nobody will be converted in this debate - all we can do is encourage those who have to objection to sharing to do more of it - Jean-Claude Bradley

I don't think the "open data is better than open s/w" argument is very strong - both are important. However I think a more useful line of argument is the opportunity cost (financial/time/etc) involved in the two - is it cheaper to have OD but possibly have to build your own tools? Or vice versa? One could also argue that OD stimulates the development of open s/w. - Rajarshi Guha

It depends on the context actually. In cases of large data sets that are generally useful, the number of people who can derive value is fairly large. In those cases open data is more important that the s/w used to operate upon them being open. On the other side if we are talking core algorithms that are generally useful to a community, or some form of framework, then open source is critical. In the end both are important. I don't think you can ever come up with an argument about one being ... - Deepak Singh

... significantly more open than the other. I do believe that data was meant to be mashed up and forked and used in different ways and that in different hands it can be used in different ways and get more value out of it - Deepak Singh

That said, Abishek's take on data is so wrong from so many angles I don't know where to begin. The value companies get is from information derived from data, but that core data doesn't need to be closed. Just imagine if the genome had remained proprietary data. It inhibits innovation like nothing else (and I am nothing but a capitalist :) ) - Deepak Singh

@Deepak I already mentioned that may be I am against flow, but you should enlighten how exactly my take is wrong, - Abhishek Tiwari