Am 15.03.2012 12:28, schrieb Michel Bauwens:
here is how I understand it, let's say ibm,
previously, ibm and other companies where all developing their own
internal
software, spending a lot of money; when first corporate pooling and then
linux commons got along, they could obtain the same results with only 10%
of the investment; gladly giving an extra 5% away to the commons because
of
all the savings they made. On top of that, they obtain the logic, give a
brick, get a house, so by paying only 2,000 people, they get the work of
100,000 paid people and another 25% who work for free as contributors.
Hi Michel,
do you really think, this is not a common story within capitalism? If a
new technology (here the "social technology" of open sourcing) reduces
average costs and you (as a capitalist) will use the costly old technology
you will get ruined. So if you are technologically ahead (as IBM was, who
understood the open sourcing quite early and even changed in the early 90th
their philosophy from market leadership to technology leadership) you will
just do the same. The market pricing will _adapt_ to the new technology, so
after certain time you will no more get "free lunch". And "free lunch" was
for your risk and efforts to establish the new technology (a trial and
error period needs much human labour "on foreign common needs", so there is
a clear understanding of all that within a sound labour value theory).
I think you deeply underestimate the role of ibm's (not so) new philosophy
for, e.g., establishing the eclipse ecosystem in the last 10 years.
hgg
--
Dr. Hans-Gert Graebe, apl. Prof., Inst. Informatik, Univ. Leipzig
postal address: Postfach 10 09 20, D-04009 Leipzig
Hausanschrift: Johannisgasse 26, 04103 Leipzig, Raum 5-18
tel. : +49 341 97 32248
email: graebe informatik.uni-leipzig.**de<graebe informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
Home Page: http://www.informatik.uni-**leipzig.de/~graebe<http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/%7Egraebe>
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal