AN EDITORIAL: The prevailing of openness
For some, learning something new can be exciting for its own sake. For others, their only thought is "How much money will I make from it?" This dichotomy has recently surfaced in two rather different areas related to science and technology, and the similar way in which things appear to be evolving suggests some interesting lessons in not only science and technology but also in economics and human behavior.
The U.S. Government antitrust suit against Microsoft Corporation has been well publicized this past year. A perhaps lesser-known development which might threaten Microsoft in the long run far more than any antitrust suit is the development of Open Source Software (OSS). It is based on the Linux operating system developed originally by Linus Torvalds of Finland and made user-friendly by the GENOME program of Miguel deIcaza of Mexico. Because OSS is posted on the Web for all the use, it is also available for all to improve. Thus the best minds outside of Microsoft have been brought to bear on developing it -- and everyone can benefit from it, free. (See Charles C. Mann, "Programs to the People," Tech. Rev., 101(1), 36-42 (Jan/Feb 99).)
Another area of science and technology that currently promises lucrative returns is biotechnology -- to the point that, according to the 8 December 1998 issue of The New York Times, a private company, Human Genome Sciences, had sped ahead of the Human Genome Project to identify more than three quarters of all human genes. Then, in the 15 April 1999 issue of The New York Times came the announcement of a commitment by a consortium of ten pharmaceutical companies to carry out their own identification of the human genome. But, unlike Human Genome Sciences, the consortium would publicize its results for all to benefit from and contribute to -- in the same spirit that guides Open Source Software.
Science thrives on openness. It has flourished through the years because scientists have been willing to publish their results for review and eventual approval or rejection, by their peers. I was greatly disturbed to read that Human Genome Sciences' effort would remove the human genome from the "public domain" of science. But just as a viable competitor can undo a monopoly, so has Open Source Software taken on Microsoft, and so has the pharmaceutical consortium taken on attempts to hold the human genome in proprietorship.
- John L. Roeder
Home Spring 99 Full Screen
The TEACHERS CLEARINGHOUSE FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY EDUCATION