open Goog?

Here are some extracts from the googleblog post, The meaning of open , which champion the openness of the internet:

Open systems allow innovation at all levels — from the operating system to the application layer — not just at the top. This means that one company doesn't have to depend on another's benevolence to ship a product. If the GNU C compiler that I'm using has a bug, I can fix it since the compiler is open source. I don't have to file a bug report and hope for a timely response.

So if you are trying to grow an entire industry as broadly as possible, open systems trump closed. And that is exactly what we are trying to do with the Internet. Our commitment to open systems is not altruistic. Rather it's good business, since an open Internet creates a steady stream of innovations that attracts users and usage and grows the entire industry.
..
An open Internet transforms lives globally. It has the potential to deliver the world's information to the palm of every person and to give everyone the power of freedom of expression... There are forces aligned against the open Internet — governments who control access, companies who fight in their own self-interests to preserve the status quo. They are powerful, and if they succeed we will find ourselves inhabiting an Internet of fragmentation, stagnation, higher prices, and less competition.

Our skills and our culture give us the opportunity and responsibility to prevent this from happening. We believe in the power of technology to deliver information. We believe in the power of information to do good. We believe that open is the only way for this to have the broadest impact for the most people. We are technology optimists who trust that the chaos of open benefits everyone. We will fight to promote it every chance we get.

Open will win. It will win on the Internet and will then cascade across many walks of life: The future of government is transparency. The future of commerce is information symmetry. The future of culture is freedom. The future of science and medicine is collaboration. The future of entertainment is participation. Each of these futures depends on an open Internet.

I cannot argue with most of this vision. However, the post also claims that the Goog will gain competitive advantage from embracing open. Yet surely the ultimate result of open collaboration and participation will be to eliminate the purpose of commercial competition. Control and competition become impossible and unnecessary in a truly open and collaborative world.

And of course The Goog has no intention of opening up its search or advertising algorithms, the two things it actually makes money from. They are happy to push others into being open and collaborative, while keeping their own commercial engine sealed in a black box. They want to grow the internet, not out of a spirit of benevolence, but so that their ad revenues increase. The Goog wants to continue having its massive cake and eating it.

The Goog will champion openness when they see something in it for them, and will stay closed when it suits them to. This selfish attitude is not in the true spirit of open source or open standards. It is inherently a paradox for a commercial organization to embrace openness.

Accordingly we should not place too much emphasis on the Goog's vision for a more open and collaborative and participative world. The Goog is reacting to the new paradigm of the internet, a force way beyond its (or anyone's) control. It is not creating that paradigm. It will keep making mistakes and misunderstanding what it is dealing with, due to its old paradigm commercial and competitive focus.

For an example, consider the recent reports that the Chrome OS will be aimed solely at devices that have no local storage.. the Goog wants to control and centralize our data, but the coming economic meltdown will ensure that internet connectivity will not be constant for many of us - we will need a distributed system which allows us to continue using our computers when we are offline. The Goog has the ability to provide this for us, but does it have the will? We shall see - the Goog might be hiding its true intentions. But it is in the nature of a commercial enterprise to seek to control. And true benevolence is anathema to such a creature. The above quotes even claim that "our commitment to open systems is not altruistic". Therefore it is not a true commitment.

The internet will not bend to the Goog's will, but will force it to change its ways, or perish in the longer run. But meanwhile the Goog will likely surf the internet wave (sic) better than other more reactionary goliaths, such as Apple, or (far far worse) Microsoft. At least, unlike its fellow goliaths, the Goog has ~some idea of where we are heading. It may play a useful role in slaying some of its fellow beasts, before it falls itself.

But the true benefits of openness will continue to be delivered by the radical hacker individuals and loose knit teams who created open source and open standards, and who continue to fuel the internet revolution. They are incognito and they are in tune with the times, and their legacy will last long after the commercial goliaths have turned to dust.


ps: great article on the likely rise and fall of the Google empire HERE