[Discuss] OSHW & Economics

[Javier Serrano]

On 20.11.2013 21:48, Matt Maier wrote:
> If someone is "free" to
> do something, but can't afford to, they don't consider the freedom relevant.

Let's agree to disagree on that. I do consider the freedom relevant, and
I am not the only one. BTW, I don't think this is the most important
part of freedom, but since this thread seems to be mostly about
economics: freedom does have an economic impact -- sometimes not
immediate -- more often than not, usually a positive one for those who
enjoy the freedom.

Also, regarding your "free to do something": in hardware that would
typically be the freedom to study the design documents, distribute them
as you like, modify them, distribute the modified versions, and yes,
make hardware and do with it what you like. Only the last freedom is
affected by your economic arguments, not in a definitive way. And the
other freedoms are just as important IMHO.

> So the values of the "free" movement mean even less in hardware than
> they do in software. Even if someone gets "free" hardware (plans) they
> can't debug them, let alone use them, in the physical world without
> costs that don't exist for software projects. So the pragmatic question
> "does it work" has much more relative importance. Committing resources
> is a risk, and more resources are involved in hardware projects.
>  
> That means "open source," which focuses on pragmatism rather than
> morality, has values that translate much better into hardware than "free."

Given the huge debate which happened in the software world, one can be
tempted to believe that these are two mutually exclusive camps among
which one must choose only one. I dispute that. I say freedom in itself
is important to me and many others, but I dispute that freedom in
software is the exclusive domain of the FSF or any of its illustrious
members. It is however reassuring to me that some people have taken it
upon themselves to preserve these freedoms first and foremost. I would
not like to rely on other people who get the same or similar degrees of
freedom "by accident" so to speak -- and sorry for this huge
over-simplification of real life -- because then I would not feel that
the freedom is so future-proof.

Sorry, this is getting more and more conceptual. It is not my intention
to bore the people in this fine list, and even less to reproduce the
very unproductive open-vs-free debates from the software world here. I
just stepped in because I thought the criticism on free thinking was
unjustified.

Now, regarding the original post in the thread: I find this subject most
interesting and relevant to OSHW, and would ultimately think that what
the companies say should have a special relevance. I read with interest
Nathan's reply. I wonder if there are cases where things did turn wrong
in the sense that the original post implied. I keep hearing about how
cheap knock-offs can kill an OSHW company, or how big players can step
in and take all the market small firms have carefully built over many
years, but I don't know of any actual case where this happened! Has
anybody got any examples?

Thanks,

Javier