Re: Some interesting economic facts

[Matt Deatrick <mattd@shocking.com>]

	Once again some great points. And herein lies the whole idea of my
claim. The fact that you, I, and Brett are all discussing, sharing, and
increasing the flow of information. Private companies have an incentive to
restrict this flow. And in certain matters, as you say, information is not
useful commercially or simply over time becomes moot. But the reason I am
on this list, and I assume most of us, is that our information has not been
collected and processed by the commercial industry that dominates the
software industry. We are not being listened to, we are not in the
informational flow in any way that is affecting the commercial outcome and
here we are, complaining about it. 
	Knowing the political apathy present in this land of ours, and
knowing how few of us have access to this sort of informational exchange,
how many other voices are not being heard? Who is being left out of the
"great gathering of information?" How do we get them in so that our
information is complete? Because without that what have we accomplished? 
	The point is that M$, and others creating the onramps to this
informational exchange, should be required to give all access. I have
studied this issue in depth for the last six months from an economic
perspective and what I trying to say is this: economics bears out my
opinion(indeed it is what has shaped it). That, I think, is something
people should at least know about.
	Matt


On Tue, 21 Apr 1998, Katharine M.J. Osborne wrote:

> 
> ---Matt Deatrick <mattd@shocking.com> wrote:
> >
> > 	It is little known, and "they" are keeping it a secret.
> But there
> > is an interesting economic twist on this whole
> "informational economy"
> > idea. 
> > 	Economics is based in the idea of scarcity; economics
> is the
> > science of discovering how to allocate those scarce
> resources. The basic
> > assumption: I eat a can of soup, there is less soup for
> you. Information
> > escapes this dillema. When I provide you with access to
> information, you
> > probably provide me with information. Rather than
> degrade the amount of the
> > resource, it actually expands due to its
> "consumption"(sharing is a better
> > word). Even if you do not provide me with access to
> information, you have
> > gained knowledge which you may pass on, etc.... To
> infinity and beyond.
> > 	The point I am getting at is this: an information
> economy is a
> > contradiction of terms. Information should be, and by
> definition is, a
> > public good. The theory of public goods states that my
> consumption does not
> > affect your consumption, sounds like information!
> 
>  -snip-
> 
> This is a valid point, nut I think that it is a little too
> simplistic a view of the situation. Information is not
> just one nebulous resource, it is a menagerie of different
> entities each of which interacts in real society
> differently than one another. Each type of information
> affects real situations in different manners, and have
> different percieved values.
> 
> There are quantifiable, empirical facts, opinions,
> disinformation, misinformation, rumors, heresay, slanted
> journalism, video footage, oral history, myths, legends,
> radio broadcasts, politcal speeches, press releases, mail
> lists, chatrooms, commericals, wirefeed, stockquotes,
> corporate databases; the list goes on and on and on.
> 
> Often we make sweeping statements about a percieved ideal
> "information" that always holds the "one" truth, whether
> or not we may realize it, when none such exists. In fact
> the only "one truth" is that there are many, one for every
> person in the world and then some.
> 
> Information does not always expand (although overall it is
> doing so very rapidly). When you consider specific cases,
> information can be replaced with more accurate
> information, can be eliminated entirely, modified,
> compressed (in non-digital senses as well). In addition,
> the value of information may fluctuate depending on the
> situation and other information that surrounds it, which
> ultimately determines how it will change. The best analogy
> for understanding the dynamics of information is to
> compare it to some infinite living system.
> 
> The questions involving MS are as much of a
> moral/philosophical nature as they are based in our crude
> concepts of economics (or anti-economics).
> 
> -KaOs
> ===
> *************************************
> * Kathy Osborne-----ICQ UIN:3166100 *
> * kosborne@rocketmail.com------KaOs *
> * http://members.tripod.com/~KaOs42 *
> *************************************
> "Create like a god, command like a king, and work like a
> slave. You have a moral imperative to change the world." 
> --Guy Kawasaki
> Few men have the virtue to withstand the highest bidder.
> -- George Washington
> _________________________________________________________
> DO YOU YAHOO!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
>