Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 14:26:05 -0700
| From: | Eric Armstrong |
|
eric.armstrong@eng.sun.com Reply-To: unrev-II@egroups.com |
| To: | unrev2 unrev-II@egroups.com |
| Subject: | Intel's new XML network devices |
As a species, I am beginning to wonder if we are capable of surviving.
Several people have interesting proprietary work they want to pursue. I want to be investigating and working in this space more than anything, but no one is funding any of us.
Meanwhile, no one wants to give anything away, because their only hope for having the freedom to pursue the paths that need pursuing is to garner revenue for the purpose. (Even when we *do* share, it's harder than hell to reach agreement on anything.)
Doug is adamant that open source is the only way to go. He's right, but where does that leave us? At SRI they are talking about setting up an open source base technology, and building revenue-producing IP on top of that. I was one of the first to say, hey, if someone is going to start generating revenue, where is mine going to come from? As much as I freely contribute design ideas at this stage, as soon as we started talking about a tangible product, I felt myself shifting gears, looking for my advantage. But do we have time for that?
I guess my point is: If the problems we face really are that pressing, and we as a society cannot identify and free up the brains that are capable of finding a solution, then there is strong possibility that the solutions won't attive in time.
Meanwhile, those of us who have something to contribute find ourselves lacking either time to do what needs to be done, or financial incentive to contribute what amounts to our hope for the future (personal future, that is).
So the question remains: Are we, as a species, in fact capable of surviving? Or do personal and societal short-sightedness make it unlikely?
Sincerely,
Eric Armstrong
eric.armstrong@eng.sun.com