Rudolph Clausius died in 1888 and his contributions to science included elements of the the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This natural law states (heavy paraphrase) that without constraints all things move towards disarray. If you consider this law in the context of modern day software and computers you might question how it applies. I contend that the Second Law of Thermodynamics can be applied to the adoption of software and technical practices in business.
When Clausius talked about disarray, he used the more technical and appropriate term entropy to describe the transformation of energy. An example is the movement of energy away from cold objects (like ice melting) in a warm room.
To make my point about the law in modern business, I will use disarray to mean distribution, the process of moving away from the source (developer) to the consumers (end user).
I will also use constraints to mean all forms of licenses, contracts, patents and other elements that are intended to either 1) control distribution or 2) ensure that developers can derive just compensation.
Without constraints, modern day software, tools and practices would naturally flow from developers to end users. It would be just like art, enriching our lives and contributing to the development of mankind. Developers would be helping others as they came up with new ways to make tasks easier to perform.
Business people label this scenario as naive because they sense there is lost opportunity. All of this “contributing to the common good” stuff has to mean profit. I can’t tell you how many meetings I have attended where the conclusion of the presentation was “… and we will all be millionaires!“. Because we are not living in the movie Wall Street, greed is not good. It is interesting that there are so many willing and able to generate profit for themselves when they did not do the work in the first place. There is nothing wrong with selling software, but the price should reflect the value and utility of the product not just the profit motive. Everyone is entitled to be compensated for their work.
I am not against licensing and patents, but I do look down on greed. Licensing and patents were originally (I believe) intended to control how a person’s property was used. For instance, I as the consumer am not allowed to use your tool to conduct genocide. Somehow, we have altered the meaning to assign worth. Product A is “better” than Product B because it has a patent attached to it.
I believe that the pace of technological adoption in Real Estate is artificially retarded by patents and licensing that are not aligned with the worth of their contribution. I am constantly presented with “get rich quick” schemes thinly veiled as “technology”. People ask my opinion of the product and I tell them the honest truth. Fine, call me a heretic. I am not anti-business, just anti-greed.
0 Responses to “Keeping things under control”