Re: and visual library once again

["Bob Spooner" <rls19@psu.edu>]

"Steve Whalen" <SteveWhalen001@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129888684.681335.230450@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> tmoran@acm.org wrote:
> > >I'm actually a big supporter of the GPL and look forward to the day (5
> > >to 100 years from now) when all (non-classified) computer programs will
> > >be GPL'd or it's future equivalent.  However, in the present, there are
> >   The economists point out that to the extent programs are "public
goods"
> > the market will undersupply them, leaving it to government or other
> > organizations not guided by the market to pay programmers.  So 5 to 100
> > years from now programmers will be employees of government or other
large
> > institutions/organizations?
>
> Between 5 and 50 years from now hopefully we'll have a gradual
> transition to more "shared" code as businesses realize it's to their
> advantage to spend less on code that does NOT differentiate their
> business (i.e. all the utility stuff like compilers and word processors
> and accounting systems and inventory systems, etc.). The only people
> business will pay to program will be working on the relatively short
> list of things that actually give one company competitive advantage
> over another. Some of this "shared code" will be written by paid
> programmers for various forms of consortium that companies pay to
> develop and enhance the commodity infrastructure software because they
> can't gain competitive advantage from spending their own money on it.
>

And just what differentiates the business of a software company such as
Microsoft?

> Between 50 and 100 years from now there will be a massive deflationary
> cycle as powerful computers combined with cheap electricity and
> increasingly capable robots eliminate the cost of "labor" from the
> economy.  Since the price performance of robots will begin to follow
> that of the computers that drive them, all the basics (food, clothing,
> shelter) will have their costs driven down toward zero.  At some point
> the government will tax the robots and pay everyone $500 a month which
> will be more than enough to live on.  You will be able to choose to
> program, or to watch TV, or to garden, or to serve others, or do
> nothing, just like in Star Trek <g>. Then programming will mostly be
> done by people who do it because they love it, because nobody has to
> work just to survive.

This sounds a lot like the predictions of about 40 years ago that with
automation, etc. the biggest problem we would have now would be what to do
with all the extra spare time. And yet the average person is working more
hours now.

>
> This projection of course comes with a money back guarantee <g>.
>
> Steve
>
> P.S. Also, the economics of software are very different from other
> economics, because the cost of production is zero (i.e. once a program
> is written it can be shared and/or run by an unlimited number of people
> or companies for no additional cost).
>
The cost of _distribution_ is very low. The cost of production, that is
development, of software, especially _good_ software, is high. Very few
companies are willing to make the kind of investment it takes to produce
good software. That's one of the reasons Ada isn't more widely used.
> --
>
> "In an efficient market, price equals marginal cost. Marginal cost of
> software: zero."
>
Only if the development cost can be amortized over an infinite number of
sales or licences or support contracts. Otherwise price does not equal
marginal cost and the development cost is highly relevant.

Bob