And why you don’t want to work at Microsoft.
I can’t think of a better use of the term “creative capitalism” than to apply it to open source businesses.
As I recently wrote in a comment of my article “Overwhelm their Fears with Open Source“:
I whole heartedly believe that sealed systems are holding back are growth in its role as fundamental part of our self-centered, greed based society.
Open source is an opportunity, not a business plan (sic business model), not a solution in itself. The opportunity is curiosity, exploration, and innovation, and in a global community this can far exceed any proprietary model.
Sure, you have to be more creative how you pay your bills and make your fortunes today, but it is your only opportunity to consistently better peoples lives and have a lasting legacy.
The fantastic development is that curiosity and exploration will triumph in our life time — if we don’t destroy the planet in the interim — because of us increasingly using technology to connect with people from all the world.
The greatest stumbling point is education, not education of what open source or free culture is, but basic education. Most of the world doesn’t have access to the education to be curious, understand the systems they are curious about, and benefit from their curiosity.
Ironically, Bill Gates, who more than any other single person in personal computing missed the opportunity to take us in this one area beyond our petty selves, today is leading in giving the world’s children the education they so desperately need.
- Hat tip Kara Swisher. [↩]
- Projector to Help Students Succeed!
- Enjoying A Magazine (Year 3)
- Technology to Keep Students Engaged in Learning!
4 Comments
I don’t think capitalism has failed the poor of the world so much as it simply hasn’t been available to them. There’s a chicken/egg thing going on. The countries are not capitalistic, so they aren’t viewed as a market, and capitalism isn’t offered to them internationally. But if companies would be a little more forward-thinking, they’d work to make them into markets by seeding them. They’d be able to compete in the markets they create, but would have a lot of clout because they were there first. You know, the whole “small piece of a bigger pie” thing.
Capitalism is the only answer. You’re not going to significantly or permanently raise the standard of living in the third world through typical charity (of the food/medicine/clothing/shelter variety) or warfare or welfare. Those are all external forces that are imposed upon their recipients. Change has to come from within. Capitalism is the only system that can give them the tools (education being one of these tools) to lift themselves up out of poverty by innovating, trading, competing, etc.
Open systems are absolutely a better choice for those at the economic bottom. They have the lowest cost of entry, they encourage experimentation and innovation (an essential ingredient in self-betterment), and they create vibrant micromarkets. I think things like the OLPC are good, but they might be a little bit ahead of themselves. How about open source power generation techniques, open source water transportation and purification, open source crop cultivation techniques? This isn’t something that is only applicable to advanced technologies like computing.
All I’d like to add is that if people are willing to work together, there’s a heck of a lot that can be done. If you know what Microlending is, then you’ll know what I mean here. Sites and Org’s like Kiva are not only offering solid returns to investors, but at the same time improving lives in the third world. It works. That’s an example of creative capitalism.
As far as open source is concerned, the creative part is already there, but it’s a bit lacking in the capitalism department. If we can come up with a way to mint money for people and companies working on open source, then it’ll most certainly work.
Hmmm… It’s getting harder and harder to view Bill Gates as pure evil.
Even Adam Smith didn’t think the markets solved everything.
As far as open source is concerned, the creative part is already there, but it’s a bit lacking in the capitalism department. If we can come up with a way to mint money for people and companies working on open source, then it’ll most certainly work.