Skip to content

How good of social graphic design network?

June 28, 2010

This post is contributed by Susie – Ph.D candidate in economics

The Stocky project proposes several unique features, which can potentially pave the road for future graphic design. These features encourage integration, interaction, free, and collaboration of graphic design.

Several thoughts offered in below:

1. Interactive design and its influence. An outstanding design should reflect the idiosyncrasy of its designer. Over reliant on the interaction of designers could potentially mingle the uniqueness of graphic design.

2. Motivation. The design social network can provide an environment for designers. The question is whether designers are motivated by the interests of design or the possible income from the design social network.

3. Who will pay the bill? Currently, most of social network rely on advertisement to pay the network operation bill. It is a new business model.  For the traditional business, for example Microsoft, the end users are the typical ones to pay bill.

Social network however takes a different approach. Rather end users to pay the bill, advertisement companies pay it. It is because the social network users can buy the products sold by the advertisement companies. The question is how sustainable of such business model? Yet, this could be an interesting research topic for economists.

4. Interest confliction.  Once a collaborative graphic design is eventually somehow sold on the market, assumingly, by one of designers. How the income can be divided. One viable way is to divide the reward based on the efforts paid into the design or other written agreement. But, this could be potentially against the idea of open source.

5 Comments leave one →
  1. susie permalink
    June 28, 2010 1:00 pm

    My contribution is to ask some questions. You answer some of the questions. Stocky may open a door to explore a new business model for open source. I think currenlty open source dilemma is that resources are supposed to be offerred for free. However, without a market price, the resources can not be explicitly valued. That is, the human labors or efforts that produce the resources can not be clearly rewarded. Work without returns is against the self-interest human nature.

    • June 28, 2010 1:17 pm

      Thanks for your contribution and thoughts. Exploration of return and reward of our work is an interesting and challenging topic.

      Most open sourceners rely on company institutes support, using the spare time to make contributions. However, this could compromise the effectiveness of open source projects.

      For now, the spiritual reward is still larger than the money reward.

      In a word, the traditional meaning of work reward is still a big challenge for all open source projects.

      But, we may need to think beyond of the traditional meaning of work reward. Do we?

      • susie permalink
        June 28, 2010 1:28 pm

        Without big changes of the current social institution (especially the wealth distribution system), even though we could think beyong the traditional meaning of work reward, we have to live on the traditional meaning of work reward. Do we?

        • June 28, 2010 5:09 pm

          That’s true. We need to choose the way we like to live. Many people just look after the reward, but some others do not. it is all acceptable.

  2. August 12, 2010 2:26 pm

    Thanks for posting 😀

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: