I find it extremely interesting how few people are jumping on this one. Whence the lack of interest?
For my part, I wonder if intellectual property, in the end, should be mainly free. It would certainly increase the dignity and knowledge of the common man. But without greed to drive us, would we create much of anything at all? Is open source simply an anomaly, a product of the online culture?
Now a more specific question, to which I don't know the answer (I don't have enough facts): was the Renaissance propelled by the free exchange of ideas, or did people get lots of money by creating new art and new philosophy? In the same vein, did anyone listen? Was there enough distribution of books and papers to make reading a mass phenomenon, or was it contained to the elite?
I'm just curious to see if there are many opinions out there that aren't based on simple radicalism. Sure information wants to be free, but the question is, should we let it?
Slashdot Mirror
I find it extremely interesting how few people are jumping on this one. Whence the lack of interest?
For my part, I wonder if intellectual property, in the end, should be mainly free. It would certainly increase the dignity and knowledge of the common man. But without greed to drive us, would we create much of anything at all? Is open source simply an anomaly, a product of the online culture?
Now a more specific question, to which I don't know the answer (I don't have enough facts): was the Renaissance propelled by the free exchange of ideas, or did people get lots of money by creating new art and new philosophy? In the same vein, did anyone listen? Was there enough distribution of books and papers to make reading a mass phenomenon, or was it contained to the elite?
I'm just curious to see if there are many opinions out there that aren't based on simple radicalism. Sure information wants to be free, but the question is, should we let it?
--John