No, innovation across the scientific board.
Disagree - scientific innovation is based on research that other people have done and published. Like I said, both software and hardware of computers which I'd have thought have led to most of recent scientific innovation have been fundamentally based on standards and co-operative. Yes the companies are competing but they needn't have been, and competition hinders scientific innovation rather than helps it.
After the research and review stages are done, after benefits are derived.
I'm not involved in research but I doubt that, too. Research is normally now done in teams that co-operate on the research rather than each trying to compete against the rest of the team. The researchers I've seen are happy to talk about their research with the scientific community and share ideas. It's only in companies who are secretive or where someone has an idea they want the glory for that they don't. Again, competition damages research not helps it.
It's all based on education which is again a collaboration. You can introduce competition there too, but again I doubt it has any benefit. Any greater desire to succeed by beating other people I'd have thought would be constrictive and raise stress levels - people don't perform well under stress.
Peer review is an example of collaboration, too.
Companies running their own standards also works well, especially within the tech market.
Nope. Proprietary standards are only useful to the company and only succeed if other companies co-operate by building to that standard. They are hated by users - what use is a communications board that doesn't communicate with other manufacturers' equipment? It ties people into that one company which can force up costs because they're hooked into that proprietary standard.
I'm not a socialist.
Do anarchists not prefer co-operation to competition? I'm surprised and a bit wary of anarchism if that's not so. It makes no sense for small communities to compete against each other - surely they have to co-operate. Otherwise you'd have lots of fragmented small communities having to develop technology in isolation and in parallel. That would be hugely wasteful. If you believe that competition is more efficient in some way then how can you believe that anarchism is the best structure for society?
Competition fragments society and only benefits them at the top.You seem to have swallowed the neoliberal propaganda that competition is good for us.
/scarpers, chuckling as he goes
