-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- I see that Coinstar now also offers vouchers for Starbucks or iTunes. How do you redeem the voucher with Starbucks? Do they give you a Starbucks card? Regardless, I've got a lot of coffee...
- Dude, I'm just joking with you Applebees. Chill. And yes, the stylus is soooo 1994. But some things from the past are worth preserving.
- Steve: Great comment, to which I would add just a couple of points. First, to the extent that a corporation that may provide the "pipes" is separate from one that provides the content,...
- My top 5: 1. <a href="http://ww.autohotkey.com/">AutoHotKey</a> - This is a simple yet powerful macro scripting program for Windows. I created a simple one-line script...
- "Don’t understand how you iPhone zombies get along without one." It does not help your argument any when you insist on insulting users of another device. You arguments come off as...
DISQUS
Returning? Login
2 years ago
link
I agree with you (of course) that the Wikipedia model provides economic value, perhaps even more than Britannica provides. It strikes me, though, that the peer production & sharing model might have a disadvantage in producing campaign contributions. One thing about these particular broken windows is that the glaziers know how to lobby effectively, while the shopkeepers face some significant collective action problems.
2 years ago
Here's the plain text:
http://crookedtimber.org/2006/05/30/a-general-t...
2 years ago
Obviously, they are of value to the economy. Just because they are not overtly monetized certainly does not mean they are not of value.
"By the same logic, the sun and the air don't contribute in any meaningful way to the U.S. economy."
Strongly recommend the book "The Future of Life" by Edward Wilson, The Future of Life, in which he does take a stab at valuing the biosphere.
But, let's get back to the reason these phenomena are so revolutionary--not because they have built an Encyclopedia (which is in fact very good, but I digress) or a super computer but because they have done so outside of the control infrastructure of the traditional hierarchies.
That is why wikipedia, open source software, have been so vilified by those agents of the powerful traditional hierarchies.
Examples of this vilification: Microsoft calling FOSS "cancerous", Brittanica response to the Nature study, SCO suit against linux, and you can look at those apologists of the corporate power infrastructure attacking open source and Free Culture at such propaganda sites as IP Central every day...
2 years ago
1 year ago