View Full Version : Competition Vs. Cooperation.
Competition Vs. Cooperation.
I am involved in a movement called OSH, Open Source Hardware. Over the last few years I have witnessed an exponential growth through cooperation, something never seen in the competitive environment. The growth rate is insane and people are getting paid. Startups are succeeding and bringing manufacturing and assembly back to N. America. I see a better future thru cooperation. Competition and trade secrets, IMO, are greedy and stunt production.
Open Source Software has already taken the world by storm and is well established. Proof of concept, beyond a shadow of doubt.
Thoughts? Where do you see this going? Do you think the world should be run by innovators or money changers and asset hoarders? Which do you think better represents us all?
What would be more productive. Training with friends and helping eachother become better MAists, or just training alone and doing comps?
I'm not saying competition is bad. If it is in the context and spirit of cooperation I think it's a great thing. But when it's just head to head and unfriendly, there is more tearing down than building going on.
There was this competition for Bot makers.(robotic engineers) and they all had to make a bot that could perform specific tasks. Many had different ways of looking at it. There were many great ideas. Before the OS movement, these people had to design their bots from the ground up. After the OSM, they used eachothers platforms that were best suited for their needs and then went from there. Which do you think produced the better examples? The competition with no sharing or the competition with OSH and OSS?
Bacon
11-21-2012, 10:26 PM
Competition is good but competition should breed innovation, not stifle it. If everyone's got access to the same technology true capitalism dictates that the person who can do it at the best cost/value ratio will sell the best. And considering everyone wants to be first I say we limit patents to a month at most.
IMO cooperative collaborative competition is the best. Like the Bot example I used. Every year they not only build off and improve their own ideas, but all the other competitors ideas aswell. How many companies spend billions in RD to produce the same thing in the same amount of time? It's a waste. But no, they want it all for themselves so they won't share. It's like starving to death because you are hoarding your own food instead of living off it. Dumb. Short term gains, long term pains.
In the first post when I said competition, I meant the type of greedy "me first" and if possible "me only" type of competition that dominated American economics over the last 50 years. Just to be clear. I'm sure most of yall got that tho.
Actually, it's more like starving your family so you can have extra food. It's a sickness and we are INFECTED!
sanjuro_ronin
11-22-2012, 06:21 AM
No need to make it an either / or situation.
I used to visit other gyms and train with their guys to learn their stuff - cooperation
I used to test my stuff vs others - competition
You get further and better by using BOTH than you ever will be using just one.
Empty_Cup
11-22-2012, 06:44 AM
In order to attract investors there has to be a solid business model. Otherwise the movement will depend upon a critical mass of altruistic developers and hobbyists. With OSH what does the business model look like?
No need to make it an either / or situation.
I used to visit other gyms and train with their guys to learn their stuff - cooperation
I used to test my stuff vs others - competition
You get further and better by using BOTH than you ever will be using just one.
That is cooporative competition. There is a difference. Sorry, thought I cleared that up in one of the posts.
Your analogy isn't very different from the Bot analogy.
Maybe I should have labelled this thread "Open source Vs. Patents" or something like that. But I figured you guys would be able to read between the lines so that I wouldn't have to post an OS mission statement and a long dry explanation. It's a simple concept. Sorry I wasn't more clear earlier. I made the assumption that people already had an idea of what OS is. My bad. If you have questions, please feel free to ask and I will do my best to make it clear.
In order to attract investors there has to be a solid business model. Otherwise the movement will depend upon a critical mass of altruistic developers and hobbyists. With OSH what does the business model look like?
It's not subject to a model. If you build something, you can sell it any way you want to. Whether you wanna build them in your garage and sell on craiglist or create prototypes, draw up a model and pitch to investors. Your call. I understand this may be hard for some to grasp.
But then this is part of my point, OS changes EVERYTHING about how biz is done and I feel It's a better way of going about it.
Since when is a patent essential to a good model?
In order to attract investors there has to be a solid business model. Otherwise the movement will depend upon a critical mass of altruistic developers and hobbyists. With OSH what does the business model look like?
I was wondering, are you really unfamiliar with the fact that there are many successful OS companies making a ton of cash? It's no secret.
Look up Arduino or Raspberry Pi. Two very good examples that are trending now so you shouldn't have any trouble finding out all you need to know about these two products and the people who produce them. They are both prototyping tools, these usually cost an arm and a leg when they aren't OS. That is just two out of tens of thousands all over the world. It won't be long before the greedmongers start trying to patent open source material, but they will never win the battle. One great thing about OS is that we all stand together. You try to hoard our ideas and you will suffer the consequences. Not only do we have rock solid grounds for a legal engagement, but the last thing you wanna do is **** of a few thousand hackers. You will feel the pain, one way or another.
Considering the fact that the technology and economic mindstate kept this from being realistic until recently, we've gone very far. It's like music. Bands would sign with a label and have no choice but to take front money at insane return rates just to record a decent quality LP. Now I can do it in my home for under a grand, not factoring the money for the gear. That's about 10 grand. Distro is beyond easy, not even a factor anymore.
Despite the fact that this is a new idea(not really, but new in large scale practice), the amount of success is insane. Never seen before. Progress by hobbyists is already starting to catch up and pass billion dollar RnD centers. Just recently there was a biotech startup who needed to fold proteins in a certain way to achieve their goals. They couldn't do it after so much effort and a **** ton of money. They released their info and asked for help from the OS community and a 14 year old solved the problem with one of his video games he developed. That is progress. And make no mistake, this kid is getting his due and now he has opportunities flying at him. Sure he could have held his idea for ransom, filed patent. But he didn't and now we are collectively better off for it. And his life has already improved drastically.
http://www.crm-reviews.com/50-open-source-success-stories-in-business-education-and-government/
here's a story from 2006.
There are now whole programs at major universities to learn and eximine OS. MIT is VERY involved.
More
11 Biggest Open Source Success Stories That Are Changing The World As We Know It
http://www.techdrivein.com/2010/08/11-biggest-open-source-success-stories.html
How the Open Source Movement Has Changed Education: 10 Success Stories
http://oedb.org/library/features/how-the-open-source-movement-has-changed-education-10-success-stories
We are just getting started. I suggest people in RnD get aquainted real quick. This IS the future. Get on the bus or you'll be chasing it down the road trying to keep up.
wenshu
11-23-2012, 06:55 PM
The entire web you're surfing on is built on Open Source.
Linux to run the server (command line gong fu). Apache (Tomcat), Nginx, HaProxy or NodeJs to serve the pages and services, PHP, Java, Javascript, jQuery for programming dynamic content, HTML, CSS for static, (you can even write it with an open source IDE, Eclipse). SVN, CVS for source code version control and repository, Hudson/Jenkins for deployment. MongDB, MySQL, PostgresSQL or Sqlite for your databases. Sheeeeit even the browser you surf it with is possibly Chrome or Mozilla, all open source.
If you have the inclination for self education you can single handedly deploy a new web application for < $20/month (the amount it costs to rent a small server instance from AWS EC2 (http://aws.amazon.com/what-is-aws/))
I want to single out two of the most cutting edge technologies currently being used in web development;
http://www.mongodb.org/
http://nodejs.org/
Open Source Software is a well established fact of life now.
Open Source Hardware is still growing roots. But it's coming and it cannot be ignored.
Open source research, like cancer research. That one bothers me. Not because it happens, but that it doesn't happen enough. A classic example of MASSIVE waste of resources in the name of competing for profits.
Don't get me wrong. I am a capitalist. I'm just not a douchebag.
wenshu
11-24-2012, 09:52 AM
Open Source Software is a well established fact of life now.
Open Source Hardware is still growing roots. But it's coming and it cannot be ignored.
Open source research, like cancer research. That one bothers me. Not because it happens, but that it doesn't happen enough. A classic example of MASSIVE waste of resources in the name of competing for profits.
The problem that prevents the open source licensing model from taking off in bio/medical research and hardware is because they require seed funding to even get off the ground. Raspberry Pi for instance can't even meet demand. Whereas any kid with a ten year old PC that can run a text editor can create the next big framework or write a webserver for absolutely nothing.
YouKnowWho
11-24-2012, 01:21 PM
Open Source Software is a well established fact of life now.
I thought Java has converter that can convert binary code back to source code more than 10 years ago.
If a product has A, B, C, D, E 5 functions, a customer only want to buy function A, C, E. You can take the release product binary code, run through the converter to get the Java code. Use scanner to remove all functions that have to do with function B and D. recomplie back to the binary code, and relese it to the customer.
I thought Java has converter that can convert binary code back to source code more than 10 years ago.
If a product has A, B, C, D, E 5 functions, a customer only want to buy function A, C, E. You can take the release product binary code, run through the converter to get the Java code. Use scanner to remove all functions that have to do with function B and D. recomplie back to the binary code, and relese it to the customer.
Open Source Software has been around for over 30 years. It doesn't have the many challenges that OSH has. Writing code takes a computer and some knowledge. Open source hardware requires much more. Like funds for prototyping on the low end and on the other end you have to gather funds for large scale marketing and production development.
The problem that prevents the open source licensing model from taking off in bio/medical research and hardware is because they require seed funding to even get off the ground. Raspberry Pi for instance can't even meet demand. Whereas any kid with a ten year old PC that can run a text editor can create the next big framework or write a webserver for absolutely nothing.
Great points. Mos def there are some hurdles. But I can think of worse things than overwhelming demand.
Pi is a learning tool, primarily. If you know your field, it doesn't take much to just make one on your own. If you are able to tear down existing electronics and build a single board computer on your own, you don't need raspberry pi. That being said, Many people is the "makers" movement are using them to control projects because they are cheap and easy. Why build one when you can pick one up for 30 bucks. I see contracts to supply institutions of learning in Rasberry's future. If they can show that kind of demand(and they sort of already have) investors will follow. Early stages are always tough without billion dollar RnD support.
You see the same thing with Arduino's new Due. They sold out in like a day and had to play catch up. But they have an amazing team and I have no doubt as to whether they will succeed or not.
OS is a concept that can solve many of the worlds ills. To ignore that for more profit for you by subjugating others would be, and is, unfortunate.
It's up to those of us who are educated to push it into the public consciousness as a good thing, not a naive thing. Many people feel we are all crazy and carry a massive idealistic naivety. That comes from people who are or want to be on top rather than just have more equality.
It's a sad truth, but if you asked the poor what they would rather have, a fair shot and relative comfort, or you can own islands and become a party to oppression, they will usually choose the latter. Weak. Sad. But true, none the less. And it is a reality that presents hurdles. No doubt.
We are just now starting to see investors starting to grasp the potential of the concept. In ten years, this conversation will be VERY different. Yall can call me on that if we're all still around.
The biggest hurdle to open source research are pharma and tech giants.
There are a very large amount of people who are willing to give a lil to get a lot in this respect. And people who butt heads and try to interfere with malicious intentions will reap the consequences.
I know it's not the same thing exactly, but just ask Penny Leavy and her HB Gary clown outfit what happens when you butt heads with a legion of cooperative action. It really is, in many ways, a war for the future of mankind.
No more trouble finding Raspberry Pi now. The only one I can't get easily is the Model A. All that fuss bout the inability of meeting demand was for nothing. They are killing it.
wenshu
03-31-2013, 09:36 AM
No more trouble finding Raspberry Pi now. The only one I can't get easily is the Model A. All that fuss bout the inability of meeting demand was for nothing. They are killing it.
Only took a year and a half too.
Which is awesome considering their situation. It was only a year, and they were available all throughout that year at various times. It's not like they had one small run and then nothing for a year. To go from expectations of moving like 20,000 units to passing 1 million and getting the next runs in order to meet demand in such a short time is not something to look down on. Sure, they could have just used the first Chinese manufacturer that could get it done fastest, but they chose to make sure their products quality wasn't gonna go down the ****ter w/ some random sweatshop. I can wait when it means integrity stays intact. And really, for this kind of thing it was pretty fast.
wenshu
03-31-2013, 10:45 AM
Developed since 2006, foundation established 2009, pre-orders in 2011, plenty of time to gauge demand, if you can't properly source your supply chain in 6 years. . .
Obviously not all of the delays were supply chain based, nonetheless the impatience with the initial delays was justified. Doesn't take away from the great product, is just indicative of mismanagement which is typical for a non profit let alone a start up side project.
*technically Rasberry Pi isn't open source hardware.
Yeah but I don't count any of the time before the demand. In 2009 they had to give them away. You could argue for 2011 and on, no sooner. And I only count B model Rev 1 because that's when the real demand came in. And it was like a flood, not a steady stream. Also we have to remember that the initial intent was to have them all manufactured in the UK. Clearly that isn't gonna happen now. Only one of mine is a Chinese one. So far so good. We'll see I guess. Aside from the whole ethernet problem that slowed them down early, that is. And that's where the real frustration came in. It was those who had preordered and then they couldn't release the run cause of the ethernet drama. Not sure whos fault that was, but it was annoying, for sure.
In the big view of manufacturing, they were horribly slow. And since people are used to large runs by large corps, they don't realize what it takes to set that up when demand increases 1000 fold. To go from an educational "non profit let alone a start up side project." to what they are becoming now in such a short time is great. They just didn't have the talent to go in this direction. They did some great work, but clearly didn't have the structure to go where they are going now. You can tell they were honestly taken back by the demand. And yeah, we can say they should have done a better job at gauging response, but we also have to factor in the growing maker trend. Raspberry Pi has already made it to space(technically). Remember, the initial intent was to sell them to UK schools because the PC spoiled a whole generation with all this user friendly stuff. ;)
Regardless of the manufacturing issues, for the price it's a great tool. There are better boards for most of the applications you can use the Pi for, but they aren't nearly as versatile and cheap. Some are versatile, some are cheap, none are both on the level of the Pi. Actually that isn't true anymore, but it was last year. :)
Everyone was impatient. I think it goes both ways. Partly because of unrealistic expectations and partly because the team they had wasn't set up for where it ultimately went. Still, in context, they did pretty good with this whole project, you gotta give it up for that.
The new Beagle Bone looks pretty good.
*technically Rasberry Pi isn't open source hardware.
Word. Not just technically... ;)
That doesn't change their impact on OSH though. And it's Linux, so there is that. :)
Again, Their intent was more geared to computer science than electrical engineering in general. People are using it for all sorts of stuff that it was never intended for. The original idea was to have every kid having a linux computer on their school desk.... For obvious reasons.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.