An interesting read but I think Mr Lancashire has postulated a crap argument. I think it goes something like this. The US is the worlds richest culture - it should have the biggest "post-scarcity gift culture" (whatever that is)- it does not contribute the most per-capita Linux contributors - ergo they do it for the money.
Well, maybe they do it for other cultural reasons and Eric Raymond got it wrong. Maybe "post-scarcity gift culture" (whatever that is) does not have anything to do with it. Is it possible that in a post-whatever culture we have the luxury of doing things that are "interesting" and not related to economic survival?
IMHO the whole argument was based on shakey premises which I won't painfully list. It looked too much like an argument to prove that Open Source contributors do it for the money even if they don't know it, because they have to or economic theory is wrong.
Maybe there are other motivations besides economic. Maybe people do things because they want to, or feel like it. Do painters paint only for the money? No doubt economists say yes and painters say no, not always, maybe sometimes or yes - depending on who the artist is.
Slashdot Mirror
An interesting read but I think Mr Lancashire has postulated a crap argument. I think it goes something like this. The US is the worlds richest culture - it should have the biggest "post-scarcity gift culture" (whatever that is)- it does not contribute the most per-capita Linux contributors - ergo they do it for the money. Well, maybe they do it for other cultural reasons and Eric Raymond got it wrong. Maybe "post-scarcity gift culture" (whatever that is) does not have anything to do with it. Is it possible that in a post-whatever culture we have the luxury of doing things that are "interesting" and not related to economic survival? IMHO the whole argument was based on shakey premises which I won't painfully list. It looked too much like an argument to prove that Open Source contributors do it for the money even if they don't know it, because they have to or economic theory is wrong. Maybe there are other motivations besides economic. Maybe people do things because they want to, or feel like it. Do painters paint only for the money? No doubt economists say yes and painters say no, not always, maybe sometimes or yes - depending on who the artist is.