to artists, not to their publishers.
zh_CN: 我提出过两个在合法分享公开作品（非商业性分发未经改动的副本）的社会中支持艺术家的新系统。一个是政府为此征税，并把税款按照艺术家受欢迎程度（在人群中抽样）的三次方根为比例在艺术家之间分配。另一个是为每个播放器设置一个 &ldquo;捐赠&rdquo; 按钮来匿名捐赠小额金钱（比如50美分）给作品被播放的艺术家。这些资金会直接给到艺术家，而不是发行商。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: People often wonder why I don't propose these methods for free software.  There's a reason for that: it is hard to adapt them to works that are free.
zh_CN: 人们经常问我为什么不为自由软件建议这些方法。这是有原因的：这些方法很难适应自由的作品。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In my view, works designed to be used to do practical jobs must be free.  The people who use them deserve to have control over the jobs they do, which requires control over the works they use to do them, which requires <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">the four freedoms</a>.  Works to do practical jobs include educational resources, reference works, recipes, text fonts and, of course, software; these works must be free.
zh_CN: 在我看来，用来完成实际工作的作品必须是自由的。使用这些作品的人理应对他们的工作有控制权，其中就包括对他们做工作所需的作品有控制权，这就要求他们有 <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">四个自由</a>。完成实际工作所需的作品包括教育资源、参考作品、菜谱、字体，当然还有软件；这些作品必须是自由的。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: That argument does not apply to works of opinion (such as this one) or art, because they are not designed for the users to do practical jobs with.  Thus, I don't believe those works must be free.  We must legalize sharing them, and using pieces in remix to make totally different new works, but that doesn't include in publishing modified versions of them.  It follows that, for these works, we can tell who the authors are.  Each published work can specify who its authors are, and changing that information can be illegal.
zh_CN: 这个论点并不适用于观点（如本文）和艺术作品，因为这些作品并不是让用户用来完成实际工作的。因此，我不认为这些作品必须自由。我们必须让分享它们合法，让使用它们合成完全不同的新作品合法，但是其中并不包括发布它们的修改版。这就是说，我们应该可以分辨这些作品的作者。每个发布的作品都应该有特定的作者，更改作者信息是非法的。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: That crucial point enables my proposed funding systems to work.  It means that if you play a song and push the &ldquo;donate&rdquo; button, the system can be sure who should get your donation.  Likewise, if you participate in the survey that calculates popularities, the system will know who to credit with a little more popularity because you listened to that song or made a copy of it.
zh_CN: 这个关键点让我的筹款建议能够运作。如果你播放一首歌，然后点击了 &ldquo;捐赠&rdquo; 按钮，那么系统知道谁会得到你的捐赠。同样地，如果你参加了受欢迎程度的调查，当你收听和复制了一首歌时，那么系统应当知道谁的受欢迎程度会增加一些。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: When one song is made by multiple artists (for instance, several musicians and a songwriter), that doesn't happen by accident.  They know they are working together, and they can decide in advance how to divide up the popularity that song later develops&mdash;or use the standard default rules for this division.  This case creates no problem for those two funding proposals because the work, once made, is not changed by others.
zh_CN: 当多个艺术家（比如几个音乐家，几个作词家）联合创作了一首歌时，我们知道这并不是偶然。他们在合作，他们预先可以决定如何分配这首歌的受欢迎程度&mdash;&mdash;或者使用标准的默认分配方式。我的两个筹款提议对此没有问题，因为作品一旦问世，就不再更改。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: However, in a field of free works, one large work can have hundreds, even thousands of authors.  There can be various versions with different, overlapping sets of authors.  Moreover, the contributions of those authors will differ in kind as well as in magnitude.  This makes it impossible to divide the work's popularity among the contributors in a way that can be justified as correct.  It's not just hard work; it's not merely complex.  The problem raises philosophical questions that have no good answers.
zh_CN: 然而，在一个自由作品的领域，一个大的作品会有上百个，甚至几千个作者。作品会有多种版本，各个版本的作者不尽相同，也互有交叉。此外，这些作者的贡献种类和大小也很不同。这让分配贡献者的受欢迎程度成为不可能，很难说怎么做更正确。这不仅是难解；也不仅是复杂。这是一个我们还没有好答案的哲学问题。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Consider, for example, the free program GNU Emacs.  Our records of contributions to the code of GNU Emacs are incomplete in the period before we started using version control&mdash;before that we have only the change logs.  But let's imagine we still had every version and could determine precisely what code contribution is due to each of the hundreds of contributors.  We'd still be stuck.
zh_CN: 试想一下，作为自由程序的 GNU Emacs。在我们使用版本控制以前，GNU Emacs 的代码贡献者的记录并不完整&mdash;&mdash;之前我们只有修改日志。但是假设我们有了每个版本的记录，并能够准确定义数百个贡献者的代码贡献。我们还是会毫无办法。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: If we wanted to give credit in proportion to lines of code (or should it be characters?), then it would be straightforward, once we decide how to handle a line that was written by A and then changed by B.  But that assumes each line as important as every other line.  I am sure that is wrong&mdash;some pieces of the code do more important jobs and others less; some code is harder to write and other code is easier.  But I see no way to quantify these distinctions, and the developers could argue about them forever.  I might deserve some additional credit for having initially written the program, and certain others might deserve additional credit for having initially written certain later important additions, but I see no objective way to decide how much.  I can't propose a justifiable rule for dividing up the popularity credit of a program like GNU Emacs.
zh_CN: 如果我们想按照代码行数（字符数不行？）的比例来分配贡献，那么一旦我们定义了怎么处理甲写的代码后来被乙改掉之后的情况，贡献应该就可以直接算出来。但是这假定了每行代码都一样重要。我觉得这不对&mdash;&mdash;有些代码做了重要的事，有些做了不那么重要的事；有些代码难写，有些代码容易。可是，我不知道如何量化这些不同，程序员可能会对此没完没了地争论。我也许因为发起了这个程序获得额外的贡献分，而其他人会因为发起了后来一些重要的部分获得额外的贡献分，但是我也不知道如何客观分配具体的贡献分。对 GNU Emacs 这样的程序，我没有办法提出可行的受欢迎程度分配方案。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: As for asking all the contributors to negotiate an agreement, we can't even try.  There have been hundreds of contributors, and we could not find them all today.  They contributed across a span of 26 years, and never at any time did all those people decide to work together.
zh_CN: 对于要让所有的贡献者一起达成共识，想也别想。我们有数百位贡献者，现在我们并不能找到所有人。他们的贡献跨度有26年，而且也从来没有一个时间点，所有人决定要一起工作。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We might not even know the names of all the authors.  If some code was donated by companies, we did not need to ask which persons wrote that code.
zh_CN: 我们可能甚至不知道所有作者的名字。如果有公司贡献了代码，那么我们就可能不曾询问是哪个人写的代码。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Then what about the forked or modified variants of GNU Emacs? Each one is an additional case, equally complex but different.  How much of the credit for such a variant should go to those who worked on that variant, and how much to the original authors of the code they got from other GNU Emacs versions, other programs, and so on?
zh_CN: 然后，GNU Emacs 的其他分支和修改版又该怎么办？每个版本都是一个额外的案例，同样复杂却不同。每个变种的贡献度该怎么分配，原始作者的贡献该怎么处理？如此等等。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The conclusion is that there is no way we could come up with a division of the credit for GNU Emacs and justify it as anything but arbitrary.  But Emacs is not a special case; it is a typical example.  The same problems would arise for many important free programs, and other free works such as Wikipedia pages.
zh_CN: 结论就是除了武断之外，我们没有办法合理分配 GNU Emacs 的贡献度。但是 Emacs 并不是一个特利；它是一个典型的案例。许多重要的自由软件都有同样的问题，其他自由作品，比如 Wikipedia 页面，也一样。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: These problems are the reasons I don't propose using those two funding systems in fields such as software, encyclopedias or education, where all works ought to be free.
zh_CN: 这就是我不建议在软件、百科全书或教育领域使用上面两个资助系统的原因，这些领域的作品都应该是自由的。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: What makes sense for these areas is to ask people to donate to <em>projects</em> for the work <em>they propose to do</em>.  That system is simple.
zh_CN: 在这些领域，让人们为 <em>他们建议要做</em> 的 <em>项目</em> 捐款更为合理。这样的系统也简单。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The Free Software Foundation asks for donations in two ways.  We ask for <a href="https://my.fsf.org/donate/"> general donations to support the foundation's work</a>, and we invite <a href="https://my.fsf.org/donate/directed-donations"> targeted donations for certain specific projects</a>.  Other free software organizations do this too.
zh_CN: 自由软件基金会寻求两种捐助。我们请求大家 <a href="https://my.fsf.org/donate/">为支持基金会的工作做一般性捐助</a>，我们也请大家 <a href="https://my.fsf.org/donate/directed-donations">为某些具体的项目定向捐助</a>。其他自由软件组织的做法也类似。

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
zh_CN: 请将对FSF&amp;GNU的一般询问发送到<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>。还有一些其他联系FSF的<a href="/contact/">方式</a>。关于链接错误和&rdquo;其他更正或建议&ldquo;请发信到<a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。

note: TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, replace it with the translation of these two: We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard to <a hr
en: Please see the <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.
zh_CN: 我们尽最大努力来提供精准和高质量的翻译，但难免会存在错误和不足。如果您在这方面有评论或一般性的建议，请发送至 <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。</p><p>关于进行协调与提交翻译的更多信息参见 <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">《译者指南》</a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Copyright &copy; 2013, 2021 Richard Stallman
zh_CN: Copyright &copy; 2013, 2021 Richard Stallman<br></br>Copyright &copy; 2024 XIE Wensheng (translation)

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.
zh_CN: 本页面使用 <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a> 授权。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
zh_CN: <b>翻译团队</b>：<a rel="team" href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn/">&lt;CTT&gt;</a>，2024。

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
zh_CN: 最后更新：
