Linked by Dmitrij D. Czarkoff on Fri 31st Aug 2007 08:54 UTC
Editorial This article is an answer to "Competition Is Not Good" by Kroc and reading it wouldn't be comfortable without switching to and from the original article. I wrote it just because I do strongly disagree with Kroc and I believe I can prove that he is not as close to truth as it may seem from the first glance.
Thread beginning with comment 267271
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE
by Kroc on Fri 31st Aug 2007 09:14 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

You're competing with my article? ;)
Brilliant, I like it. Actually, I knew this was going to happen, and that's a good thing - because the article was there to promote discussion, and that's what's happening here, discussion; not competition.

Reply Score: 2

RE
by Spellcheck on Fri 31st Aug 2007 10:02 in reply to "RE"
Spellcheck Member since:
2007-01-20

Your comment is delusion, not discussion.

Dmitrij's article exemplifies competition of ideas through discourse. May the best ideas win.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE
by Luminair on Fri 31st Aug 2007 10:33 in reply to "RE"
Luminair Member since:
2007-03-30

Delusional is the nice way to describe Kroc's article :O

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE
by kaiwai on Fri 31st Aug 2007 10:12 in reply to "RE"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

You're competing with my article? ;)
Brilliant, I like it. Actually, I knew this was going to happen, and that's a good thing - because the article was there to promote discussion, and that's what's happening here, discussion; not competition.


I think in alot of cases the only real way to motivate people is through competition. There are those who are motivated just through shear desire to move forward. Put me in that camp, at work, any desire to work is a direct result of wanting to push something forward because of the pride of wanting see something improve rather than anything to do with 'competiting' or 'beating' a rival.

Unfortunately for most people, unless there is something constantly jumping on their back in the form of economic realities - they simply become lazy - or as the old Polish saying goes regarding communism, "people pretended to work, and the state pretended to pay".

Humans over all are lazy creatures, do the bare minimum required - very few have a work ethic that would compell them to work a 70 hour week unless they're forced or financially rewarded as a result. Same goes for innovation, unless there is that reward there for someone to innovate, the compelling aspect to work the long hours and take the risk won't exist - and thus, things stagnate.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE
by SReilly on Fri 31st Aug 2007 10:51 in reply to "RE"
SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

Same goes for innovation, unless there is that reward there for someone to innovate, the compelling aspect to work the long hours and take the risk won't exist - and thus, things stagnate.

I was having a very similar conversation with the drummer in my band last night. He is currently studying mechanical engineering and as it's the summer holidays, he is working with a metallurgical engineering firm.

The firm he is working for has a world wide patent on a process for nitrogen treating alloys. The fact that the owner of the company invented this process gives him every right to patent it, thereby getting a substantial return on his efforts.

Sure, the process belongs to everyone, that's always going to be the case, but, armed with the patent, the company gets sole licensing rights for the next 50 years (or however long these things last).

If the patenting system did not exist, the inventor would have much less of a reason to develop this process in the first place as anybody could just appropriate his technological invention without paying him a penny.

Now, if we take the example of software patents, it's a completely different matter. Software, IMO, is basically a creative means of expressing mathematics. It's akin to a musician writing a song. I have never heard of a musician patenting his way of playing the guitar, keyboard of percussion, that would be absurd! Yet this is what software patenting is attempting to do.

Many of use have seen the darker side of what software patents do to stifle competition and creativity in the IT industry. If you develop a great new application that happens to do/display/output in some manner that has been patented by MS, Apple or HP, you would leave yourself wide open to litigation, at least in the US. The whole situation is akin to a protection racket as it seems that the only way to protect yourself from this daft patent system is to buy in to it and aquire your own patents.

In our current political and economic climate, the competition engendered by our patent system is, IMO, a darn good thing, yet we see it being abused in the form of software patent. Sure, competition is good but as quite a few other have put it, only on a level playing field.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE
by SlackerJack on Fri 31st Aug 2007 10:19 in reply to "RE"
SlackerJack Member since:
2005-11-12

Competition is bad you say, it's a competing discussion in itself and if by your view it's bad then we wouldn't be having it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE
by Angel on Fri 31st Aug 2007 14:04 in reply to "RE"
Angel Member since:
2005-07-07

You're article was not even worthy of this counter article. People just had to read the comments on your article.

Reply Parent Score: 0