16 July 2006

The Dangers of Open Content

Here's a nice story involving Elephant's Dream and Wikipedia - and a reminder that the latter is best regarded as a rough guide or a starting point, to be used with intelligence, not instead of it. (Via Slashdot.)

15 July 2006

More Microsoftie FUD

Another comparative "analysis" of security flaws in Windows and Red Hat. The result: Windows is better - the figures prove it. Well, yes, but let's look at those figures at little more. The giveaway is this paragraph:


Because of the nature of the Open Source model, there seems to be a higher tendency (unscientificly speaking) to just copy a piece of code and reuse it in another components. This means that if a piece of code turns out to be flawed, not only must it be fixed, but also that maintainers must find every place they might've reused that blob of code. A visual inspection showed me that many of these were the multiple vulnerabilities affecting firefox, mozilla and thunderbird. In a typical example, firefox packages were fixed, then mozilla packages were fixed 4 days later, then thunderbird was fixed 4 days after that.

Note that it says "In a typical example, firefox packages were fixed, then mozilla packages were fixed 4 days later". So one reason why Red Hat has more vulnerabilities is that it has far more packages included, many of which duplicate functions - like Firefox and Mozilla. The point is, you wouldn't install both Firefox and Mozilla: you'd choose one. So there's only one vulnerability that should be counted. Not only that, but Red Hat is penalised because it actually offers much more than Windows.

I don't know what the other vulnerabilities were, but I'd guess they involved similar over-counting - either through duplication, or simply because Red Hat offered extra packages. By all means compare Windows and Red Hat, but make it a fair comparison.

Wikipeda Does RSS

I amazed this hasn't been done before: you can now track changes to Wikipedia articles through an RSS feed. If you use Firefox, say, to go to the history tab of the page that interests you, you'll find the standard orange radio symbol in the address bar like any other RSS feed.

This is clearly great, because it means that you can watch how pages of interest to you change; it's also clearly terrible, because it means that edit war loonies will be able to engage even more rapidly. (Via Micro Persuasion.)

The Value of the Public Domain

More light reading - this time about the public domain. Or rather, a little beyond the traditional public domain, as the author Rufus Pollock states:

Traditionally, the public domain has been defined as the set of intellectual works that can be copied, used and reused without restriction of any kind. For the purposes of this essay I wish to widen this a little and make the public domain synonymous with ‘open’ knowledge, that is, all ideas and information that can be freely used, redistributed and reused. The word ‘freely’ must be loosely interpreted – for example the requirement of attribution or even that derivative works be re-shared, does not render a work unfree.

It's quite academic in tone, but has some useful references (even if it misses out a crucial one - not that I'm bitter...).

Innovation Happens Elsewhere - Online, Too

Ron Goldman and Richard P. Gabriel have made available an online version of their book Innovation Happens Elsewhere: Open Source as Business Strategy. It's a well-written and highly-approachable introduction to open source, mainly for those thinking about using free software in business.

I particularly like the following take:

Open source is fundamentally about people volunteering to work on projects in what could be called the commons; that is, it is about working on things for the public good.

This idea will come as no surprise to readers of this blog, but it's still a novel viewpoint for many. The rest of the book shows a similarly refreshing originality in its approach. (Via Creative Commons blog.)

Net Neutrality and Open Spectrum

David Levine has an interesting post that joins the dots connecting the net neutrality debate with the issue of creating a spectrum commons. I don't share his concerns about imposing net neutrality through legislation, but I certainly agree that breaking the last mile monopoly through wireless is ultimately a better solution. And while we're at it, let's try and get some global wireless meshes going too.

14 July 2006

ODF A.G. (After Google)

It's curious the low-key way that Google has joined the ODF Alliance. But there's no mistaking the impact and importance of that move. IBM's Bob Sutor has some interesting observations in this context. Two in particular:

It is up to Google to say what they want about this, but, as I noted last night, ODF Alliance membership jumped by 20 members in the few days following the news of their membership.

and

OpenDocument is bringing on a Renaissance of document creation and publishing. That which we used to know is being rediscovered and combined (mashed together) with what we have learned recently.

The orthodoxy of "this is how you create office documents" is going to fall by the wayside, though there will opposing kingdoms and battles and heretics and maybe even a few heros emerging.

Tripped up for Want of a Commons

I'm not a poddie myself, but the idea behind Griffin Technology's iTrip - being able to broadcast your MP3 files to nearby FM radios - is a great one. A pity, then, that's it's currently against the law in the UK because it "trespasses" on someone else's "property" - the radio spectrum that has been allocated for their use.

The current fix, apparently, is to use the 2003 Wireless Telegraphy (Exemption) Regulations Act. But the real solution is to create a much broader spectrum commons where people can start trying out all sorts of wireless innovation - without having to jump through these kind of hoops.

Update: Wow, that was quick. Here's Ofcom with a consultation on Wireless Telegraphy Licence Exemption that amends the 2003 Wireless Telegraphy (Exemption) Regulations Act. Powerful things, these blogs. (Via openspectrum.info.)

Microsoft the Translator, Microsoft the Traitor

Since I sank to the (oceanic) depths of linking to a fisheries story on the basis of an irresistible headline, I don't see why I shouldn't do the same for this post, winningly entitled "Traduttore, Traditore" - Italian for "Translator, Traitor".

It's an interesting examination of the reality behind Microsoft's much-ballyhooed support for ODF, but what really grabbed my attention was the fact that this translator/traitor word pairing is always close to the surface of my mind whenever I use either: I'm always teetering on the brink of swapping one for the other. Which would be unfortunate. (Via Bob Sutor's Open Blog.)

Making All the Right Connexions

A couple of months back I had the pleasure of interviewing Richard Baraniuk for an article about open content for LWN.net. As I wrote then:


Just as open source avoids re-inventing the wheel by building on existing code, so open courseware aims to save time, effort and money by making educational material freely available for others to re-use, extend and improve.

The first such project, Connexions, came from Rice University. It was the brainchild of Richard Baraniuk, professor of electrical engineering, who was directly inspired by the example of open source. Connexions uses a content creation platform called Rhaptos, which is released under the GNU GPL.

Connexions is a fascinating exercise in re-inventing university course materials, but Baraniuk told me that they were planning to go even further. Now Rice has announced that it is to use print-on-demand technologies to produce academic textbooks in a completely new way. As the press release explains:

Rice University's innovative Connexions today announced an on-demand printing agreement with QOOP Inc. that will allow students and instructors anywhere in the world to order high-quality, hardbound textbooks from Connexions - in most cases for less than $25.

The deal positions Connexions to take the lead in open-source textbook publishing as soon as it completes software needed to feed each of its titles to QOOP's on-demand publishing platform. Connexions plans to offer more than 100 titles for online purchase by year's end.

"From its inception, Connexions has used the Web to go beyond print," said Connexions founder Richard Baraniuk. "Connexions lets pupils and instructors make cross-disciplinary intellectual leaps with a simple mouse click, following knowledge wherever learning takes them.

"But being Web-based is also about access, and because our materials are freely available to everyone, we needed an easy, low-cost way to let people use a book if that's the medium they are most comfortable learning from," said Baraniuk, the Victor C. Cameron Professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering.

QOOP's on-demand service will allow Connexions users to order customized course guides and a variety of fully developed Connexions textbooks. Standard paperbacks will take just 3-5 days to produce and ship, and traditional hardbacks will take about a week to produce. QOOP ships directly to customers.

No other publisher of open-source educational content can match Connexions offerings. This is partly due to Connexions early adoption of Creative Commons open licenses. Because all content on the site is authored under these licenses, there are no copyright conflicts to negotiate.

Open content, open source - sounds like all the right connexions are being made.

Why Hackers Do It

If you've ever wondered what makes hackers (not crackers) tick, you can relax: somebody has now submitted a doctoral thesis on the subject (in German) to give us an academically-rigorous answer.

It has as its title "Fun and software development: on the motivation of open source programmers," and includes, in an appendix, an email from RMS, whom the doctorand unwisely addressed as an "open source developer". To which Stallman inevitably (and rightly) replied:

Thank you, but I do not consider myself an ’open source developer’, and I don’t like my work to be described as ’open source’.

My work is free software (freie Software, logiciel libre).

One result, noted by Heise Online, is particularly striking:

Only about half the programming work is thus undertaken by the developers in their free time; for 42 percent (in temporal terms) of their engagement with open source the programmers are being remunerated -- an astonishingly large percentage. On this point the author of the dissertation Benno Luthiger Stoll remarks that this figure is likely to be even higher when the big picture is taken into account: The developers most likely to be paid are those working for large open-source projects; projects that in many cases have their own project infrastructure, he notes. Those active open-source programmers questioned, however, had come from Sourceforge, Savannah and Berlios, which in general tended to host less elaborate projects, he adds.

Happily, it also seems that

When compared with some 110 developers working for Swiss software companies, those engaged in open-source projects were seen to have more fun.

But maybe Swiss software companies are particularly boring.

PortableApps.com - Open Source on a Stick

One of the many benefits of open source is that it allows people to experiment. In particular, it lets people try out all sorts of whacky ideas that would simply be stifled at birth had they involved closed source. A good example is Portable Firefox, which consists of a slightly-modified version of the free browser such that it can be placed on a USB drive and run from it, without needing any further installation.

I knew that this had spawned things like Portable Thunderbird, which does the same thing for Mozilla's email client, but I hadn't realised that things had gone much further. For there is now a site called PortableApps.com, run by the person behind Portable Firefox, John Haller.

And what a cornucopia of a site it is. In addition to portable versions of Firefox and Thunderbird, you also find "ports" of OpenOffice.org, the IM client GAIM, the Web site editor NVu and the anti-virus program ClamWin. There's even a mini LAMP stack - though this is without the GNU/Linux part. However, the PortableApps site indicates that portable operating systems are on their way.

The software on this site represents quite a significant achievement, because it means that you can literally carry around in your pocket all the main apps that you need on a USB drive. Provided you can find a PC with a USB socket you can start working as if it were your machine.

Some Microsofties See the OSS Light

I don't know whether this is big enough to call a trend yet, but it's striking that several ex-Microsofties are setting up new companies based around open source. The latest one is Ohloh, whose site explains:

We're mapping the open source world by collecting objective information on open source software. Search our site for the most current software metrics and project information on open source software projects.

eWeek has some details on the ex-Microsoft people involved:

Collison and Jason Allen, a former development manager for XML Web Services at Microsoft and now vice president of engineering at Ohloh, co-founded the new company. Other former Microsoft executives involved in the startup include Paul Maritz, who served as a member of the executive committee and manager of the overall Microsoft company from 1986 to 2000. Maritz is an investor in the company, along with Pradeep Singh, who spent nine years at Microsoft in various management positions and left in 1994 to found Aditi Technologies, an Indian outsourcing company, Collison said.

I think one of the reasons for this move from the dark side can be found in another quotation from the same story:

"unlike 1999 one can do a startup on very thin capital, and that is the way we are going about it," Collison said. "One would have to be insane these days to take a traditional Series A round [of venture capital funding] with the open-source software and outsourcing opportunities that are out there."

In other words, it is the open source infrastructure that makes low-cost startups possible; and once you start using open source yourself, you begin to find that it's rather good, and realise that potential customers might think so too....

13 July 2006

SAP's Success is Being Sapped

SAP is a strange company. Largely unknown to the general public (at least outside its native Germany), it is large, and until now, hugely successful in its chosen field of Enterprise Resource Management. It is also a dinosaur and doomed. Indicative of this is its very ambivalent attitude to open source, which some of its executives show little sign of understanding.

This story from the Reg confirms my suspicions: that its power is being sapped by rival closed-source companies. Just wait until the up-and-coming open source ERP companies start hitting their stride....

Open Source Evolution

Carl Zimmer is one of the best science writers around today. He manages to combine technical accuracy with a writing style that never gets in the way of his argument. So I was delighted to see this piece on his blog, entitled: "In the Beginning Was Linux?", which includes the following section:

Biologists have long recognized some striking parallels between genes and software. Genes stored information in a language of DNA, with the four nucleotides serving as its alphabet. A genetic code allowed cells to translate the information in genes into the separate language of proteins, which used an alphabet of twenty amino acids. From one generation to the next, mutations introduced slight tweaks to the software. Sex combined different versions of subroutines. If the software performed better--in the sense that an organism had more reproductive success--the changes might become incorporated into the genome across an entire species.

Now, this is amusingly close to the opening chapter (and central idea) of Digital Code of Life, but Zimmer goes further by drawing on the theories of Carl Woese, one of the most original thinkers about how life might have evolved in the earliest stages. It would take too long to explain the details to non-biologists, so I won't attempt it here - not least because Zimmer has already done with customary clarity in his post. Do read it.

EU Software Patents Battle 2.0

Florian Mueller, who did more than most to rally people against the software patents directive in the European Parliament, has flagged up the next - and potentially even more serious - threat from software patents.

This time, though, it's couched in rather obscure terms. The battle is not about allowing software patents "as such" - since they are explicitly forbidden in Europe - but about how litigation over patents should proceed. The point is, if the current proposal for something called the European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA) goes through, the European patent offices, many of which are happily handing out software patents, would have enormous influence over the litigation of such questionable patents, which is hardly right, methinks. As Mueller explains:

The legal status of software patents in Europe is contradictory. While the existing written rules, which go back to the year 1973, disallow patents on computer programs “as such”, the European Patent Office (EPO) and various national patent offices have granted tens of thousands of software patents. However, European patents, even if granted by the EPO, can only be enforced country by country as of now, and national courts declare many EPO software patents invalid when their holders try to use them against alleged infringers. Critics argue that the EPLA would create a new court system that would be under the control of the same group of government officials who already govern the EPO, and that the judges appointed by those people would support the EPO’s granting practice and its broad scope of patentable subject-matter with respect to software and business methods.

It's still very early days for the EPLA, but fore-warned is fore-armed.

Moroccan Fisheries Escapes Proprietary Net

Not my title, I hasten to add (though I wish it had been), but the one used by this article. The latter does what it says on the tin - a sardine tin, I presume, since Essaouira is a major centre for fishing said species.

Croats Have a Go at...OSS Policy

It seems that Croatia has joined the Euro-club of OSS enthusiasts. At least that's what I'm told. I really must get around to learning Serbo-Croat....

Update: More details in English here (with thanks to James Tyrrell.)

Towards a Wikipedia Done Properly

Larry Sanger's name has cropped up several times on this blog, so I was delighted to interview him recently for The Guardian. You can read the finished result here. Larry rightly takes me to task for the misleading headline and sub-head, but in my own defence I have to point out that I didn't write them.

A Study in Official Openness

It is probably hard for those outside the UK to appreciate the extent of the secrecy that has pervaded public life here for centuries. The clearest manifestation of this is the pernicious Official Secrets Act, which makes pretty much anything a secret if the Government says it is.

Against this presumption that the public has no right to know anything, the passage of the Freedom of Information Act in 2000 was a major milestone, and credit must be given to the current Government for finally making it a reality. This is especially the case since it is clear that the information released by Act is proving a major embarrassment at times, thanks to both an increasingly demanding public and a commendably independent commissioner, Richard Thomas.

As the foreword to his first Annual Report makes clear, he is acutely aware of the central position that his department occupies in today's world, where there is an inevitable tension between his two main tasks: promoting openness and protecting privacy:

Never before has the threat of intrusion to people’s privacy been such a risk. It is no wonder that the public now ranks protecting personal information as the third most important social concern. As technology develops in a globalised 24/7 culture, power increases to build comprehensive insights into daily lives. As internet shopping, smart card technology and joined-up e-government initiatives reduce costs, respond to customers’ demands and improve public services, more and more information is accumulated about us. According to one estimate, information about the average working adult is stored on some 700 databases. New information is added every day. Much of this will be confidential material which we do not want others to see or use unless we say so. There are obvious risks that information is matched with the wrong person or security is breached. The risks increase substantially as information is shared from one database to another, or access granted to another group of users. Real damage can arise when things go wrong – careers and personal relationships can be jeopardised by inaccurate information. Identity theft can involve substantial financial loss and loss of personal autonomy.

The vast majority of information that is held on adults, and increasingly on children, serves a useful purpose and is well intentioned. But everyone recognises that there must be limits. Data protection provides the framework. It raises questions about where lines should be drawn. What is acceptable and what is unacceptable? What safeguards are needed? What is the right balance between public protection and private life? How long, for example, should phone and internet traffic records be retained for access by police and intelligence services fighting terrorism? Whose DNA should be held, and for how long, to help solve crime? What safeguards are needed for commercial internet-based tracking services which leave no hiding place?

All power to Mr Thomas' elbow.

12 July 2006

Of FAQs and NAQs

FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions - are one of the characteristic concepts of the online world, born, presumably, of a cheery belief that it is possible for experts to distill any given area into a few pithy questions and answers for the benefit of newbies.

But things are moving on. The Guardian has pioneered what it calls "Newly Asked Questions", and now we have a new kind of FAQ: "Frequently Awkward Questions", aimed at the entertainment industry. I imagine that others will follow in due course.

Why Microsoft Got Thwacked

If you were wondering what exactly the sticking point was that led to Microsoft getting thumped by the European Union, here's a helpful press release from the Free Software Foundation Europe. The central problem is the company's refusal to make documentation available that would allow GNU/Linux to interoperate perfectly with Windows, thanks to the Samba free software project:

"Microsoft is still as far from allowing competition as it was on the day of the original Commission ruling in 2004. All proposals made by Microsoft were deliberately exclusive of Samba, the major remaining competitor. In that light, the fines do not seem to come early, and they do not seem high," comments Carlo Piana, Milano based lawyer of the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) regarding the decision of the European Commission to fine Microsoft 1.5 million Euro per day retroactively from 16. December 2005, totalling 280.5 million Euro. Should Microsoft not come into compliance until the end of July 2006, the daily fines could be doubled.

These fines are a reaction to Microsofts continued lack of compliance with the European Commission decision to make interoperability information available to competitors as a necessary precondition to allow fair competition.

Microsoft's refusal to comply - and its willingness to incur fines amounting to hundreds of millions of Euros - is a measure of just how worried it is about Samba in particular, and open source in general.

The release also points out how risible are Microsoft's claims that it cannot easily supply the requested information:

"If we are to believe Microsofts numbers, it appears that 120.000 person days are not enough to document its own software. This is a task that good software developers do during the development of software, and a hallmark of bad engineering," comments Georg Greve, president of the FSFE. "For users, this should be a shock: Microsoft apparently does not know the software that controls 95% of all desktop computers on this planet. Imagine General Motors releasing a press statement to the extent that even though they had 300 of their best engineers work on this for two years, they cannot provide specifications for the cars they built."

Open Access...to Search Spam

Open access is usually about being able to read high-value texts that are normally only available for a correspondingly high fee. But, in reality, it's about access for free to stuff. For example, as Open Access News points out, you can have open access to "value-added" search spam data (and note the scrupulously precise use of the CC licence at the bottom).

OpenDocument Fellowship Rings the Changes

ODF just goes from strength to strength, as many posts on this blog attest. One of the main organisations pushing the standard is the splendidly-named OpenDocument Fellowship, even if it tends to keep a low profile (maybe it's just because I'm a member).

It has recently redesigned its Web site, and it's well worth taking a look for the useful ODF resources to be found there. These include introductions to the whole ODF idea, a handy list of applications that support ODF, the latest news and members' blogs with postings on related matters.

11 July 2006

Of Sakai and Moodle

Sakai may not be a name that is known to many in the world of free software, but it's one of the leading open source projects in the field of education. IBM has certainly heard of it, having just donated a goodly lump of code to the project. And if Sakai proves of interest, you probably ought to check out Moodle, too.