Slashdot Mirror

The quote "Because that's where the money is" is usually attributed to Willie Sutton not John Dillinger. But at least one source says that Willie claims it was actually a reporter who came up with the witty response.

That's basically good advice. Always go where the money is, and figure out how to give the moneyholder what they want. Asked why he robbed banks, Willie Sutton said "because that's where the money is" (he actually didn't say that).

But, having made some money (especially in 2000 and 2001) doing tech analysis for VCs, that's not nearly as good a return on my time invested as selling them equity on a company I start. That tech analysis you're talking about nets maybe 1-3% of a deal, if it goes through; maybe 1 in 5 of the techworthy ones go through. You can work on maybe 10-15 deals a year, during which time you could start an investmentworthy company instead. The analyst therefore gets maybe 2-6% of the total equity that year, while the entrepreneur gets to keep at least that much (usually at least 2-3x that), and bought out of most of the rest. Of course there's more risk in starting the company, and harder to sell the equity, but the reward is many times higher.

If only the moneyholders will actually use their money, instead of keeping it tied up as they do these days. In that scenario, maybe it's better follow Willie Sutton's example literally.

I will quote my sources on the explanation for these journalistic positions:

[In response to an anonymous reporter's question "Why do you rob banks?"]:
"Because that's where the money is." - Willie Sutton

[from the bottom of the current Slashdot page in which I'm submitting this post]:
"I don't have any solution but I certainly admire the problem. -- Ashleigh Brilliant"

Actually I think a reporter had written that in an article about him, he never said it. Here is more info.

Now is when the open source community should be working hard - to be ready to quickly launch an "open kazaa" type system, with the supernodes p2p searching and indexing, etc. The old protocol has already been reverse engineered. Its a proven protocol, and it works well enough. Just use that protocol and the old giFT client as a starting point.

All that is needed is a "keyless" client and a solid "Windows" version of the client. Why Windows platforms first? To paraphase the alleged Willie Sutton quote, "because thats where the files are". Remember, its the mass of users and files that make this work, so a technically solid and professional looking Windows client must come first, for maximum user gain. This is in additon to the usual and inevitable multiple Linux versions. The replacement client must be made to install and use the files and directories that already exist on the windows users' computers, and to use a similar user interface - so it is instant changeover, apparently seamless and painless - and it will look as if they never "left" the old p2p service except for the centralized login.

Finally, the forgotten element in the Open Source community, "publicity", must be revved up to get this client into the hands of a lot of people so it can be switched to as soon as Kazaaa/Morpheus et al are shut down. Linux users will take care of themselves, but the Windows herd usually needs to be led, at least initially. A question for the Slahsdot crowd,

How do you "publicize" things to the non-geek Windows crowd without a budget ?

Ok, nows the time to step up to the plate - this is a golden opportunity to put into place a open p2p net that cannot be stopped at a central source, that can permanently rip control out of the hands of central authorities for file-sharing, that will quickly adapt to overcome countermeasures, and a system that will make moot the DMCA and other US-centric bad laws. The question in front of the community now is:

Can Open Source people do things pre-emptively - plan and act in advance to scatch an itch we know is coming, instead of waiting for the itch to appear?

This is certainly a good test case to see if the Open Source community is what we enthusiasts always claim that it can be.

From the replies, apparently some people don't recognize the quotation attributed to the famous bank robber Willie Sutton (wrongly attributed, until he stole it).