Open Source

Open Source

In my opinion, knowledge should not be hidden. Knowledge should not be difficult to access.  The ability to share knowledge drives progress. This is especially true in the case of medicine.

For example, there is a disease called NMO. There are many research centers around the world who are independently working on finding a cure for NMO. These research centers do not like to share their knowledge with each other because they want to file for patents and other issues.  One individual, Victoria Jackson, had a daughter who developed NMO and was told she would die very soon. Jackson realized that there were many institutions trying to find a cure, however they never cooperated, hence there was no progress. She founded her own charity http://www.guthyjacksonfoundation.org/, invested millions of dollars of her own, and forced the different organizations that were to benefit from her money to cooperate to find a cure for NMO.  Great progress was made in the treatment of NMO because scientists now didn't all focus on one area, rather they picked up on where others had left off.

I believe using the Open Source licence is a great way to develop things. It definitely spreads the message of sharing knowledge. It is morally acceptable because it accounts for social benefit.

Another example of such progress from sharing is the success of the Linux kernel. It is one of the most stable operating systems available. It is thoroughly tested and sometimes goes beyond user expectations. The fast pace at which it is developed is solely due to great minds working together.

When it comes to knowledge, and the ability to access knowledge, I am disappointed at the fact that university textbooks cost hundreds of dollars. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with profiting from something, for example certain open source licences. However, the profit should be reasonable. It should not inhibit the ability to access knowledge. There is absolutely no need for textbooks to cost hundreds of dollars.