--- /dev/null
+# I Copyleft this Crowdsourcing
+
+Fascinating news this week about success in using
+[FoldIt](http://fold.it/portal/info/faq) to successfully
+crowdsource the
+[folding](http://news.yahoo.com/online-gamers-crack-aids-enzyme-puzzle-175427367.html)
+ of an "AIDS-like virus enzyme".
+
+This is a milestone in imagining a blend of human and
+machine skills for, perhaps, one of the biggest health
+related challenges we have. The technology is awesome.
+The human creativity is awesome. The goal is awesome.
+
+What's striking about this story is how little is told
+about the fruits of this effort. My guess -- and I'm
+perfectly happy to be corrected -- is that the large
+beneficiaries of this work will be pharmaceutical companies
+that will patent the molecules they discover can
+bind to such proteins. These molecules will be the
+basis for very important cures. And the pharma with the
+patent will have a monopoly on that molecule for 20 years.
+
+So is there even attribution for the AIDS patient who
+donated her time to FoldIt? Could she benefit from the
+medication she helped bring to market (at a reduced price)?
+
+For many years those of us in the FLOSS community have
+been raising the concern that software patents do not, in fact,
+"promote the progress in science and the useful arts".
+There is growing awareness that that software doesn't pass the
+ยง 101 "machine or transformation test" and mathematics --
+a representation of software -- is not patent-able.
+
+The other large customers of the current patent system
+are big pharma. Do pharma patents promote progress?
+Would the drugs come to market anyway? An *economic* analysis
+of this market would be enlightening.
+
+If the court of public opinion pushes Facebook
+to disclose privacy policy (and implement modest controls)
+doesn't FoldIt owe it to the community to at least disclose
+the "terms of service"?
+
+
projects / wiki.git / blobdiff