3 ms·
The OSS model is instructive as an analogy. 80% and shrinking of the fund market is closed and proprietary software. Its very expensive and relies on single p
by VLM 11y ago
The OSS model is instructive as an analogy.
80% and shrinking of the fund market is closed and proprietary software. Its very expensive and relies on single points of failure, often one person per fund. There's a lot of propagandizing that they're the only way to invest or best or whatever.
20% and growing of the fund market is free open source allocation, here is TODAYs definition of an index now buy stock to reflect it. Needless to say its incredibly cheap compared to the closed source funds and arguably gives an overall higher rate of return.
Some of the lower rate of return of closed source funds is because of their massive advertising and propaganda budget spent to convince investors that they're a better deal. Sometimes, by obscure enough definitions of better deal, they are. Usually not. Needless to say someone who's paycheck depends on FUDing the free competition isn't going to have anything nice to say about FOSS or index funds.
The idea that FOSS or an index fund is a conspiracy is kind of weird. If index funds are made illegal on that ground, I suppose Emacs will be made illegal soon because its unfair to make individual proprietary editor writers compete with the entire world teamed up against them. "The right of the rich to privatize gains and socialize losses shall not be infringed" and possibly other constitutional amendments will be marched out in the corporate press, etc.
- stdbrouw 11y agoThe article is not about index funds competing with alternate investment opportunities and whether or not the competition is fair, it's about what index funds do to the competitiveness of the companies they invest in.
- VLM 11y agoExactly, that's the best way to present FUD. Don't tell people you're trying to grind an axe, just say I'm merely providing free advice from my grindstone financed workplace.