I’m glad to see other people thinking deeply about these things. Recently, I posted http://jjinux.blogspot.com/2009/08/open-source-closed-source-video-games.html in which I admitted that I’m thankful for both open and closed source video games. I still wonder if that applies to the entire software world. Part of me thinks it does, but the little Stallman who sits on my shoulder keeps calling me a sellout ;)

I think the experience of open source developers shows that some of the premises of LeGuin’s book aren’t totally valid, but it’s interesting how much of the contrast between the two worlds in the book is reflected in the contrast between the open source and commercial software communities.

I think we should learn the value of symbols, for example what is the meaning of a coin for society. We depend very much of such concepts, imagine there were not possible way to guarantee secure economic transactions, or that legal status are not respected by people any more …

In order to change we should be able to appreciate the kernel features that are at the core of our society. Such change require a deep knowledge of the human nature, an appreciation that I think we will never get when a person is only a mascaraed to live in a tribe.

Yes. The open source style of organizing work, and of narrating work in a transparent way, is a key innovation that can and should spread to every profession.

I’ve been trying for a long time to use the open source model to illustrate this point — because it’s the best real-world example of it. But it’s hard because people both inside and outside the software world keep wanting to view the model through the lens of tribal warfare.

I share your technocratic view of government, or any significantly large organization. People always overestimate how much control and power the leader(s) have, but if the leaders do a good job then they have very little (personal) power at all. All decisions are be reasoned, agreed upon, and executed, as if obeying the laws of physics. Like gears in a machine.

I view myself as an Open Source developer, a builder (or creator). I can’t remember a time when I hesitated posting the source code to my creations, mostly because I didn’t see the source code as the part that contains its value, but rather the idea it represents. I want the idea to flourish, even if someone else becomes responsible for it.

Finally, I very much enjoyed the anecdote about the nursing mailing list. I’ve heard similar impressions from nurses and their perspective on the battle between their opinion and that of the doctors. My impression is that the nursing movement is much more agile and progressive (very similar to the open source community), whereas MD’s are a proprietary corpus of R&D and reputation.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and your code.

@shazow (a user of much of your code)

• Code is the best way to control a complex system. For an x86 server we use software code, for our government and judiciary system we use legal code, but they are really quite alike. Generalizing a bit, we are good at writing code to control complex systems. Right now, we’re all focused on complex Turing machines, but that could change, especially as those non-Turing systems will have all their data accessible by Turing machines.

• Our craft is unique in that the cost of destruction is nil, so coding evolved to include refactoring as part of the development process. I don’t think there’s any other craft or profession out there where you are not ashamed of throwing away your old work, but it’s really all right if your professions is focused on knowledge.