> All software should be free, The marginal cost of one more user is exactly zero

All bridges should be free, The marginal cost of one more user is effectively zero.

If you're suggesting we should fund critical software in the same way that we fund bridges, then I support that motion.

Quite ironically for the GP, that's exactly what has happened in this case: a taxpayer-funded governmental organisation (NSA) has produced and released a public good for free consumption. They literally saw the toll bridge (IDA Pro), said ‘nope’ for whatever internal reason, built a new one downstream, drove their vehicles across it, and then said “hey folks, this over here is for you to use for free whenever you want”.

While I agree with your overall point, this isn't the greatest analogy, because a finite number of users are able to use a bridge simultaneously. A bridge with too many users is called a traffic jam.

A piece of software with users who can't support themselves when issues crop up (and sustain their longterm usage) has effectively the same issue.

Toll bridges are quite rare. Most bridges are publicly funded via taxes and free to use, just like Ghidra.

Speak for yourself, I pay a fortune in tolls.

Time to stop driving the Mass Pike (I know, regional humor/rant.)

Sometimes it's an hour or more in time savings.. Not MA, probably just as bad in DC.

The people who make software need to be paid. Where do you think that’s coming from – ads?

Currently, yeah.

Along these lines, the first customer should pay the millions of dollars it takes to market and produce the software and then they can do what they want with it.

The first user can cost a lot, however

Okay, they you be the first user and pay the R&D costs + the salaries + bug fixing future expenses. I hope you got a billion in your pocket.