"hacking the social system"

[James Richard Tyrer]

Jesse Haubrich wrote:
> <snip>
> 
>> I believe that B. F. Skinner would strongly disagree with you.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Skinner studied mice, not developers.

Is there a difference? :-)

> I wonder how his results would have varied had he been only able to
> acquire cats. ;-) Additionally, any developer who is motivated by
> praise can contact me directly. I'm willing to trade some heavy back
> patting for CPA work and household chores. :-P

I believe that his point is that operant conditioning works on all 
species.  And, yes I have found that his methods work on cats.  So, 
developers are also motivated by positive reinforcement.

> I don't know, maybe I'm socially maladjusted. Growing up, my sisters 
> always got praised for doing the *expected* thing. The most I ever
> got was a red bottom; which is a small price to pay for fun. ;)
>
> ESR has an article, "The Hacker Primer" where he relates developers 
> with the anthropological idea of a "gift culture."  A gift culture,
> as he describes it, is society where status is gained based on how
> much a person gives.  This is a strong argument for the reason that
> status is something that people strive for and are motivated by (esp.
> here in the states).

The question is whether the current contingencies of reinforcement for 
developers are external or internal -- are developers conditioned by the 
positive reinforcement of others or is it self reinforcement.

> I dug up this article that I stumbled on a few weeks ago. Its a brief
>  comparison of the motivation of traditional volunteer work versus
> Open Source.
> 
> http://merrillassociates.net/topic/2004/04 

The blog uses the terms Altruism & Egoism but these are the same 
concepts (external & internal reinforcement).  I believe that it is 
correct that Egoism ("self-satisfaction") is the primary means of 
positive reinforcement in OSS.  But, we should not assume that the 
contingencies of reinforcement for self-reinforcement are the same for 
all developers, or that the current contingencies are the optimum.  One 
of the points that I try to make is that for me -- coming from the 
engineering culture -- that these contingencies are different than they 
appear to be in the Hacker culture.

<<
The Open Source community is a great example of a facilitated 
environment. There is a free-flow exchange of ideas and products within 
the community. There is the challenge of creating a better 
product/service. There are opportunities for both individual and team 
creativity and innovation. There is the opportunity to share in common 
vision with like-minded people. There is an environment in which 
volunteers can work as equal partners with some of the best and 
brightest in the field. There are opportunities for dialogue and 
community. Though much of the activity takes place as part of a vast 
online community, many local communities have monthly face-to-face 
meetings, creating technical support groups and open source communities 
that foster the exchange of knowledge and opportunities to build skills 
and connections.
 >>

How well does the KDE community conform to this description?  Or, do I 
see it differently because I am on the outside looking in?  But, if it 
_is_ Open, should anybody be stuck on the outside?

IAC, I feel that the self-reinforcement contingencies in the Engineering 
culture are probably more optimum than the current ones in parts of the 
KDE culture.  It is possible that this can be ameliorated by some 
external reinforcement.

-- 
JRT