Cowboy Caleb the liberal arts, grown-up stuff & random mischief

Don’t Read This Unless You’re A Geek

What happens when a bio-cracker unleashes a plant virus on all the wheat in North America, and the genetic code to “Wheat 2.0″ is closed-source, patented code owned by a corporation? Should life be Open Source?

I was reading this very interesting post discussing if the very blueprints of life should be open-sourced as opposed to being held in the hands/claws of a corporation.

I am against open-source anything that involves a nett value exceeding 10 billion Happy Meals. The reason I use Happy Meals is because they can be found in nearly every country in the world. The value of a Happy Meal in a country can be used to determine the country’s nett relative Big Mac Index value.

Q: Why is open-source bad when it exceeds 10 billion Happy Meals?

Because people as a rule move like a mindless swarm. When something really important needs to be accomplished, such as writing the software to control a nuclear power plant or providing stable jobs for 5% of a country’s population then open-source becomes an threat to the system.

Somebody needs to be in control. You cannot rule by committee.

I would be very very worried if the genetic code for trangenic wheat were to fall into the wrong hands. A rogue scientist could inject malicious behavior into a few grain that might infect the rest of the crop.

Unlike open-source systems like Linux, bio-engineering does not have a central guardian ensuring that the pool does not get contaminated.

Saying that non open-sourced systems stifle innovation is wrong. I would rather have small incremental advances that are safe then huge innovative leaps that may prove to be our undoing.

You are assuming that the “somebody” in control is a good hand.

I am a corporate whore.

If we cannot trust the hand that rocks the cradle, then we are lost.

There have been many instances where the hand that rocks the cradle has proven to be untrustworthy and/or capable of being manipulated. Think Enron. Or Saddam.

While I agree that open-source (or what I think open source means, i.e. accessible by anyone and everyone) is dangerous and invites sabotage, I believe a single person or corporation in control is even more dangerous. Who regulates this single controller? He might be the rogue scientist. If people really do move as a mindless swarm, then they will mindlessly eat mutated wheat because the controller says it is OK.

Although open source allows a rogue scientist to implant mutations, it also allows for these mutations to be identified by others, ultimately. A built-in checking system.

Anyway, I find it hard to argue about this because I cannot and do not want to generalise my comments across all areas of genetic code/modification etc. As it is, I am starting to argue with myself.

fwah, your post so long.

free adult