I’m fascinated by science and watch shows like NOVA as often as I can. Coming across this was a joy, but it also represents one aspect of my personal philosophy on perception.
I am a perpetual non-committal fence rider so you can’t infer anything about me by this. Nonetheless, coincidentally I was watching Charlie Wilson’s War and then came across this. I am not a fan of politics. I am a fan of perspective. And I find coincidence interesting.
The idea of mass collaboration and transparency is eloquently articulated in Macrowikinomics by way of the “frozen oil” anecdote. The Oil Spill Recovery Institute (OSRI), “tasked by Congress with the responsibility of cleaning up the Exxon Valdez oil spill off the coast of Alaska,” had been trying to figure out how to remove frozen oil from the seafloor. They launched a challenge via InnoCentive and John Davis, a construction engineer, offered a solution. The OSRI received a solution and John Davis received a $20,000 award for this contribution.
The difference between this and anything like it of years past is the spirit, intent and the platform. The extent of the challenge’s exposure is greater than it ever could have been in the past. The open collaboration was wider than ever before.
I personally consider the possibility of a pendulum effect between contribution and compensation in the near future and perhaps beyond. The spirit of collaboration and contribution in this case cannot be driven solely by compensation. Of thousands of contributors, only one award for this challenge was given. There is nothing wrong with putting out a challenge and taking ideas from willing participants, but this may not be enough to radically change the world. Macrowikinomics does not at all suggest that monitory incentives are enough, but I consider the market capable of tiring from the alternative rewards such as reputation and a feeling of contribution. There will always be solution contributing participants at InnoCentive, but there is a boundary. And is that boundary widening enough to solve all the worlds ailments?
And is the spirit prepared to withstand the few who will exploit others and those who will game the system and sour the pot for all?
One specific (though hardly complete) way of explaining the Wikinomic paradigm is to describe the process of value added production. This is the idea that aggregation (“mashups”) and open information don’t necessarily lead to socialism but rather to an ever increasing value in products or services from those competing in the free market from a better starting point. Because multiple parties are involved and competing for your attention from advancements over a common foundation, the world benefits in greater ways over a shorter period of time because at every level, the foundation is reset and we advance again from a common start. This in effect greatly reduces “reinventing the wheel”, an occurrence that is so very common. It is argued that in order for efficiency to increase enough to compensate for our growing demands, we’ll need to accept this concept at ever increasing levels.
I can’t help but be reminded of VAT (taxes) of other countries. For better or worse, this is along the same line and does work to explain the concept.
Linux is touted as a common example. Linux, created by Linus Torvalds, is the foundation of so much more than we may ever realize. From our computers, phones and iPods, to our cars, refrigerators and toasters. Everyone in the marketplace has free access to Linux as a foundation and platform. This raises all ships to a new level and now innovation starts from this place - we don’t create a whole new operating system every time we set out to build the next car stereo.
Linus Torvald also says that open source (Linux) is not socialism it’s free market enterprise. Linux is merely a powerful tool in this regard, nothing more.
