Re: [ox-en] Germ of a new form of society or germ of a new form of business?
- From: "Niall Douglas" <s_fsfeurope2 nedprod.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 01:44:29 -0000
On 3 Feb 2004 at 11:03, Raj Mathur wrote:
Niall> You almost certainly come from the right background - I bet
Niall> you're white, speak english natively and come from at least
Niall> a middle class background with an expensive education. If
Niall> you were Hispanic just freshly arrived over the border from
Niall> Mexico, could you make a living from servicing GPL'ed
Niall> software?
1. White: no
2. Middle-class background: yes
3. Expensive education: no
3a. Education: no
4. Hispanic: no
5. English-speaking: yes
6. Mexican: no
7. From across the border: which border would that be again?
8. Making a living from servicing GPL software: yes
I used Mexico as I know Mako is in the US, but I'm not sure about
you. However I am sure that a high majority of computer programmers
wherever they're at or from were born into well-to-do circumstances
and that the cost of their education (not what their parents paid,
but government + parents) will be many multiples of the average for
that country.
Niall> Have you ever considered that those who make a living from
Niall> servicing complex and arcane software are in fact Niall>
practicising one of the most fundamental forms of Niall>
information control - that which requires "expertness"?
So does editing a book or writing. What's your point?
No, books or writing require vastly less training. Many successful
authors have no training at all.
You seem to be claiming that passing on knowledge (information) in the
form of free software is not enough, you also have to pass on the
years of experience that you have garnered in IT. Can't you see how
ridiculous that is? In my book, hiring experts to develop proprietary
software and more experts to sell and service it is ``information
control'', not passing on information for free and trying to ensure
that it remains free.
It's like stonemasonry in the European middle ages - the resulting
work is often still standing today ie; just like software, it comes
with source. However for centuries the guilds protected their
expertise and thus their control of its practice by using overly
complex techniques and long apprenticeship periods, often running
past a decade. Thus they artifically limited the supply of
stonemasons and thus drove up asking rates.
That's my point. Freeing software is far more than making its source
free. It's about lowering the entry barriers to a point when anyone
can easily be a good programmer, even with only days of training.
You may think this impossible? Ok, look at how many billions are
totally comfortable with their mobile phones? If they can be
comfortable with those, they can be so programming their computer
too.
Niall> It used to surprise me that all "computer geeks" are very
Niall> similar. I am just as much part of them. But then I Niall>
realised we all have the same socioeconomic background, all Niall>
had plenty of free time in our teenage years and all had Niall>
expensive schooling (we're also all mostly male).
The generalisations and assumptions you're making in order to prove
your points are moving from being humorous to being pathetic. I'd
drop it now and retain at least a semblance of self-respect.
If you search google groups, you'll see I've made a right pratt of
myself in the past. And I'll do so again in the future. And I agree,
I'm on tenuous grounds here - but it's like middle class socialists
in England, they wax on about the plight of the poor and how we need
to fix things, but ask them to give up their living standards -
well!, suddenly they're umming and ahhing.
Unfortunately for some, in today's online society credibility is one
of the most valued currencies available. Refusing to acknowledge that
is an error; nullifying any that one may have had completely by trying
to attack this society's whole basis with senseless judgements is a
disaster of the first magnitude.
Not at all. Society especially in the west is fundamentally flawed
and its end is drawing near. There shall be world economic collapse
permanently, and it'll either end this round of human civilisation
growth for the next few hundred years or it won't.
Because we are so much a part of a long-term unsustainable society
and culture, even our most basic assumptions are likely to be wrong
eg; how we think innovation should be cultured, how we think
information is controlled etc.
That the collapse is coming is inevitable. How we prepare for it is
what shall determine what kind of bifurcation point it shall be. A
very good start is to stop arrogantly assuming we know how things are
and start asking some very fundamental questions. It is after all why
I'm on this list and have spent hours each night for the last week
constructing each reply I send.
Cheers,
Niall
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/