Piestar

I have to say that I consider myself to be a scientist, if not in the traditional beakers-and-chemicals sense then in the more philosophical sense.  I believe in the scientific method.

I don’t really get the rising anti-science movement these days.  I think it is generally a result of a failing education system (caused through a lack of respect by the parents and pupils rather than the school themselves failings) but you more and more hear science being referred to as something optional.  Even people who you would otherwise think of as smart seem to think mysticism and ‘healing crystals’ and other such nonsense can co-exist with science, missing the fundamental point – If there was any tangible proof you could cure people with crystals it would be science.  Since no proof exists it isn’t science.  And since no proof exists how on earth does anyone know that they work?  Even if you prove me wrong and manage to prove in the healing power of crystals then you have just brought them under the umbrella of ‘science’ and your whole point is moot.

There is a popular saying (coined by Marcello Truzzi) which is “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.”  Basically if you claim you can cure cancer with crystals, can read minds, have a perpetual motion machine or any other large, game-changing, claim then you better be able to back it up with some pretty hefty evidence.  Every now and then someone will trot out some perpetual motion machine which they claim ‘works’, but mysteriously never works on the night, or only works under limited, unverifiable conditions.  I always call bullshit and the reason for this (and the original quote) is the burden of proof is on the person making such claims.  I claim I can fly, why is it up to you to disprove this?

So apparently commercial software is obsolete.  FOSS is the way of the future.  The old barter model – I give you x in exchange for y – is dead, to be replaced by a model of free distribution and sharing.  An industry that accounts for trillions of pounds and millions of jobs globally is on the verge of being wiped out and replaced by a community sharing model.

The old system of selling software for money is obsolete.  Instead the new system is to not only give that software away but to give away the source, plus complete distribution rights.  You can in fact make more money by giving away software and selling support than you can ever make selling said software.

The capitalist system of competition to drive down costs and to create the best product through competition is dead, instead teams of people working in their spare time (for free) will create software that caters for the end-users needs much more completely and capably than groups of people who’s livelihoods depend on keeping such users happy.

There are some pretty extraordinary claims above, yet the presented evidence of Linux (which nobody uses), Sun Microsystems (which just failed), Microsoft and Apple (kings of closed and doing well) with the only real evidence of success being Ubuntu (funded by a multi-millionaire) and Red Hat (who’s yearly turnover is probably less than Microsoft’s annual stationary budget) do not point to the claims being true.

Where’s the ‘extraordinary evidence’ required to back up such claims?  Where’s the normal evidence?  How can anyone make such claims and expect to be taken seriously by sensible people?

Believe this rubbish, sure, but don’t pretend it’s any more real or believable than healing crystals, homeopathy or ‘faith healing’, because it isn’t.  I just looked in my crystal ball and saw that in ten years time FOSS will be just as unpopular then as it is now.

38 comments

All those people wanting me to actually put something on my About page (as well as contact details) have had their wishes fulfilled!

Also, over on Slashdot right now there is some amusing idiocy about Microsoft apparently corrupting the legislative process, buying governments etc. because it is trying to get a law changed in its favour.  Normally I wouldn’t be in favour of this behaviour but here is the law:

Under current law, all of Microsoft’s worldwide licensing revenues of approximately $20.7 billion annually are taxable at .484 percent.

Yep, that’s right, Washington State want nearly 0.5% of Microsoft’s total revenue.  Not profit, revenue.  That’s 0.5% of global revenue.

What if each American State decided it wanted a piece of this action – it’s only fair after all.  That would mean near 25% of Microsoft’s revenue would suddenly dissappear overnight.  Since there are what (~250 ish) countries in the world – lets be fair they deserve the right to the tax just as much as WS – that is 145% of revenue Microsoft would have to pay in ‘taxes’.

What Microsoft want is to pay taxes on what they sell in the state, not in the whole world, which to me seems perfectly reasonable.  But who am I to get in the way of a groundless bash-fest by the idiots on Slashdot?

Edit: I am an idiot, Redmond is in Washington.  They still should not be able to tax items sold in a different country simply because MS has a presence there.

30 comments