Why has intellectual software development been the model?

To develop infrastructure that can interface the entire world you need vast capital. Most of the people who are trying to get an idea off the ground are so interested in pursuing a specific idea that they hadn't had time to consider the foundational soundness of the existing investment models for software development.

Angel investing and crowd sourcing have been possible, but by and large the most impactful new companies of the last twenty years have been subjected to the ownership of a corporate entity and subsequently, fiduciary duty to its shareholders.

By the natural standards that a reasonable person would apply to the world, a piece of software has a finite value to humanity - but if you apply the need for infinitely expanding profits, and then apply the minds of the best and brightest thinkers in the country, you create an institutional poison to be inevitably and nearly imperceptibly administered to all users.

From my experience it's the birdsong of everyone that hears a great idea "you'd better patent it", "you'd better beat other people to it". Covetousness. Avarice. These are the motivations that can make someone sign a pact with the devil.

I believe the answer to this systemic failure to create software that is subservient to the human condition is to enumerate and codify the rights of users in relationship to technology, and allow developers to voluntarily adhere to this new technological bill of rights. There could also be a central authority - a tech version of the SPLC per se - that acts as the authority of which pieces of software were in compliance with these basic rights.  

An organic rating for software.

The upshot of Intelligent software not requiring human momentum is that the software should all be immediately supportive and affirmative of human life, thereby not requiring the typical critical mass that VC-backed technology requires. It all has the ability to grow at its own rate and the right to reach its natural peak of usefulness to users, meaning that it can start humbly.

I believe it will rely heavily on crowdfunding, crowd promoting, angel investment, and subscription support similar to podcasts, NPR etc...

No comments: