Skip to main content

The Value of Simplicity

Navigating information technology often means navigating through layers of competing platforms. For every choice in operating system, there are choices for word processors, browsers, chat applications, media players, etc. As a fan of GNU/Linux, I'm also a fan of choice, so I have no complaints about the options. As long as you know what you want or are willing to explore, you can find an operating system and software suite that at least mostly meets your needs. I find that most people are really not interested in doing so and as such just use whatever they first learn.

If all software were created equal, there would be no problem with taking applications as you find them. Unfortunately, there are merits and demerits to every choice, and, even worse, there is a cost to switching. A quirky application you know is better than a quirky application you don't know, especially when productivity is an issue. As such, it's often to a user's benefit to survey a few options. Of course, competition for users causes a bit of standardization, so trying out a new application (or even a new OS) is really not all that difficult. I had my students do just that with Ubuntu a few semesters ago, and I really enjoyed reading about what they learned when they tested the waters.

Having as much experience as I do, I've developed some pretty clear preferences on OS and application, and I keep an eye on new developments to test or revisit other options. Nevertheless, I've found that as I've learned more, I find I need less out of an application. Take word processing for an instance. I like LibreOffice, and I can use Word with about an equal level of proficiency, but nothing beats LaTeX for formatting control and (with BibTeX) citation management. While there is a somewhat steep learning curved to LaTeX (I recommend testing the waters with LyX, a more user-friendly presentation), one of the main benefits is that I can edit a document with nothing more fancy than a text editor. 

Converting documents from one format to another often creates artifacts or errors that have to been cleared up by hand. In general, it's best to stick with one application and one format, especially for a document in process. When without access to the preferred set of tools, compromises will have to be made, and sometimes compromises harm productivity. Furthermore, unless you've in the Apple-verse, mobile devices have made working cross platform even more important. As such, I really value the ability to open a file on any device and work with it.

In this process, I've gained a appreciation for simple text editors like Kate and gedit. When composing simple documents such as this post, I don't need tend to need italics or citations. Even less so when putting together reading notes or early drafts of longer articles. I do need a program that opens quickly (no splash screen), doesn't offer formatting assistance, and has inline spellcheck (negotiable). I get all of that with any text editor, including the one on my phone. No matter the platform, I can write, so I don't have to lose time just because I can't access my computer.


Popular posts from this blog

Justifications for Intellectual Property Part 1: Utilitarianism

There is no way this tutorial series would be complete without some discussion of justifications for intellectual property. While not necessarily a matter of law, some knowledge of the philosophical foundations will provide a better sense of the values at stake in intellectual property debates. Notice, for instance, that the tutorials on fair use were punctuated with appeals to values, social goods, and individual rights. Without an understanding of the moral and political framework against which the law stands, one can very easily find oneself in a stalemate, with one value pitted against another and no way of deciding which should prevail. To understand the jurisprudence around intellectual property rights, one has to have some idea of the justifying theories to which attorneys and judges appeal in their arguments and decisions. So, without further ado, let's get to the tutorial.
There are three main ways of justifying intellectual property rights: the Utilitarian theory, the Lab…

Justifications for Intellectual Property Part 2: Labor-Desert Theories

I know it's been a little while, but I want to finish this tutorial series rather than abandoning it and moving on to other topics. Of course, I would have liked to have finished it by now, but various research and teaching-related obstacles have kept me nose down in the Real rather than preparing content to be released into the internet. Nevertheless, I'm returning to routine, so I'm going to release this installment today, rather than wait for my usual MWF release schedule.
At any rate, let's pick up where we left off and talk about justifications for intellectual property rights. While the utilitarian justification discussed in the last post enjoys the status of having been enshrined in law, scholars and jurists have often brought in other property-justifying theories. Perhaps the most popular of these are Labor-Desert justifications, best exemplified by John Locke (the philosopher, not the character on Lost).
In his Second Treatise on Civil Government, Locke const…

Justifications for Intellectual Property Part 3: Self-Expression Justifications

The third dominant justifying theory for intellectual property rights is often called the Self-Expression justification. Most scholars attribute it to Hegel, but it ultimately has roots in Kant. While few philosophers even addressed intellectual property, Immanuel Kant discusses the sale of pirated books in Metaphysics of Morals. Kant argues that reprinting a book after first publication is a violation of the author's right to entrust his communication to a particular publisher. Viewing books as importantly communicative, not material, in nature, Kant claims that a publisher is essentially a spokesperson, someone designated by an author to communicate his ideas to others. Reprinters interrupt this process by taking it on themselves to communicate the author's idea, without his consent. Reprinting is then akin to removing the author's control over the communication of his ideas. While Kant's argument does not get you an entire system of intellectual property, he does dr…