Horst Herb wrote: > Yes I do. This is why I charge >= $200/hour, yet the farmhand I employ to fix > my fences only gets $20/hour, or the lady doing the ironing only $18/hour
I'm a bit shocked that Horst doesn't do his own ironing... > In medicine, pretty much everything is open source (except for our software > and patended medication). You can grab any medical text book and read up how > to take out an appendix if you wish. Most people however recognize that some > tasks require carefully honed skills that have matured over time in order to > do it well - and this is how a I make my money. > > Not by artificially restricting access to knowledge or shrouding my doings in > secrecy. Yup. Our familiar Popperian paradigm of science (incl. medical science) and the equally (but unfortunately) familiar paradigm of closed source software are fundamentally at odds with each other. As software becomes more and more intermingled with medical science (that is, as medical software moves beyond just business automation and into really helping with the practice of modern, scientific medicine), one or the other will have to give way. I know which one I hope changes to accommodate the other. > The software industry could work on exactly the same principle. It would not > make anybody rich quick, but it would guarantee steady good income > proportional to the demonstrated level of skills. Agree completely. Just like no-one should be able to become mega-rich through science, no-one should be able to become hyper-rich through software. But comfortable incomes and even fame are fine in both spheres. Tim C _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
