On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 15:44, Todd Walton wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:14:17 -0500, RBW1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The good news...
> > History is NOT over!
> > http://tinyurl.com/3kkma
> 
> Oh, I absolutely *love* this line:
> 
> "A social or economic tipping point is characterized by a sudden burst
> of mass sanity as mainstream public opinion abandons an unsustainable
> mythology in favor of something closer to reality."
> 
> I didn't so much like this:
> 
> "Mr. Torvalds ... used this Robin Hood combination of ..."
> 
> The comparison is completely without substance.  Robin Hood was a thief.
> 
> I don't agree with this either:
> 
> "The open-source movement is just a faster, Internet-enabled
> implementation of the much older academic tradition of peer review and
> building on foundations laid by others."
> 
> When I hear the really old-timers talk they seem to "get" the open
> source thing, but they don't seem to identify with it at all.
> 
> "Open source" is not "peer review".  For one thing, in the open source
> model, everyone is a contributor.  Participants are not merely
> reviewing for inaccuracies or minor suggestions, they're actually
> creating the final product.  In this sense they're actual peers, given
> the fully equal status of potential contributor, vs the "older
> academic tradition" in which one person or group of people is/are the
> implementors, and others play the role of trusted assistant at best.
> 
> In another sense, open sourcers are less "peer" than in the older
> academic tradition.  Potential contributors to any open source project
> aren't selected based on credentials or pre-determined merit.  Whereas
> researchers in 1950s Bell Labs had to qualify for the job, "peers"
> included only people who held a similar job or who had gone through a
> defined training period and held a university degree of some sort.  If
> a trained monkey responded to light patterns and poked at a keyboard,
> eventually resulting in a piece of code that just happened to work
> wonderfully for the Freenet Project, the Freenet people would accept
> it and it would make Slashdot.  People would say, "Ooh, neat hack" and
> go back to their Apple-lust.  In open source, contributors don't have
> to actually be "peers".
> 
> Great article.  Thanks RBW(?).  I wish I had the skillz to write an
> essay/article like that.
> 
> -todd

I know it is a little all over the map but historic "tipping points" are
usually not very clean and rife with mixed messages and confusion as the
change is occurring.

I think he may be on to something (tech revolution in CPU and ready and
willing OS to take advantage) even though he engages in a good bit of
myth mouthing regarding the creation and the causes.

RBW

-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to