RE: [DDN] bill gates transitions
C'mon Don - Please don't get caustic. There is a difference between a mission and an opinion. I wish you luck in your mission of moving the leviathans. I think this thread has in fact seen better days. Jesse Sinaiko - Chicago, IL ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] bill gates transitions
Consider this thread over. Please take it off-list if you wish to continue it. I think this thread has in fact seen better days. -- -- Andy Carvin acarvin (at) edc . org andycarvin (at) yahoo . com http://www.andycarvin.com http://www.digitaldivide.net http://www.pbs.org/learningnow -- ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] bill gates transitions
I just think it is the nature of the beast to eat everything that it can reach and that in the end we are better off breaking these outfits up into politically manageable pieces Hi Jesse, I think your concerns are much broader than the matter of corporate's supporting OSS, and I would need to give some thought to your points before expressing an opinion - however may I wish you the best of luck in your mission to disassemble these corporations. Best Rgds, Don Cameron ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] bill gates transitions
Jesse Sinaiko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It has been shown over and over again that the creative side of this stuff has nothing to do with size. These outfits become as big and over-reaching as they are in order to grab and hold market share; that is, to sell us lots and lots of stuff, and to make sure that it is more difficult for others to sell us lots and lots of stuff. I'm not trying to teach Econ 101 here - I'm just opining that it takes unified, concerted, hard-ball, POLITICAL action by huge numbers of people acting as a unit to budge these guys, kicking and screaming all the way. So IMO, we as a group or we as individual are much too teensy tiny to have much or any effect on the monsters. But how feasible is it to motivate huge numbers of people to become the hard-ball activists which are required for this approach, and to get them to act in a reasonably coordinated manner? I'd propose the alternative of trying to find a way in which philanthropic businesses (defined as businesses which consider some philanthropic goals to be at least comparable in importance to all goals of increasing personal incomes and/or corporate profits) can work together in ways which are economically efficient enough so that in effect networks of philanthropic businesses can compete successfully with greedy corporations. The economic function of prices has two main aspects: (a) From the buyer's perspective, the price provides a simple numeric measure of how expensive it is to procure some economic good. In competitive markets, these cost prices are a measure of the amounts of scarce resources that are required to produce the corresponding goods. Hence at least to the extent that the relevant markets are competitive, the buyers' self-interest is a strong economic force that influences the overall economy in the direction towards striking reasonable balances between the needs and desires of consumers of goods and the amounts of scarce resources that are required to produce these goods. (b) From the seller's perspective, the price is an important aspect of how the seller's economic reward for providing the good is determined. This economic reward for sellers is the profit which in competitive markets is determined by how valueable the good is from the buyer's perspective times the number of buyers (who buy at this price) minus the cost of procuring or producing the goods. Hence the financial aspect of commercial transactions is very important for the functioning of the eocnomy as a whole. I wouldn't expect money-less gift economies to work well on a large scale as long as scarcity of resources is a reality. However I strongly disagree with the current mainstream economic philosophy of normally making buying decisions without considering any information about the side effects of production and procurements of the goods. In some areas, such as fair trade bananas and the prevention of child labor, large-scale pollution and the destruction of tropical rainforests, activists have succeeded in raising the awareness of a significant part of the general public in industrialized nations so much that attention to at least some philanthropic concerns has become an important aspect of the brand image for consumer goods. However since there is no reliable mechanism that would measure and direct economic actions concerning such philanthropic goals in a quantitative manner (similar to how the mechanism of prices and monetary payments directs economic actions with respect to making good use of scarce resoruces), there is no reason to assume that the currently-established mechanisms are in any way efficient with respect to banalancing philanthropic benefits against the additional costs of business activities when besides profits, achieving philanthropic benefits is also considered an important company goal. Rather, with the currently-existing mechanisms, world markets are dominated by greedy corporations which spend just enough on philanthropic concerns so that they can project the positive brand image that they want, while keeping the risk low that some activitsts could damage the company's brand through revealing some practices of the company which many people consider to be morally unacceptable. What I propose is to create and standardize trustworthy mechanisms for measuring environmental and social side-effects of economic processes, and how this information can be communicated together with the price when any goods or services are offered for sale. If the buyer cares about one or more of the side-effects that the seller is taking the trouble of measuring, and there are competing offers which have a lower price but also lower philanthropic benefits, the buyer can then use this information for making ration buying decisions that balance the higher price against the higher philanthropic benefits. I have a working paper with some thoughts about
RE: [DDN] bill gates transitions
Don - Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I really mischaracterized it when I said over and over that the big boys - MS in particular - haven't done anything for me. What I really meant...seriously, I should have spent more time talking about what I believe is the hard-wired behavior of these mega-corporations. They behave like governments, but their only voters are the shareholders. Also, because of their size, relationships with governments (see all the news pieces about Google and MS and their relationships with China), and economic reach, it takes more than a nudge to influence them. It has been shown over and over again that the creative side of this stuff has nothing to do with size. These outfits become as big and over-reaching as they are in order to grab and hold market share; that is, to sell us lots and lots of stuff, and to make sure that it is more difficult for others to sell us lots and lots of stuff. I'm not trying to teach Econ 101 here - I'm just opining that it takes unified, concerted, hard-ball, POLITICAL action by huge numbers of people acting as a unit to budge these guys, kicking and screaming all the way. So IMO, we as a group or we as individual are much too teensy tiny to have much or any effect on the monsters. In this particular discussion I would say that outfits like MS, and to a lesser extent IBM (Dell too) are just glomming onto OSS, Linux in the server space especially, so they can sell us lots and lots of stuff while trying to prevent anyone else from doing so. That in and of itself isn't illegal or even evil, but it isn't really supportive of the OSS movement and it isn't particularly expending OSS's market share. They just figure that a certain percentage of the market will go with Linux, and it may as well be us (MS, IBM, Dell, HP) that sells it to them. It could be argued that these guys help corrupt OSS by marketing it the same way they market all their other stuff. Maybe they pull an Apple and couch it as some sort of alternative way of doing things, but in the end it seems to me that it really is just the same old marketers, marketing in the same old way, without much or any concern with elements of the market that aren't damn near as big as they are! I just think it is the nature of the beast to eat everything that it can reach and that in the end we are better off breaking these outfits up into politically manageable pieces so that there is real diversity in the marketplace, not just a couple of leviathans pretending to offer diversity or offering strictly on their own terms. Jesse Sinaiko Chicago, IL ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] bill gates transitions
Friends: To take this discussion a little away from Microsoft and OSS. The Gatses are among the largest funders of public health and school education programmes. Both of these can benefit a great deal if knowledge flows freely and unfettered. Currently the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation supports the public library movement through a major award. It would only be a logical extension for the Gatses, Microsoft and the NM Gates Foundation to support the open access movement. Right now the Open Society Institute and the Wellcome Trust are among the few institutions that support the OA movement. Subbiah Arunachalam I wonder if it's really possible to incorporate a Linux -v- Microsoft battle of operating systems into any sort of effective Open Source activism? Trouble is that Open Source perse (and true OSS activism) has no issue with Microsoft - to the contrary... the fact this leviathan itself ventured into Open Source in 2004 (albeit tentatively and only a tiny step thus far), is marvellous news to those of us honestly wishing to promote OSS as a viable and humanitarian-focused software development ideology. I am quite sure that to a majority of software developers... What better proponent for OSS than the world's largest and most powerful software company? Having spent years fostering and developing a tenuous relationship, it would be horrible for the relationship to now be destroyed by a few Linux zealots so wrapped-up in a preferred operating system they would smash any bridges regardless of cost. Ideological terrorism. In a few weeks (along with about 1,000 other software developers) I will spend a week at Microsoft TechEd. Assuming the event is no different to other years a small minority of us will be Linux users, a large majority Open Source Software activists in our businesses and workplaces. Microsoft are expected to announce further Open Source developments, and as in years past we will again be very vocal should this fail to eventuate! (having spent $thousands to attend the event MS are inclined to listen to us). A leviathan cannot be moved by brute force, but it can be persuaded to move if enough voices of interest suggest good reason to do so... Having nudged this particular leviathan a few steps along the path we can only hope that a noisy minority do not continue to undermine efforts in one-eyed hatred of all things Microsoft - That the leviathan isn't forced to abandon this new-found path because the view of the end is simply too unpalatable. PS - I personally have more issue with IBM than Microsoft - MS is at least honest enough to openly criticise what it views as the shortcomings of OSS, meaning activists can listen and address concerns in a reasonable manner... IBM has a history of trying to associate with and subsequently dominate OSS projects simply for it's own marketing purposes. To consume rather than participate as equals. Nonetheless I also acknowledge the benefits IBM can bring as a powerful player and market force. We need to nurture the support of all these leviathans. Cheers, Don ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] bill gates transitions
At the risk of sounding like a misinformed idiot, why? They aren't doing much to support me. (snip) Hi Jesse, We seem to have some convergence of threads so I'll try to keep on topic... Far from misinformed your question inspires careful thought. Why? - perhaps a variety of reasons. Maybe because openness of source-code is an ideology some of us wish to promote and support (that's my reason although I acknowledge others may not be so inclined). In my experience a lot of detractors simply have a preference for a different operating system and will use perceived OSS failings as an excuse to criticise. Yet others I'm sure are genuinely concerned about business monopolies or have some other legitimate gripe against one or more of these company's. Nonetheless, like yourself Microsoft and IBM et-all have done nothing to support me however I do believe they have much to contribute to OSS if we encourage them to do so. Maybe it's as simple as choosing to construct relationships in hope of mutual understanding rather than just criticising everything they do. I suppose a better way of putting it is: Don, do you think the instinctive behaviour of a leviathan such as MS will allow itself to be influenced by our nurturing their support? Yes I do. This will not happen overnight however there are demonstrable examples of change taking place. Mostly for reason that Microsoft is after all just a trade-mark; a name - What we are really talking about are people no different to you or I except in whom they work for. I know a few MS employees on a personal level and surprisingly enough they don't have three arms and nine toes :-) They are intelligent, genuine and reasonable people just like you and I. Why should we view them as incapable of change?, and in such change, changing the culture of their work environment? Maybe what we should be doing is turning some of these questions aroundÂ… What do you hope to achieve by continued criticisms of Microsoft, it's CEO, SCO or IBM et-all in preference to trying to work with them to promote change? - Do you think they will change or go away just because a few people publicly condemn them? Cheers, Don Cameron ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] bill gates transitions
There really isn't any point in me continuing the 'Missing the point' thread when rational debate has gone walkies. Well said. Let's wrap this up. For those who have been a part of this discussion, feel free to post a concluding thought, but please take any new tacks or followups off-list -andy -- Andy Carvin acarvin (at) edc . org andycarvin (at) yahoo . com http://www.andycarvin.com http://www.digitaldivide.net http://www.pbs.org/learningnow -- ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] bill gates transitions
This brilliant guy who many see as evil is going to spend most of the rest of his life giving most of his money away and making a real difference in the pathetic US public high school system and in serious health care issues in developing countries that most don't care about. Not a bad legacy, me thinks, Mike Michael F. Pitsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Shapiro Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 8:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [DDN] bill gates transitions hi DDN community - that's quite some news that bill gates will be stepping down from his full time job at microsoft. i was totally surprised to hear that he has also accepted an entry level position at red hat. considering the overwhelmingly dominant role microsoft has played in computers until this point, this might signal a turning point in the history of computing. with increasing diversity in operating systems and application software, new doorways of opportunity will open for those who previously have lacked access. new doorways will also be opening in the entrepreneurial realm as society moves away from the monolithic computing paradigms of the past. phil shapiro (only kidding about the entry level position at red hat.) -- Phil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/pshapiro http://philsrssfeed.blogspot.com http://www.his.com/pshapiro/stories.menu.html Wisdom starts with wonder. - Socrates Learning happens through gentleness. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
[DDN] bill gates transitions
hi DDN community - that's quite some news that bill gates will be stepping down from his full time job at microsoft. i was totally surprised to hear that he has also accepted an entry level position at red hat. considering the overwhelmingly dominant role microsoft has played in computers until this point, this might signal a turning point in the history of computing. with increasing diversity in operating systems and application software, new doorways of opportunity will open for those who previously have lacked access. new doorways will also be opening in the entrepreneurial realm as society moves away from the monolithic computing paradigms of the past. phil shapiro (only kidding about the entry level position at red hat.) -- Phil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/pshapiro http://philsrssfeed.blogspot.com http://www.his.com/pshapiro/stories.menu.html Wisdom starts with wonder. - Socrates Learning happens through gentleness. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
