Economic Crisis Will Eliminate Open Source 753
An anonymous reader writes "The economic crisis will ultimately eliminate open source projects and the 'Web 2.0 free economy,' says Andrew Keen, author of The Cult of the Amateur. Along with the economic downturn and record job loss, he says, we will see the elimination of projects including Wikipedia, CNN's iReport, and much of the blogosphere. Instead of users offering their services 'for free,' he says, we're about to see a 'sharp cultural shift in our attitude toward the economic value of our labor' and a rise of online media businesses that reward their contributors with cash. Companies that will survive, he says, include Hulu, iTunes, and Mahalo. 'The hungry and cold unemployed masses aren't going to continue giving away their intellectual labor on the Internet in the speculative hope that they might get some "back end" revenue,' says Keen."
Shakeout more likely (Score:5, Interesting)
All you may see is a shakeout of commercial Web 2.0 ventures that were going nowhere and were only being made a fuss of "because it's web 2.0". The same hype that drove the original dotcom bubble. A shakeout of dodgy commercial ventures, yes, Opensource on the other hand is likely to get stronger in this climate.
Not Quite. (Score:0, Interesting)
Blogs shift power from broadcasters to individuals. Pull media empowers us all.
I predict the reverse (Score:4, Interesting)
Marxist Economics (Score:3, Interesting)
He makes the same fatal mistake that nearly all economists make when talking about labor. They assume that labor in and of itself has value. It doesn't. Only the products of the labor have value, and then only if someone is willing to value it.
Your labor is worthless if you work on something that no one values.
Sure, it would be nice if we could all be compensated for all of our labor all the time, but the real economy doesn't work that way. It only works that way in the wet dreams of Marxist economists.
End of the Internet Predicted: News at 11 (Score:5, Interesting)
His whole premise is deeply flawed. People don't post stuff on these sites because they are so fat and happy that they just can't find anything better to do with their time. They do it because they want to be known for something, or they want to show off, or because they just want to contribute to a large project. None of these things are really affected by the economy.
Okay, some people might contribute less because they have to take 2 jobs or something, but that's a temporary phenomenon. For most people, their jobs will still occupy about 8 hours a day, and that still leaves several hours every day for farting around on the Internet, which often includes submitting content to these so-called "Open Source" content sites.
User-generated content was there at the beginning of the Web, and it isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Maybe CNN will toss the iReport thing, but not because of the economic downturn. Sure, they might decide that now is a good time to end it because they have a convenient excuse, but the real reason to end it is because it's a cesspool of mouth breathers posting pictures of their cats and saying the same kind of mindless garbage that gets posted to CNN's Political Ticker. The iReport site doesn't do much more than allow CNN to post stories that would be of no more than local interest otherwise (ooh, a car on fire! Alert the media!).
As for Wikipedia, it has deep and fundamental flaws that may or may not eventually lead to its downfall, but the economic condition isn't going to change that one way or the other.
Wow, I need a gig like this! (Score:3, Interesting)
When I read stories like this, or like the "RAID-5 will die next year" article earlier today, I feel like I'm in the wrong job. I mean, I could shoot my mouth off, spouting stupid things that almost make sense if you don't scratch the surface too hard.
People who get paid to write/create online may find that jobs (and payment) are scarcer, but people who provide volunteer time (wikipedia, etc.) aren't going to suddenly stop doing it because they're unemployed. In fact, some of them are probably going to have more time on their hands.
I predict that there will be an increase in online suicide notes in the next three years, and also that everyone will point to the internet as the problem instead of recognising it as a time-sink for the already suicidally depressed. Unfortunately, I don't have any specious facts to bolster my opinion (which of course, I'd angrily claim to be inevitable and obvious to anyone but the most clueless), so I guess I'll never be on Fox News, write for Fast Company, or blog (for pay!) on Internet Evolution.
Re: I think we should be able to (Score:5, Interesting)
Are you the guy who modded my comment in the wikipedia story "flamebait"? Have you no sense of humor, or at least no sense of irony?
Yesterday was a story saying the economic downturn was a boon to open source, now another, equally misinformed dumbass says it will kill open source.
I think these guys are hilaruious, myself.
The reality is the economic downturn (call a spade a spade, we're going to have a depression) will probably do neither. Of the two stories, however, this one is the dumbest. But not by much.
Yesterday's mcgrew journal, Open Office Blues [slashdot.org], about a non-nerd and open source, illistrates perfectly why open source software has not taken the world by storm despite its superiority.
Re: I think we should be able to (Score:5, Interesting)
Ok, you have a point. It's just that I hear this sort of thing all the time.
"Why would you do all that work and then give it away?"
For me, as soon as money enters the picture, the fun is (mostly) gone; with money comes responsibility, whoever is providing the money buys the right to demand answers and project deadlines. It's no longer "because I enjoy doing it", but "because he tells me to".
I think he either just doesn't understand this concept, or he ignores it, because frankly, it makes *him* completely irrelevant. It must be very frustrating, being an economist, and people suddenly start doing stuff that's not about money.
He conveniently forgets that a lot of people who contribute to OSS aren't professional programmers during working hours, he is completely ignorant to the fact that there are people who know how to write computer software *outside of the US* (gosh!).
Besides, WTF does Myspace have to do with OSS?
Re:yeah right (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to mention the fact that those businesses that stop throwing money away on overrated software will need to start employing people who are experienced with the free and open equivalent.
Re: I think we should be able to (Score:3, Interesting)
>>>Just go to Openoffice.org and click the tab that says 'download'. It's a full version and it's free."
>>>"But... isn't downloading illegal?" This, my friends, is why Linux and Open Office haven't taken over the desktop. The non-nerd media (and I daresay, quite a bit of the nerd media) have non-geeks thinking that "downloading is illegal".
>>>
Good grief. Surely people are not THAT dumb. Surely they must realize downloading is okay if the owner voluntarily gives it away (like Itunes or Winamp or VLC player). I suspect this is the intent of RIAA and MPAA - to make people think nothing is free, and therefore you have to Buy from legal sources (theirs).
Re:Just like... (Score:3, Interesting)
It just shows that proprietary companies still do not understand OSS... OSS is not about building a company to sustain profits, but rather about trying to build tools to help get around paying a "tax" just to use something...
OSS is an evolution of the software industry. In fact, I strongly suspect OSS will actually do better in a recession because companies want to reduce costs even further...
Re:Money? (Score:5, Interesting)
People used to do most things for free. See Money and the Criss of Civilization [realitysandwich.com]:
Re:Donations (Score:3, Interesting)
The minority that gives is usually enough.
Re:Yeah right. (Score:5, Interesting)
>>>He just doesn't get that some people do things not for the money.
On the other hand, it's difficult to "do things" like update OpenOffice, if your electric company just pulled the plug, or you lose your house to the bank. If the next decade becomes a Depression-Lite economy, then there will be a lot fewer engineers with the ability to update software. They'll be busy just trying to survive, with little spare time or cash to continue their open-source "hobby".
The Golden Age of Open Source (Score:3, Interesting)
Why not the reverse argument that open source will become more popular than ever as people realize they don't have to spend money on certain programs and instead can use tools such as Ubuntu, OpenOffice and the like?
You can (Score:3, Interesting)
With the new index [slashdot.org], you *can* actually mod up and down stories directly on main page. There's no flamebait tag, but there's slownewsday and stupid ones.
Re:Yeah right. (Score:3, Interesting)
If anything, the current economic downturn will INCREASE participation in "free" projects. People have a need to feel "needed" and to actually accomplish things. Our jobs fill part of this need, and those who don't have jobs will feel a greater need for fulfillment. Not having a job does tend to create more free time, after all, and sometimes the networking that you get from participating in a free project can help you find work.
Re:This is just wrong (Score:3, Interesting)
During the depression of the 1930s, the movie, liquore, and publishing industries boomed. When you've got the blues you want escape.
Re:Yeah right. (Score:2, Interesting)
I suppose the truth behind this article depends solely on just how bad this economic downturn will be. If bands of feral children start roving our countrysides in search of screaming baby meat, then yes, open source software isn't going to be a high priority for anyone. Of course, neither will any software. On the other hand, if society manages to hold itself together for a few years, the increased unemployment in the IT sector (among others) might actually increase the number of (talented) people with time on their hands.
Re:A more likely target (Score:2, Interesting)
Agreed. We host an airline website, and have over 60 Weblogic application server instances running. I can't even imagine how much all of those licenses cost.
We're driving hard to move the site to Tomcat instead. Our margins will improve, without affecting performance.
Our company has a few OSS contributors, and everything's converting to Tomcat and other OSS solutions. This is only going to drive more OSS contributions.
Re:Yeah right. (Score:3, Interesting)
What about college students, will they quit writing open source projects. I doubt it.
I think you could also draw similarities between open source coders and artists too. Just cause your not getting paid for you work doesn't mean you quit, sometimes you continue just to do it. Also if you are unemployed working on a open source project would be a good way to improve your portfolio or to show what you were doing in that 6 month period between jobs.
Re:Yeah right. (Score:5, Interesting)
If that is the case then how did the open source projects come to exist in the first place? Matter of observation I saw a boom in open source projects after the dotcom bubble burst and even open source projects that existed before the collapse even got even more contributions after that. I certainly saw better progress from kernel development to KDE maturity.
Yeah I know... I know... You were just showing the other side of the ever fake coin. ;)
Economists predict end of open source (Score:3, Interesting)
Student paper quota (Score:5, Interesting)
The two services we offer are drinking and arguing, both always in demand in tough times. Broadly speaking our current strategy is to spend our way through the recession. Economist friends tell me this is akin to smoking your way through a heart attack, but if there's one thing we ought to have learned, it's that economists can't be trusted.
Re: I think we should be able to (Score:3, Interesting)
Ok, I'll bite. Who ever said that markets were perfect other than trolls trying to discredit them? All the informed defenses of the market is that nobody's come up with anything better. Any problem you find with a market system is going to pale in comparison with the alternatives.
We keep trying to "tweak" the market. In the late 1990s we tweaked it by putting the taxpayers theoretically on the hook by telling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go into subprime mortgages. Well, now we've figured out that this wasn't such a good idea but was that a market failure or a government tweak failure?
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: I think we should be able to (Score:3, Interesting)
When life is not primarily about making money, because there is little money to be made, what happens instead is that people direct their efforts toward other purposes that add value to their lives. Have you ever wondered why there are more community festivals and a more ubiquitous gift economy in poor nations than in rich ones? How can they afford it? Well, those cultures place a value on time and effort, which every person has in equal measure. People are able to participate in their community on this basis. So, despite the many disadvantages of poverty, social activities flourish, particularly those requiring time and effort. That sounds a lot like open source development to me.
Our present culture is about money. That's why an economic downturn causes enormous social disruption, because it impacts our ability to participate. Because we have all this wealth to maintain, and all these complex commitments which depend on cash flowing at a certain rate, we can't just laugh it off. It's difficult to adapt to changing conditions, but especially so when we are encumbered with wealth. For example, I have a much more jealous attitude toward my apartment as a mortgage holder than I did back when I was a renter.
So, to the question of when people will stop caring about "intangible" goods produces a different answer in different circumstances. Sure, in the extreme case of real famine, we lose the means to participate in any constructive sense, and this applies to any culture. But it's doubtful that's the case we're looking at now.
I'd argue that the conditions which encourage community participation - open source development, for example - come into play more strongly in poor times than in rich times. This is the exact converse of what the article claims, because it assumes that we all have nothing better to do than fight over whatever trickle of wealth continues to flow out of the old tap. I think people may just as likely turn away from the tap and put their efforts elsewhere.
Re:Yeah right. (Score:2, Interesting)
It might also be the case that, rather than using the time to make money, they have to use that time so they can avoid spending money. For instance
Spending more time shopping for and cooking your own food at home, rather than going out to a restaurant (also applies to bringing in lunch from home).
Doing your own home or car maintenance.
Mowing your own lawn instead of hiring landscapers.
All of these eat into your free time (which I define as leisure time, not time not at work).
Re:*laughs* (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, there are a lot of people who work with open source technologies for the money. In that respect, there will be a bit of a shake-up. Some of the failures will be very high profile, and may even convince people that open source is falling apart. That's what the public picture is going to look like.
Behind the scenes it will be quite different because, as you and others have said, not everyone works on open source for money. And even those who do it for the money will have much greater flexibility than the commercial software titans. After all, companies like Canonical and Red Hat have been dealing with far more competitive markets than Microsoft has been dealing with. They are the ones who have had to fight to sell their products, and to distinguish their products from competitors who can pretty much re-badge what they produce. The knowledge that they have gained over the years will be of tremendous value in tough economic times.
Re:Yeah right. (Score:2, Interesting)
I think it's a mistake to assume that everyone will do the same thing when faced with job loss. Looking back at the dot-com collapse, I know people who reacted in very different ways when they got laid off. Some got burned out on software and computers completely, took jobs that had nothing to do with IT, and in some cases never came back. They basically just put their tools down and walked away. That was it for them.
However, I know other people that didn't react that way at all; they spent a lot of time looking for jobs, sure, but it's hard even for a very highly-motivated person to spend an entire workday job hunting. And instead they spent their newly-found free time working on various "hobby" projects that they'd had on the back burner for a while. For some people it seemed to be a way of staying sharp, while for other people it was clearly just entertainment and a way to avoid getting depressed.
I know one guy who basically took his lack of a job (and his severance package) as an opportunity to mess around on his own for a while before he started job hunting; his idea was that he'd put together something on his own and then at least have something cool to talk about during interviews besides "yeah, so I worked at this company and then I got fired..." just like everyone else who was searching at the time. Not sure whether it helped him any, but it was an interesting strategy at least.
It's in no way given that when people lose their primary jobs that they'll stop doing hobbies. Frankly I'd not be surprised if people end up spending more time on their hobbies than normal, right after they lose a job.
Free time.. (Score:3, Interesting)
People do things because they're bored and have free time, and in the case of open source code often because it looks good on the resume to have been involved with open source projects, like charity work...
Unemployed people generally have more free time, and less money to spend on doing other things with their time..
They also have more of a need to do things that will look good on their resume.
They are also less likely to be able to afford proprietary software, and are more likely to be motivated to replace it with their own alternative.
I know if i was unemployed, i would spend the time trying to improve my chances of getting another job, wether that be raising my profile by releasing open source code, or just writing code for practice or to learn new technologies or languages.
Re:First Nigger (Score:1, Interesting)
He never attended Harvard College. Columbia didn't require an undergrad thesis. Selective Service registrations include social security numbers and are privileged. Medical records are privileged. He is forbidden by law to release a list of his clients as a lawyer. There's no reason to think he published any articles in the Harvard Law Review. His vote record in the Illinois State Senate is public record and freely available.
Re:Just like... (Score:3, Interesting)
I sincerely believe that there is a spiritual law to the universe that cannot be defined by science (just as faith cannot define science - science is about the how, faith is about the why). Just as gravity is a law of this universe, and to ignore it is to come to harm, so is "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself" a spiritual law, and to ignore it will cause one to come to harm.
So, in response to your comment "look at the subject matter rather than rely on hearsay" - I do not rely on hearsay, I rely on firsthand accounts and historical data. The bible has many first hand witnesses recording the facts, corroborated by archeological digs and other historical documents, and is considered by historians to be a more accurately passed down document than the Iliad and the Odyssey (which are considered to be very accurate transcriptions of the original oral poetry) because much of the bible was written within one generation of the historical occurrence, whereas the time between the oral origination of both the Iliad and the Odyssey and when the written versions were transcribed is much greater.
So, in my case, your statement is clearly false. It is because I have reviewed the subject matter that I believe my faith to be the truth, and therefore "need" it (or more accurately, want it, and choose to rely on it).
Re:Yeah right. (Score:3, Interesting)
Why? Why do you think that?
I've been unemployed. Searching for work was my biggest priority, but it's not like I spent 24/7 trudging the streets and knocking on doors. I had more free time then than I do now that I'm employed fulltime, and I took advantage of that free time to do things I enjoy, such as writing open-source software.
And there's a purely selfish reason to do it, too. Suppose the downturn does last a couple of years. Who is going to find it easier to get a job at the end of it -- the guy who says "I have not written a line of code since I was fired in 2008, because I've been too busy searching for a job", or the guy who says "I've been continuously involved in working on this major software product that you've heard of"?
Re:Dumbass = You?! (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree, it's what they don't tell you, and the emphasis and the presentation that causes it to be unbiased. Modern propaganda techniques have little use for something as unsophisticated as a plain lie.