weirdNano because I felt like it.

Dave McClure, I thoroughly disagree with you.

tl;dr - Some guy said some bullshit, then commented on an article about his statement. I saw that he responded, and thought it might be a prime opportunity to spout off. My reply: it's not a zero sum game, don't pretend like you're something bigger than you are... you're status and position of authority comes from wealth-power, not genius.

So, I saw this link @ google news and was terrifically bothered by the title:

Investor Dave McClure: ‘Open is for losers’

The article title refers to his response to a question roughly reiterated as: does openness in tech make sense? After reading the article, stewing and ranting at a friend of mine, I noticed that McClure had commented on the article. Seeing that there wasn't much response to his comment, I thought I might be able to make a connection to an opinion/decision maker... and hopefully make an impact.

Without further ado, here's my response copied from the link above, thought you guys might appreciate. Also, I'd be interested to know what people think of my position... does it hold water? am I missing something? am I on the right track? Or am I just a troll?

Response follows:

IMHO, cost is "borne by the climber alone" specifically because of the persistent closed tech meme perpetuated by those in positions of authority. Rather, it is the open nature of information that makes progress possible in the first place. Closed information is treated as 'property' in a way that minimizes the value of ingenuity. Imagine, for instance, that we awarded a patent the process of tying shoelaces, or wiping with toilet paper, or wearing hats, or agriculture, or brick making. Would that make sense? Not at all, instead we allow anybody to learn to tie their shoes so they can walk to work without their shoes falling off. Sure we do, and must, charge for the service of shoelace manufacture and delivery, but we don't prevent new companies from making stronger/lighter/skinnier/fatter shoelaces, improving on the original idea of a shoelace.

Consider the case of written language as an open technology: slave owners actively prevented their slaves from learning to read and write as a means of maintaining control of their 'property'. By maintaining ceaseless, often brutal, control of that property, slave owners were able to amass great wealth and privilege without lifting a finger to plant, tend, harvest, or deliver products to market... all they had to do was show up and put their face on the label. And of course, they had to perform horrible feats of what I would describe as meme-maintenance to maintain control and dominance of their property (e.g. 3/5ths type policies, lynching, institutional indoctrination, civil war, etc...).

Suppose people were forced to pay for the privilege read & write in our native tongue, would there be more or less 'winners'? I'd argue fewer. Case in point, let's search for examples of human achievement and general wellness in places that don't provide socialized education. Instead of being a resource-sink, an open technology seems to breed more, and more-complex, technologies. Open technology, in this case, is a beautiful, self-perpetuating sky-hook.

Open doesn't mean free of charge, it means freedom to examine, alter, improve and re-imagine. To fall back on my shoelace example, it would be outrageous to suggest that government policy should disallow the replication or redesign of shoelaces by all but the original inventor.

And to your 'bombastic' comment that "Open is for losers"... here's my equally bombastic response:

Closed is for those who think they could make it in this world alone. Closed is for the pompous, the self-important, and the arrogant. Closed is for those unwilling to admit that they are no longer 'working', but are fundamentally dependent on those 'losers' at the bottom. Closed breeds slaves and worse, slave owners.

From your bio (which I didn't read until after I wrote all of this, lucky guess I suppose): "Many years ago he used to do real work like coding or marketing or running conferences, but these days he mostly does useless stuff like sending lots of email, blogging, and hanging out on Facebook and Twitter."

http://500hats.typepad.com/500blogs/about-dave-mcclure.html

With respect to your human dignity,

@daveguy

p.s. Dave, if you want to reach out I would love the opportunity to respectfully cuss & discuss. I'm certain you would offer interesting insights.