Noncommercial independent collaborations

>
>>The main point of Raymond's book is that open source software
>>developers are motivated by two factors: the personal utility of their
>>work product, and the respect of their peers. The fact that other
>>people are able to use the product is a unique feature of software that
>>has made noncommercial software incredibly successful, since others can
>>modify the code without interfering with its use in the original form.
>>There is no way to take this model over to hardware completely intact.

I should also add that if/when we do get nanotech replicators, all
hardware will essentially be a program which tells the replicator how to
make it. :-) As it is now, CNC machines etc. take programs that tell
them how to make things. As do photolithography system (well, more like
a series of bitmaps for them...), etc. So in practice, most manufactured
things depend on programs plus directions for assembly (another
program). Now it is true many of those programs are designed as
blueprints, and the programs for many older items exist only as
blueprints... I know I'm stretching the concept of what is normally
thought of as a "program" but that's actually my point. The major
difference is that a computer program typically runs entirely on the
machine (or maybe interacts with one use in a symbiotic fashion) whereas
a blueprint type program to make something often require multiple people
and various types of equipment to be excecuted, and also often relies on
lots of unstated information assumed by the people takign part in
running the physical program (like how to drill a hole etc.).

--Paul Fernhout