Misusing open source in a good cause

He writes about green technology, science built on biology, overtaking gray technology, science built on chemistry and physics. He writes about creating new forms of life to solve intractable problems, about children learning how to do this through games.

But he also misuses the term open source. Twice. First, he writes:

We are moving rapidly into the post-Darwinian era, when species other than our own will no longer exist, and the rules of Open Source sharing will be extended from the exchange of software to the exchange of genes.

Then later, he adds:

In the era of Open Source biology, the magic of genes will be available to anyone with the skill and imagination to use it.

What he is really talking about is the proliferation of knowledge on manipulating genes, and of creating new forms of life. He anticipates a new generation which is as familiar with the rules of biology as this generation is with MySpace and Wiis.

But mass familiarity is not open source. The idea of mass hacking of life forms, as akin to the exchange of code within open source projects, is a non-starter.

Open source refers to a specific set of conditions and business models, in which those with knowledge and ambition may engage in the search for profit. It's not the mass market in technology, where I would argue people are actually getting dumber, accepting the rules as laid down by their products' creators.

Yes, more people in the future will know biology, and understand the manipulation of genetic codes. Yes, new laws and business models will be needed to channel that knowledge in productive directions. Yes, it's all wonderful.

But it's not open source. It's science.