Alexander Viro wrote:
>On 28 Jul 2002, Federico Ferreres wrote:
>
>
>
>>I stated a simple idea aimed at solving a real world issue. And you
>>haven't proved it wrong. It may not be what you or the kernel hackers
>>need/want (which is FINE). But it would solve ALL the funding problems
>>at least.
>>
>>
>
>You don't get it. So far the only guy who had been charitable was Larry, who
>felt that problem was real but had serious doubts about viability of your
>idea. I don't feel charitable and I've no reason to hesitate telling that
>you guys _are_ waste of time. No maybes about it. It's that simple...
>
>
>
>
Viro is abusive to everyone (by email, he is likable in person oddly
enough), usually without understanding what he is talking about at a
level of depth any deeper than it is new therefor wrong (see devfs
thread where he rejects devfs on the basis of endless details without
understanding that the basic idea had any merit).
Your idea has some merit in my opinion. I think that my version of it
that I presented at linuxworld some years ago, which is called an "Open
Sale", has some advantages.
"Open Sales" are the best method for reducing the economic
distortion caused by non-zero marginal pricing of
products with zero marginal cost without losing the incentive to
produce. An open sale is when a user group agrees to
pay X% of their hardware expenditures to all of those who provide
them with the right to use their software, with the
users performing the allocation to the providers based on the
users' usage and perception of quality. The users
determine the value of X, setting it in accordance with their
interest in attracting providers. It is open in the
sense that any software producer may add their software to the list
whose usage and quality will be
evaluated. Automation of usage monitoring and sampling techniques
are expected refinements of the basic idea. It is
based on a belief that economic distortion is proportional to the
ratio between marginal price and marginal cost, not
just the dollar total of the gap, and that increasing the price of
hardware by X% is less of a distortion than
increasing the cost of software by an infinite ratio over its
production cost. An open sale retains the consumer/user
driven decentralized economic allocation of traditional sales, and
in the case of government agencies and other large
purchasers, it enhances it. Payment of the X% is required to
legally use the software.
My approach has the advantage that the fee scales with hardware costs,
and that it is set by users.
However, you should understand that an idea is not enough, you must have
sufficient sociological mass to pull it off. Neither you nor I are in
that position at this time. Most people will be hostile to you if you
propose an idea that you lack the sociological position to effectuate.....
-- Hans- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 30 2002 - 14:00:31 EST