"Software must be provided as a package – not as a service – with each user running their own private copy." My ideology resonates with this statement. On a m

"Software must be provided as a package – not as a service – with each user running their own private copy." My ideology resonates with this statement. On a more rational level, I agree that an environment that promotes application diversity encourages competition and innovation and ultimately will keep the tech economy humming. I can see that removing the infrastructure requirement for distributing and providing web applications opens up web application development to a larger group. There are shades of similarity of this idea with copyright reform and the free culture ideas of Lawrence Lessig. Once IP hits a certain threshold of common knowledge, preventing others from freely using it inhibits economic growth. Once something becomes cultural, it's hard for innovation to not grow out of it. An example is Pokemon: independent companies can't make Pokemon products without gatekeeping from Nintendo. Currently, If a third-party pokemon product benefits consumers and drives the economy but is specifically bad for Nintendo then it won't be allowed. The counter argument is to innovate somewhere else but that's ignoring the fact that innovation is born out of experience and if I had no control over experiencing Pokemon regularly in my life because it's a cultural phenomenon, my ability to innovate is essentially handicapped.