Re: The meta-invisible hand
Tue, 23 Sep 1997 13:47:58 -0400 (EDT)

Damien R. Sullivan wrote:

> } In a similar way, to pass a law affecting the competitive relationship
> } between the successful and unsuccessful actors in the free market
> } thwarts evolution and at the same time, glosses over the real problem --
> Is free market evolution selecting for what we want? I want knowledge
> and art to be produced and gathered. I don't think I'm alone in this.
> I want to gather knowledge myself, and hopefully produce some. What I
> see is Microsoft with billions of dollars, and GNU slipping by on
> contributors' spare time.

Microsoft has billions of dollars because we don't have a free market.
Without copyright and property rights Microsoft couldn't keep it's
customers. The free market, due to the lack of copyright, incourages user
centric product design. A company cannot keep customers by _locking them in_
like Microsoft, it has to keep customers with superior design and
implementation. I expect to see the freeware approach to software design as
the standard way of doing things in the free market. Creating network
communities that play a part in building your products is an excellent way of
insuring sales. The fact is things like Linux, GNU, etc. could make huge
amounts of money without comprimise on freedom or open standards, but the
computer market is not mature enough to focus on areas beyond technology.

I don't see how art or personal exploration would be changed by the move to a
free market, other than the cost of living being less.


"These problems have not even been solved at Microsoft, in one company. How
could anyone solve it across the Net?" - Charles Simonyi - Microsoft.