Throughout the semester we have viewed a vast array of ideologies that pose different approaches to what can bring success to software creation and distribution. Success, as is the case whenever it comes to selecting our theories or philosophies, is a subjective matter. Do we want to generate the most economic activity? Push the boundaries of what the technology can physically achieve? Is the endgame of computer science a utopia of instant communication or gratification? Are there high-order needs such as love or arts in this picture? What does it tell us about our very own constitution, the order of the universe?
The fact of the matter is, the expanse is unquantifiable. Everyone can say everything about what technology can do, and computer science is, in many ways, the direction the leash this technological beast is pulled toward. It requires the proper monetary incentives and the engineering infrastructure, but in the right space it can truly work unspeakable wonders. In the end, however, its end point will be defined by the winners.
Winners with financial assets and political power will remain, for certain. But these types of winners chase not an end, but the pride and influence which comes from being right. They do not care what the ending is, but only that they are at the top when the dust settles. They are not attached to any one ideology other than that of their self-interest. This happens not particularly due to malice but to basic human survival. They are neither blameless nor significantly blameworthy. However, for any goal to be reached by the technological machine, it will need their assets to let it chug along. The machine will move to where they want it to, but they have no compass at hand. They will simply choose something that works.
That’s where something like Linux shines. Linux is a winner not primarily because of its identity, but because of its functionality. Linux works. But, at the same time, Linux works because of the ideas that made Linux be what it is today. It could have never come to be, were it never for the visionaries and zealots. So, in some meaningful way, Linux is a winner because of its ideology. This is as remarkable as it is uncommon.
In every reading I have written about something that I do not know about. That is, in part, because I do not know many things about anything. No one does, really. But the collective intellect of humanity, alongside their creations and the fruits of all their efforts? Maybe there is some good knowledge there. If all of our might as a species was so focused, such cooperation would result in dismantling insurmountable challenges.
Nevertheless, true pragmatic progress is achieved through contradictory means. It would be nice if we were all perfect rational agents with complete information that joined to take the path which leads to the evident best outcome for humanity. But reality is never as nice as theory. Our perspectival variation, coupled with our daily needs, fogs our vision. We can only see what is directly in front of us. We do not know, we cannot know, if we are taking the winner’s path, we are just doing what we can with what we have.
But visionaries like Linus, even if he doesn’t realize it himself, are the only ones that can hope to move the machine in the right direction. The powerless person won’t know where to steer and the powerful person won’t care to do so. Visionaries can loosen the right knobs, speak the right words, and then maybe computer science can make the leash tout at the right moment. The machine will chug along, but if it can make even a minuscule turn, it will end in an entirely different outcome. It can be an outcome of many winners, or of very few. Collectively, visionaries will ultimately decide how many there will be. This is very important, for I do not know anything, but I do know that in the end, the winner takes it all.