I've worked with some open source projects, with disappointing results. A couple of reasons that we prefer commercial development:
Missed deadlines: The open source projects that we worked with had limited commitment to deadlines, and frequently missed them. When you're counting on product launches, this can be very painful
Lack of Support: Things never go wrong at 3PM. Instead, they always happen at 2AM on Sunday. Commercial outfits have dedicated people to help when this happens -- open source people aren't around.
Development of commercial features: Any commercial product has features or enhancements that aren't strictly bug fixes or new enhancements. These are unsexy jobs, but they need to get done. We found it difficult to get people to commit to them
Obviously, your mileage may vary. I'm sure there are some great stories about open-source, as well as even worse ones. But that's my $0.02.
Learning from history is great. But one example (anarchists) doesn't make a trend. This type of activism (destruction of corp or govt property) goes back a long way, and has been incredibly successful, particularly when the protest group has no voice in the decision making process.
I don't mean to promote violence, but I think it's clear that when a group of people are disenfranchised, they find a way to get their voices heard above the din. If hacktivism is that tool for this era -- get ready for a whole lot more.
You can mod me down, but then I'll just get bitter and find a way to have my voice heard. Muwahahahahaha...
Actually, I think it's pretty embarassing that they are excited about beating Celera, when articles all over the net (example on CNN) are suggesting that the quality of their data is really quite poor.
I'm much more concerned about bad data (particularly when it might affect my health) than I am about whether a corporation can patent genes or not.
It has not been my experience that this is the obstacle. Rather, drug abuse, alcohol addiction, chronic bad decision making, illness, immaturity, family of origins, and the like set up high obstacles to overcome. Some people don't, won't, or can't put in the time, blood, sweat and tears to overcome the issues they face.
This is, of course, very true. But the point of social programs like this is to make sure that the people who are willing to put in the effort -- get a chance to try. Some obstacles are not going to change (your family, genetics, etc). But if we want to encourage a meritocracy in which everyone has the opportunity to rise to the top, we have an obligation to eliminate as many obstacles as we can.
Having a computer(or easy access to one) is a prerequisite to a modern education. It's a natural consequence that the government will support a wide distribution of cheap computers.
It's the same reason that we now have public education. Schooling (typically with a tutor) was a luxury that rich people took advantage of. As it became clear that schooling was becoming a prerequisite to "the good life", we instituted a system that allowed everyone access to that schooling, at enormous cost. We all know that some take advantage of it and some don't, but few of us question it's merit.
I'm not saying that this program is the right way to go about it -- just that the concept is one that I agree with.
Slashdot Mirror
Missed deadlines: The open source projects that we worked with had limited commitment to deadlines, and frequently missed them. When you're counting on product launches, this can be very painful
Lack of Support: Things never go wrong at 3PM. Instead, they always happen at 2AM on Sunday. Commercial outfits have dedicated people to help when this happens -- open source people aren't around.
Development of commercial features: Any commercial product has features or enhancements that aren't strictly bug fixes or new enhancements. These are unsexy jobs, but they need to get done. We found it difficult to get people to commit to them
Obviously, your mileage may vary. I'm sure there are some great stories about open-source, as well as even worse ones. But that's my $0.02.
Sounds like a lot of Slashdotters need to watch Jerry Maguire.
Whether you're a coder or a sports agent, the grind's pretty similar, as will be the reaction if you suggest "fewer clients for less money".
Examples are rampant:
environmental issues ( Earth Liberation Front , recently profiled on 60 Minutes),
Vietnam protests (Weathermen, SDS),
Civil rights movement (Malcolm X),
and the Boston Tea Party.
I don't mean to promote violence, but I think it's clear that when a group of people are disenfranchised, they find a way to get their voices heard above the din. If hacktivism is that tool for this era -- get ready for a whole lot more.
You can mod me down, but then I'll just get bitter and find a way to have my voice heard. Muwahahahahaha...
Actually, I think it's pretty embarassing that they are excited about beating Celera, when articles all over the net (example on CNN) are suggesting that the quality of their data is really quite poor.
I'm much more concerned about bad data (particularly when it might affect my health) than I am about whether a corporation can patent genes or not.
here
This is, of course, very true. But the point of social programs like this is to make sure that the people who are willing to put in the effort -- get a chance to try. Some obstacles are not going to change (your family, genetics, etc). But if we want to encourage a meritocracy in which everyone has the opportunity to rise to the top, we have an obligation to eliminate as many obstacles as we can.
Having a computer(or easy access to one) is a prerequisite to a modern education. It's a natural consequence that the government will support a wide distribution of cheap computers.
It's the same reason that we now have public education. Schooling (typically with a tutor) was a luxury that rich people took advantage of. As it became clear that schooling was becoming a prerequisite to "the good life", we instituted a system that allowed everyone access to that schooling, at enormous cost. We all know that some take advantage of it and some don't, but few of us question it's merit.
I'm not saying that this program is the right way to go about it -- just that the concept is one that I agree with.