Re: [OT] Re: Troll Tech [was Re: Sco vs. IBM]

[Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>]

On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 21:12:41 -0400
Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com> wrote:

> I most certainly agree. Knowledge is built on knowledge, and if a Homo 
> erectus had patented the flaked stone tool, we would all still be living 
> in caves.

Hear, hear ...
 
> Of course, not everyone is capable of creating a sharp edge by banging 
> the rocks together. And that's why different people do different things.

And there is nothing wrong with that.

>  > If you can simply use the wheel and go on producing a
>  > car "on top" of it, you _saved_ money, time and manpower.
> 
> The mere act of making code open (or object-oriented) does not make 
> people reuse it. I am constantly amazed by the amount of available 
> information, and am disturbed by how few people take advantage of it.
> 
> Almost every company *does* reinvent the wheel -- and that can not be 
> legitimately blamed on closed-source software. Witness the massive 
> duplication of effort in the free software community -- KDE, Gnome, and 
> other "desktops" being a salient example. Egos, license disputes, 
> business concerns, and technical choices lead to duplication of effort; 
> as a former evangelist of object-oriented programming, I'm more than 
> aware that it is not technology that prevents code re-use, but psychology.

Well, see it as an evolutionary process. Of course you will always see
duplication as a try to re-invent something _better_. Anyway you will notice,
that evolution lives by the possibility to reuse and refine things that have
proven good.
It is a matter of time simply. It is no matter of black and white, rather of
darker and lighter grey. The more time the more the positive effects of the
"lighter grey" open source strategy (compared to "darker grey" closed source)
will take effect. See we are still at the very beginning of the "open source
age".
Since we all do not know what mission-critical questions for mankind will arise
in upcoming years,  we, too, cannot make claims about the resources needed to
solve - or at least survive - them. To me it is very clear that open source has
the capability to set resources free (see Larry: "will Sun survive the open
source") that can be very well needed in other important areas. This is not
bad, it is a chance. Reaching the same goal with less resources is never a bad
thing.
Just step back and watch the big picture, not only our "backstage area". A tool
can be very important, but you also need the people to use it for reaching the
right goal. Handing the car key to Homo erectus may not have been the right
thing to do, though the "car tool" itself is brilliant.

Regards,
Stephan