Joe <>
Sent: 6/25/2007 9:17:31 PM

Re: [GPSstash] Re: Geooglecaching

Actually, I think a site that an open source for websites would be
wikipedia... sure, it takes things to run, but look, its all controlled
by the community and some volunteers....

Seth! Leary wrote:
> All:
> I find the comparisons that are getting tossed about quite interesting.
> Running a web site like is not at all analogous to creating
> software. Software (Firefox, IE, Linux, Windows) is a single product that
> gets replicated thousands of times. Nobody comes back to the well
> until you
> build a new version. A large website is an organic product that gets used
> directly (not replicated) by thousands of users daily. That places a much
> larger burden on the web site's host/owner if the site is getting used as
> much as is used.
> Thus, the open-source argument holds little water. If Groundspeak were to
> give away the database, what would happen? The only thing possible;
> another
> commercial entity would spring up. If I spend 1,000 hours writing a
> piece of
> software and I choose to give it away, it doesn't matter whether I
> give away
> one copy or a million; it still cost me 1,000 hours to make and I am
> out no
> more and no less. But if I (or Groundspeak) create a web site, it makes a
> huge difference whether one person hits it per month or a million. Look at
> wikipedia. It does not have advertising but it would sink if it were not
> funded by vast numbers of donation dollars. The money has to come from
> somewhere.
> The Bell break-up has already been mentioned. I think it's worth pointing
> out that this is much more comparable than software. Those of us old
> enough
> to remember the good old days of Ma Bell will recall that the break-up
> was a
> debacle and is still a nightmare. No matter how you slice it, there can
> really only be one REAL phone company in any given region and everyone
> else
> has to rent that company's wires. It's all smoke and mirrors. But
> perhaps I
> digress.
> You can't convince me that Groundspeak could have made an 'admirable'
> choice
> (by either keeping the site ad-free and membership-free or giving away the
> database) and it would still be alive and well and as robust as it is now
> unless you can show me a truly comparable example. Firefox is not the
> example and I don't think that there is one out there.
> I'm also curious about this remark from Scout: "[Jeremy] had lawyers to
> threaten lawsuits against others with a different vision for the hobby."
> Is this a reference to an actual event or just speculation? I don't recall
> this happening.
> Seth!
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]