It costs much more than you think to replicate software

Many people think that free software is easily replicate-able. You'd be suprised to learn that projects like OpenBSD have electrical and server bills each month of, not $5000 per month, not $10,000. Take a guess. $20K? $30K? Do some research on the subject.

You see, as software is advertised "Free" and popularized, this means that more and more people download the software, increasing the huge GigaBytes worth of downloads. Server bills and electrical bills become huge, because millions of people are downloading 4GB or 8GB DVD images. $30,000 per month is a fairly small community project bill.

Go ahead do some research on what it costs to run OpenBSD servers in a basement and pay for T1 style internet connections, air conditioning, electrical, and, well... who was that liar again that told you software is "different" because it is freely replicatiable? Stallman? or some other fool

What's a large project cost to "serve" freetards? At one time Ubuntu was operating at a loss, mailing freetards and gnutards free CD's paying the postage bill, using magic money from thin air.

"You see, free software has been so successful because we have been able to do it without money"
--Richard Stallman

Oh really. Liar, liar, pants on fire...

It probably costs less money to give people free tables, than to give them free software. Replicating software becomes an exponential expense when it is free, because everyone downloads multiple copies of it thinking there are no consequences or repercussions.

Whereas if the software cost money, people wouldn't abuse the download service provided. Then there is the cost of apt-get, yum, and RPM package managmement servers running 24 hours a day for freetard losers to get off with their latest apps. Oh I guess that's why Apple/Microshaft charges money for their stuff, to pay the bills, and actually pay their programmers salaries. Hmm, interesting business idea. Evil. But interesting. Who would have guessed that servers cost money to run, and tens of thousands of dollars that. Wow.

Wikipedia, A GNU Free Speech Product

Then there is the whole wikipedia joke. Wikipedia doesn't pay you a cent to contribute to their articles, but they cry for donations and alert you at the top of the page that they are suffering, so they beg and beg, so they can make what's his name rich: Billy Wales or whoever owns that peice of dung, with political problems galore, edit wars, and information that's full of b.s. facts and biased selfie pages advertising certain contributors egos. It's a pretty cool idea, but is infected by the GNU cult (license).

It's all released under the GNU Free Documentation License.

Costs...?

Nobody ever asked, what does it actually cost to run wikipedia servers, and pay the mediocre PHP programmers who couldn't write a proper char by char parser if they tried. The wikipedia source code is garbage, ugly regex infested code. Like a lot of GNU projjects the quality of the code is poor.

Costs though. What's that? You said it's not about cost, it's about free speech? Say again...
"You see, free software has been so successful because we have been able to do it without money"
--Richard Stallman
"Let's state that on a monthly basis, so $42.1 [per year] / 12 = $3.51 million per month.
--Jimmy Wales
Wikipedia costs 3.51 million dollars per month to run, and that may be an outdated quote.

It's all free. But it's not about cost! Wait, repeat this one more time:
"You see, free software has been so successful because we have been able to do it without money"
--Richard Stallman
Oh so it is about cost then; because you said "without money" which is a direct reference to cost.

GNU is not about cost. But it is about cost.

Thanks Stallman for clarifying that it's not about free speech, it is in fact all about free cost. Excellent clarification. Now go pay the BSD server bill with $30,000 of free dollars. Then do yourself a favor and pay 1000 other projects bills that are way bigger and more popular than smaller BSD's.
"Live cheaply," he said, offering some free advice. "Don't buy a house, a car or have children. The problem is they're expensive and you have to spend all your time making money to pay for them."
--Richard Stallman
Wait so when Stallman mentions living cheaply, and always mentions money, he's not discussing cost? His whole reason for starting GNU is related directly to cost.

Does Jimmy Wales have a car, and a house? Probably not. Oh no, wait. He might.
Related:
The Stallman Subsidized Software Tax
..or Go back Home because GNG is Not GNU