Comments on: Public Goods Group Shopping

By: Mike Linksvayer » So, how could programmers make a living?

Mike Linksvayer » So, how could programmers make a living? — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 17:49:37 +0000

[...] by large businesses employing many programmers following these models. Well, except for the last one, which has turned out to be insignificant so far, though perhaps there remains lots of [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » Patri Friedman’s basic views on copyright and patents

Wed, 26 Dec 2007 01:40:25 +0000

[...] This closing both gives comfort to producerists (but in the beginning of the essay Friedman says that people love to create — I agree, see paying to create — and Tom W. Bell has a separate argument that should result in less concern for producers that I’ve been meaning to blog about, but should be obvious from the title — Outgrowing Copyright: The Effect of Market Size on Copyright Policy) and is a stretch — copyright might make alternatives less pressing and interesting, but it certainly does not prevent experimentation. [...]

By: robmyers - links for 2007-10-10

robmyers - links for 2007-10-10 — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:20:41 +0000

[...] Public Goods Group Shopping Mike L on how refundable Street Performer Protocol encourages donation and makes finishing work more likely. (tags: economics street-performer-protocol) [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » SXSWi wrap

Mike Linksvayer » SXSWi wrap — Sat, 10 Mar 2007 19:56:19 +0000

[...] about FairShare, Fundable and related ideas several times in the past, mostly linked to in my Public Goods Group Shopping post and its comments. The field is ripe for a really good [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » Defeatist dreaming

Mike Linksvayer » Defeatist dreaming — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 01:48:07 +0000

[...] $100 million could fund a huge amount of new free content, free software, free infrastructure and supporting institutions, begetting more of the same. [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » Tribal assurance contracts

Mike Linksvayer » Tribal assurance contracts — Sun, 28 May 2006 21:22:35 +0000

[...] They could’ve made it even easier to sign up by offering a greater than 100% refund in case the project does not go ahead. [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » ChipIn

Mike Linksvayer » ChipIn — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 22:39:12 +0000

[...] Hopefully they’ll have great success and pursue interesting mechanisms for funding public goods. [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » Outsourcing charity … to Wikipedia

Mike Linksvayer » Outsourcing charity … to Wikipedia — Sat, 31 Dec 2005 00:51:52 +0000

[...] I’d also prefer to give via some innovative mechanism. We’ll see what the new year brings. [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » Blog Archive » Imagine a one-year usufruct

Mike Linksvayer » Blog Archive » Imagine a one-year usufruct — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 04:47:39 +0000

[...] The authors also do not describe a world completely without copyright, offering creators a one-year exclusive right to exploit new works commercially (a one-year usufruct as they say) where the work demands sizeable initial investments. An unfortunate proposal: to protectionists, a ridicuously constrained mononpoly, but one that undermines the authors’ vision. Better to use the paragraph to mention ideas for financing of artistic works that do not require monopoly privilege. Or to mention peer production, open source, or free software, which they do not. [...]

By: Mike Linksvayer » Blog Archive » Reverse bounties improved

Mike Linksvayer » Blog Archive » Reverse bounties improved — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:14:53 +0000

[...] An assurance contract returns contributions (or cancels pledges) in case the amount requested is not raised. A dominant assurance contract returns contributions plus a failure payoff or refund bouns, making it worthwhile for interested parties to contribute even if they believe the contribution threshold will not be met. Both concepts could easily be applied to reverse bounties. [...]