digg

Join DiggAbout

Open-source economics from TED.com watch!

ted.com — Law professor Yochai Benkler explains how collaborative projects like Wikipedia and Linux represent the next stage of human organization. By disrupting traditional economic production, copyright law and established competition, they're paving the way for a new set of economic laws, where empowered individuals are put on a level playing field...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • DjBlic, on 04/17/2008, -15/+9I wonder how many times I can be dug down.
  • TresTriste, on 04/17/2008, -2/+0Open Source Economics, making money by understanding the product better than your customer. It's that simple, right?
  • Cryoniq, on 04/17/2008, -1/+14This is interesting in many ways what he talks about. One thing that is interesting in particular, here and now, is that you and me are a part of something like this - here and now. We are digg. Digg wouldn't exist if it wasn't for me and you. We form and shape digg by now and then submit the information to be read for you and me. And digg is a wheel of economy. Information want to be free in the sense that we link it around. And this is the same with everything else and in to Open Source. Is digg open source? I sure would call the way information flow into it Open Source.. because it is.

    And worth mention is.. this is why Microsoft and similiar companies cannot survive long from now. Because their core model isn't designed to let the users take part of the process like Open Source offer at 100%.

    So... let us build/generate something amazing guys and girls. We do not even have to make an effort for it to happen really anyway. It is all natural :P
    • toekneebullard, on 04/17/2008, -0/+9I have to disagree with you. Digg isn't really open source. Sure, users provide the information, but then secret algorithms decide whether or not it goes to the front page. There's still plenty about digg that's completely proprietary.
      • OneAndOnlySnob, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Digg is not open source, but it absolutely fits the bill of what Dr Benkler was describing. Many people contribute a little bit to create something. In Digg's case, it's the pulse of what people are generally reading or playing or watching on the web.

        Sure, if you submit something, people digg it, but secret algorithms determine what ends up on the page. Know what? Open source projects have maintainers. You can't simply submit ANY patch and have it get in. A person or a group makes the final decision. In Digg's case, a secret algorithm attempts to act as that authority.
    • georgi0u, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1True, but nature isn't open source in the same way digg isn't open source. Sure, through investigation the mysteries of nature can be discovered, but should someone sit down and experiment with digg, the algorithm could be inferred from the observed behavior of the software. What I think is awesome about this is the similarity between open source/user driven software's production and the nature's evolution. As the demands of the system change, as our demands change, the system adapts to meet them or the system dies. Following this model works for the observable world, and its more efficient then the monarchies of the industrial past that simply made decisions based on inferences the shareholders concluded.
    • georgi0u, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1also, and i ran out of editing time so i couldn't add this....

      However, there is a very obvious distinction between open source software and user driven software. In the first, the system itself is adapting whereas the latter is a system in itself that has the option of allowing for adaptation within its walls. When user driven software is designed to modify itself and project toward the needs/wants of its users, then the evolution that appears in open source on a grander scale, is imparted upon the fabricated system.

      This can work if done correctly, but still suffers from the same flaw that the monopolized monarch like companies suffered when they were in power; the more extreme changes can't be made without the Kings, or in this case Rose's and his CEO's, consent. Open source software is more directly relatable to nature's evolution which is a provenly working system, and therefore better.


      Also, check the wikipedia TED talk. The father of wikipedia desribes the inner workings of the open source software and how he balances userdriven content, with a tightly nit community of editors and mediators, the general public, and himself. Basically a balance of the monarchy, community, and oligopoly models of yesterday's and today's corporations

      http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/37
  • R00B0y, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3FAN-farking tastic discussion, and I agree with everything he said... but its a rose coloured glasses look at the web today or of the future.. sadly whether you use linux or windows, it makes no difference.. capitalism and the pursuit of profit will strip the web of the freedoms we are fortunate enough to enjoy today.. the future however is not so bright.. look at the comcast debacle.. companies are already starting to try to divvy up the web into tidy little profit margins.. its a shame because if the web was to move in the direction that is talked about here.. the web and hence world would be a much better place.. despite the corporations..
    • captZEEbo, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2I'd just like to point out it's not the corporations fault for doing what they do best. It's the government's fault for permitting monopolies. Abolish government!
    • JQP123, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Government is the original monopoly.
      Abolish government --- but give me free health care!

    • rizla420, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1If we could create a distributed network topology, much like mesh networks we could bipass the telecoms, but that would be a HUGE undertaking. You'd still have to link up with some long haul fiber at some point, but local municipal networks might work. What i foresee though is always grim. Either the entrenched businesses will stop you, or the politicians will stop you, usually because of the business. Creating a truly robust fault tolerant people created network would be a dream come true for me.
      • JQP123, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1"Either the entrenched businesses will stop you, or the politicians will stop you, usually because of the business."

        Or more often, the economics will stop you.

        Not every problem can be solved by "social production". Just because you've got a new hammer, doesn't mean that everything will magically turn into a nail. Some things; in fact most things, still require resources and capital (i.e. money) in order to be addressed adequately.
    • kaelyiesta, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1"capitalism and the pursuit of profit will strip the web of the freedoms we are fortunate enough to enjoy today."

      Not necessarily. The pursuit of profit works both ways. When not sustained by government intervention, consumers are the final word in industries decisions. As long as there is incentive to market to consumers(and not government subsidy), there will be some who will meet that demand.
  • atorch, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Hmmm... I submitted the same article, under the same name, under the same topic, eight or so hours earlier.

    The last few minutes or so are the best, starting 13:30-ish. "Property is one mechanism of coordination, but it's not the only one ... social production threatens, and is threatened by, the incumbent industrial system ..."
    • JQP123, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2"... social production threatens, and is threatened by, the incumbent industrial system ..."

      So there you have it, irrefutable proof that open source is destined to take over the desktop.
    • rizla420, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Thank you for trying to post this, i forgot about TED. Its a damn good site, i love sites like these that feed my brain with the good stuff. Too much candy and crack websites around today.
  • Jdub7, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3http://ted.streamguys.net/YochaiBenkler_2005G.mp4
  • heyja, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0It's interesting, and I also agree with everything he says.
  • Hangly, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3That was amazing. Also I LOVE THIS SITE!

    When you're done with that lecture check out this awesome French guy:
    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/197
    • lukeev, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Check out the Ted Robinson video on creativity. Awesome videos, awesome site.
  • zdlr, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6TED.com is a superb site with many talks. They have a whole section dedicated to open source talks. You should check it out if you liked this one in their themes section.
  • IIArchonII, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7TED talks are an unequivocal bastion of intelligence
    • JQP123, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1In this particular case, it contains lots of intelligent analysis but not much in the way of concrete conclusions.

      Yes, "social production" exists and it is different. It threatens ... but it is also threatened. It may work in some cases ... but in some cases it may not. After all the intelligent analysis is said and done, we don't really know much more than we did before.
    • rizla420, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Conclusion, in the future harness social production if you want to make money. Use it. Like dig, harness the wisdom (or stupidity) and repackage it in a way that makes it accessible useful. Then someone will find a way to integrate your site into theirs. ETC. Just do your thing. Find your niche, create something that brings people together, harness them. People are social beings and want to be part of something. People dont mind doing "work" if its something they enjoy.
      • JQP123, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3"Conclusion, in the future harness social production if you want to make money."

        If possible, sure, why not? However, nowhere in the video does he suggest that social production is the only way or even the primary way to make money.

        "People dont mind doing "work" if its something they enjoy."

        If you enjoy it and you're not paid to do it, I think it's called "play". Which is a fairly accurate description of what you and I are doing on digg right now.
        • MtheoryX, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Good point; however, its our "play" that is making digg money. I'd call that work.
  • Spottswood, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Hack the planet!!
  • JQP123, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Interesting, and I think for the most part correct, analysis of "social production". The issue I have is with the way it will likely to be interpreted.

    "Social production" is a significant force; made possible by the internet. It has and will continue to produce some economic upheaval in the marketplace. This is not to say that it will ever "dominate" the marketplace. In fact, he is very careful to point out that "social production" is a threat to but also threatened by traditional economic models.

    In other words, "social production" is not a magic bullet. It may work in some cases but in others, it may not. Some adaptation may be required in the marketplace but the basic economic rules remain intact. For example, Microsoft may become more like Google but Google isn't about to open source it's search algorithms. Even if they did, it would still take a lot of "old school" capital in order to build the necessary infrastructure to effectively compete with Google.

    In other words, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

    • rizla420, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1In regards to open source googleing. I bet you can have a decentralized approach to it. You have some super nodes (basically people with some cash that dont mind fronting for some beefy servers). Then you have a p2p network of spiders that crawl the internet and store local copies and distribute their database.

      At least I think it can work, but i'm not PHD or college grad for that matter.
      • JQP123, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1"I bet you can have a decentralized approach to it"

        Google already has a de-centralized approach to it. Only Google knows for sure but by some estimates, they have about 450,000 "beefy" servers in data centers distributed all around the world.
  • locri, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0For those that are interested in this topic, it's already been covered in depth in Dan Tapscott's book "Wikinomics" I saw him speak about it a year ago and it was extremely interesting.
  • rizla420, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1You know what TED sort of reminds me of... When I used to watch techTV before they got bought out (horrible horrible horrible, did i mention horrible it was) there was a show called Big Thinkers or something. It was a small discussion about big ideas. I loved that show, more so than the tech centric ones. I wonder if there's a back catalogue of those talks. Kevin (yea you, Rose) any ideas?
  • ISellSigals, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0Very intresting watch, he describes what is happening really well.

    I particularly like the example of the SETI@HOME project, much like the FOLDING@HOME one, sign of things to come!
  • Funkleft, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1preaching to the choir
  • iknoritesrsly, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1This is brilliant. I've explained these principles to lots of people, but it's nice to have one concise source to send people to as a future reference. It's unfortunate that it will likely only be seen by people that already understand and appreciate what he has to say, though.
  • taMMyLOvesRiKi, on 04/18/2008, -0/+0EPIC BEARD, SIR.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.