Killing the list ? (was: Re: New Wiard Module: Borg "Assimilator" Filters)

[Magnus Danielson]

From: "jhaible" <jhaible at debitel.net>
Subject: Killing the list ? (was: Re: New Wiard Module: Borg "Assimilator" Filters)
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:00:56 +0200

Hi list!

Been out of town until today...

Boy, you really seems to have steped on a landmine here...

> > Regrettably, this is what is killing this list. I'm doing commercial work,
> > Juergen is doing designs for Paul and others, people are afraid
> > to talk about their ideas because they might lose money.
> 
> I hope it doesn't come to that.
> 
> Speaking for myself, I would not sacrifice the fun of synth diy for money.
> I had the chance to get a full time job in the music electronics industry
> more than once, but decided against it. Sharing circuits with MAM or
> TBS or Synthtech is fun, and getting some "reward" is part of the fun.
> If I were to make "big extra money" in my spare time, I'd probably spend
> my time with the stock market, as most of my colleagues do nowadays.
> But being the synth addict I am, the fun factor is important to me.
> Sharing circuit ideas freely on synth-diy is part of it. There are certain
> exceptions, for myself, and most likely for you, when details of certain
> products to come are involved. That's why I said I won't inquire further
> on the Borg filter - I respect that. There was no irony or bad feelings
> in my answer.
> 
> Now speaking of the list, there are other things going on as well.
> In a way, the list has "grown old", that is typical effects occur, like
> new people asking the same questions (nothing bad about that), and
> the percentage of topics which are interesting for us "oldtimers"
> is smaller than it used to be.

All this makes me think of the story of the hackers as told by Steve Levy in
his "Hackers" which maybe could act as a warningsign here. This is really a
classic problem with communities based around sharing information about some
technology and the evil of the commercial forces to this community. Few are
able to carry this balance the full way out. In the computer software we have
the full span from Bill Gates to Richard Stallings (worthy representives from
both extremes).

It is more than just sharing information about constructions, it is also about
the availability of constructions. Thus being able to convert a schematic into
a working unit is far less than those that may be interested in actually own
and use such an device. Thus, just having the schematic will disqualifice many
people from apprechiate the virtues of some design and right there forms the
basis for a commercial existence of the design in a product form. There are
many shades of this and I can only come to think of Paia as bringing a really
good balance out of it.

Where the able designer (commercial or not) are eager to learn about how
something was done, as you make a product you are eager to protect your
products uniqueness and thus sharing the schematics, design philosophy etc. is
working totally against this goal. Some designers have trouble with this since
they also have they joy of telling others of the designs they are proud of.

To some degree this is where patents comes in, since an inventor is given the
price of protection of his or hers ideas for some time for the publishment of
thus ideas for everyone to see. While not everyone migth use the protected
technology directly it can be done fully later, but it could also be used for
inspiration to new development even when it is being protected.

However, much of what is covered in products is not patentable, it is just
ways of implementing things, all the small details which creates the make or
break situation.

Anyway, I personally feel worried about some of these issues I can not really
say what is right or wrong, just point out just how hairry all this is.

Cheers,
Magnus