I agree that the threat of intellectual property restrictions stifling innovation, if that’s what you mean by “developing in Linux may be made a crime”, is real (that’s one of the facets of “decommoditization of the lower levels of the software stack” I mentioned in my “Small pieces…” comment). However, in a world where there’s an open fat client platform, not to mention a small-pieces-loosely-joined world of services that fat client (and the thin clients it augments) consumes, I don’t think “thin client” equals “centrally managed and controlled distribution”. I think it’s merely a convenient aggregation and delivery vehicle for network services; and, moreover, it’s one the end user ultimately controls.

-ian

Michael, its unreal to think that any one provider could ever make a box which will do everything. The giants still worship convergence, want to build their golden box to ensare a market. And here we are, chatting about how the future is clearly more distributed, that people are demanding to use the faculties of the network, not just the system. And thats where the network externality comes into play, where evolutino happens. The webapps we us are all thin client systems, and witness which ones are flourishing; ones that are open, extensible, and give the user back their data and control. The bubble burst when people realized that no one could provide the central nexus of control. Surival is possible only through the network externalities, through connection. The mere implication that big buisness content holders can fight evolution, decide to stand alone and force the status quo- simply by relying on some hardware tricks and legalese- is actually pretty laughable. Monolopy has lost its competitive advantage.

You cannot fight Metcalf’s law. Given enough time, an ecosystem will eventually eat anything that stands too tall with too much hubris. Oss is simply here to make sure that the ecosystem is thriving, no matter who’se on top of the the rock pile today. Any one of us can fell the giant.

Implicit in this model is there is a monopoly that will own everything and license it in a very limited way to a customer. It will be domination of the latest method of entertainment distribution preferably owned by the media conglomerates.

In traditional brick-and-mortar markets for entertainment retailing, this battle was long-ago dominated by the entertainment companies who remain profitable because they control the *distribution and price* of entertainment. It is important to note, that the actual production of the entertainment content serves the distribution monopoly and not the other way around.

So, based on these two observations, I draw the following controversial conclusions.
1. Linux may temporarily prosper because it beats microsoft’s commoditization game. However, at some point in our lives developing in Linux may be made a crime. It has the ability to threaten the revenue stream of the content delivery monopoly owner. Today’s potential win for Linux turns to tommorows chilling legislation.

2. Thin client model eliminates all personal control over content. Thereby eliminating the ability to innovate because the individual will not be allowed to use tools to develop anything new for that platform. See TIVO/itunes for how it will likely deny/allow content and more importantly, allow a corporation to control and monetize something that is currently owned by the consumer.

3. More monopolies will be created and current ones maintained thereby further chilling the ability to create new wealth in certain markets. More importantly, it reinforces the precedent to extend monopolies into developing markets headed for maturity.

By extending the debian/dcc/whatever server to the desktop you set up a precedent to lock-out future OSS innovation by advocating a thin client monopoly. It takes innovation away from the edges of the network and centralizes it. With the centralization comes control. With control comes monetization and a monopoly market.

I’m not saying you personally are on course to rule the world, but the people who potentially license your software already own the monopoly of traditional media distribution and are quite happy ruling the world and chilling innovation.

If any of this is comprehensible, please consider the near-term implications of thin clients carefully.

After reading your second comment, I think we see the world pretty much the same way. The point of my comment was that my post had nothing to do with an improved desktop environment, and if anything said I see the focus of many Linux on the desktop advocates on an improved desktop environment to be misguided.

-ian

Just briefly here: you spoke of applications moving to the web, both explicitly in the sense of web apps, but also implicitly in the form of applications acting as agents on the web, the duality of thin & thick client systems, whatever forms they take. When you go to Indiana, you rely on a thick client to store your email and syncronize latter. Feed readers work the same way, building a buffer of news we can digest at our leisure. These disconnected systems– perhaps a more apt word than distributed– are potentiated from the open data that drives them, and here I swing the point to my own, that the ability to have your growing platform of clients is possible only with open data… or our nepharious trusted computing platforms and end to end vendor solutions.

I fear my strong opening marks have already tainted your opinion, and of this I am sorry. I simply feel, as you do, that open source is at a juncture where we can begin to form an ecology of applications, of thin thick and medium sized clients playfully working together. We speak of the same thing; a new collaboration.

Open source isnt going to tip the scales by more better apps, more better desktop. The game right now is who can disrupt the entrenched computing paradigm with something better. Bollocks, I just said paradigm. -Rektide

And then I drove away from the interstate. Now my phone claimed to be in “Digital Roam”. No more WAP access. Strictly voice from now on. And then finally, I’m back to “Analog Roam”.

Analog Roam. The Slowness. This is where I grew up: where every link beyond a local calling area was precious, whether it be Usenet, Citadel, or Fidonet. Life moves more slowly here.

I bet you can draw bandwidth gradients anywhere. But it was very vivid to me how much the street’s technology fell off as I drove towards my home. Plot your own maps of the US from this.

I’m pretty sure it was O’reilly who dubbed it thus: dataware. My only reservation is how vital it is that dataware be built on a bed open data, in order to build a true ecosystem of software.

Distributed has never been so much fun.
-Rektide