5 ms·
As a consumer, that may be good in the short term. But innovation isn’t free. In a world where people can just copy other people’s hard work with impunity, what
by cycrutchfield 7y ago
As a consumer, that may be good in the short term. But innovation isn’t free. In a world where people can just copy other people’s hard work with impunity, what incentive is there to invest in innovation?
- mandelbrotwurst 7y agoBeing first to market has its advantages.
- sidlls 7y agoShrinking advantages as the delta-t between release and the appearance of dozens of stolen cheap knockoffs decreases.
- benaadams 7y agoI hear OSS is doing well when it comes to innovation...
- mdorazio 7y agoI hear most OSS contributions come from people who make a living working at proprietary software companies...
- bcrosby95 7y agoMost people working on OSS are paid by companies that rely heavily on closed source innovation in other areas of business. They are commoditizing their compliments.
- effie 7y agoEven if that claim about "most people" was true, the point is still valid - OSS contributors _are_ "innovating" (creating new things to make money on), despite the innovations being freely copied. In part, the innovation happens _because_ or _with_help_ of free copying. Free sharing of some ideas/knowledge can be benefitial to innovation. Nobody is claiming _all_ ideas business finds / works on should be immediately shared freely with the world. The benefactors of a business are naturally motivated to protect their know-how. But it should be the business' responsibility to protect its secrets, not HN commenters or governments'. If an idea can't be kept secret, then government issues patents, which should be time limited and regional.
- kube-system 7y agothe state of OSS hardware is pretty sad.
- gaius__baltar 7y agoAs is the state of OSS medicine.
- pnako 7y agoOpen-source software is great but it's generally more derivative than innovative (there are exceptions of course).
- effie 7y agoInnovation is a techno/bureau -cratic buzzword, which (noun) roughly means "new thing that is novel and can be used to boost the economy". A derivative of an old product can be an innovation, if you can still make or attract money on it.
- blackrock 7y agoThis is a tiring trope. It’s like how the music industry kept saying that people would no longer sing and make songs, because piracy would prevent them from doing so. As if there was no money to be made, and money was the only point of singing. As if piracy ever stopped people from singing for the past 10,000 years. Well, artists do make money from songs, by having concerts. They are selling the service and the experience of of a live performance. This was the way that it had always been done throughout human history. Or Apple for example, they don’t make money from selling software, but they make it from selling very expensive hardware, that they force to expire after a few years.
- slimed 7y agoComparing writing new songs to developing new technology is apples to oranges. It doesn't require billions of dollars and man-hours in R&D to follow your passion and write the next big hit. It just takes talent and a few years of practice, if that.
- wolco 7y agoPeople will keep singing and dancing and making music like they have always done. Most didn't make money from it. Sheet music changed that briefly, tapes/records/cds. Music = Copyright = money is a modern thing. Getting billions invested in anything won't happen without a return. If a company is limited to a short window before everyone can copy means less funding and more valueless throwaway products.
- fhbdukfrh 7y agoThis is true for a lot of important drugs that don't have massively lucrative markets to recover their investment. This means fewer new antibiotics for global issues and more penis pills.
- blackrock 7y ago> fewer new antibiotics So companies don’t do this, because there is no profit in it? Perhaps, that is the problem with late stage capitalism itself? Everyone wants to become a rent-seeking landlord. What about a societal need? What about for the survival of the human race? This is like arguing that humanity can’t muster up the ingenuity to solve something to save the human race, just because there’s no profit in it. Necessity is the mother of all invention. If there are fewer antibiotics, then maybe this just means that it is not necessary. Sorry folks! You’re just going to have to take your chances with the Grim Reaper! My bank account can’t be bothered to find a cure for you.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoMaking things better? Though as used, "innovation" really means "figuring out new things to make money on", which renders your question tautological - "in a world where it's harder to invent new tricks that make money, what incentive is there to invest in inventing new things that make money?".
- effie 7y agoNailed it.
- chrischen 7y agoInvesting in innovation keeps you ahead. Moral of the story is that you should be constantly innovating... not innovating one time and trying to keep it a secret for maximum capitalistic market extortion.