Updates from March, 2007 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Roberto Galoppini 1:29 pm on March 25, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Community development: all communities are not the same 

    Reading the Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) I happened to read “Care and feeding open source programmers” an article about the “HandBrake manifesto“, a post defining what Open Source is for his author.

    Open source is:

    • A means to encourage software innovation among diverse groups of programmers
    • A policy of open inspection and analysis of source code, both to educate and provide a means for constructive criticism
    • A means by which programmers can “scratch their itch” for mental stimulation while at the same time solving computing problems that are frequently applicable even to non-technical users
    • Free, both intellectually and in terms of cost

    Open source is not:

    • A way to get commercial-quality support at no charge
    • A free-for-all forum to ask for pie-in-the-sky software features and expect them to be implemented as requested and with no delay
    • An invitation to harass and otherwise frustrate a small and dedicated development staff because they didn’t do what you wanted

I can see here many disagreeing on that, but I believe there is no doubt that any author can choose his/her community, choosing not to have one (or even something like that).

Authors have the power, and users too indeed! I start thinking Rubini is pretty right…

Technorati Tags: Open Source Community, HandBrake

 

  • Roberto Galoppini 6:40 pm on March 23, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Digital World Freedom: Digital Video Broadcasting and DRM 

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation, the only public interest group attending Digital Video Broadcasting’s closed technical meetings, just reported some feedbacks on these meetings, quite harmful indeed.

    Today, consumers can digitally record their favorite television shows, move recordings to portable video players, excerpt a small clip to include in a home video, and much more. The digital television transition promises innovation and competition in even more great gadgets that will give consumers unparalleled control over their media.

    But an inter-industry organization that creates television and video specifications used in Europe, Australia, and much of Africa and Asia is laying the foundation for a far different future — one in which major content providers get a veto over innovation and consumers face draconian digital rights management (DRM) restrictions on the use of TV content. At the behest of American movie and television studios, the Digital Video Broadcasting Project (DVB) is devising standards to ensure that digital television devices obey content providers’ commands rather than consumers’ desires. These restrictions will take away consumers’ rights and abilities to use lawfully-acquired content so that each use can be sold back to them piecemeal.

    Consumers would never choose this future, so Hollywood will try to force it on them by regulatory fiat. DVB’s imprimatur may put restrictive standards on the fast-track to becoming legally-enforced mandates, and existing laws already limit evasion of DRM even for lawful purposes. In effect, private DRM standards will trump national laws that have traditionally protected the public’s interests and carefully circumscribed copyright holders’ rights.

    Hollywood has long pursued this goal in the U.S., but its schemes in DVB have taken place behind the public’s back and outside of scrutiny by elected officials. In this paper, we will summarize and expose Hollywood’s plan.

    Read the full article, or download the paper.

    Technorati Tags: digital freedom, DVB, EFF, DRM

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 12:07 pm on March 23, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Social Networks Business models: ASmallWorld CEO’s speech 

    ASmallWorld is a private high-trust social network by invitation only, designed by its founder, Erik Wachtmeister – a former investment banker – for people already connected to each other in the (offline) world. Erik has participated at the DLD conference and the video is available.

    I recently read an Eric’s post about the event, here a short excerpt:

    Social Networks have emerged over the past 3 years as a useful tool in creating and recreating networks, and establishing new unfettered distribution channels. The original idea behind aSmallWorld was based on the need for a large group of people with similar needs, to connect, reconnect, and exchange trusted information. It was not based on creating a free-for-all where anything under the sun and on the WWW goes. What is missing in almost every other social networking site is notion of Relevance and Trust. I believed there was a need for ASW because of the enormity and chaotic nature of the unlocked beast that is the Internet. MySpace and others have been feeding this beast and indeed creating exciting new forms of entertainment. Our goal, however, has been to come up with an alternative to the chaos, with endless “noise” drowning the “signal” we are searching for when we go on line.

    There is a lot of talk about web 2.0 and recently web 3.0. Web 2.0 is about connecting people with people and data, not WebPages. Web 3.0 is about connecting people with meaningful people and data. In that vein, aSmallWorld is all about filtering out information overload, spammers, scammers, stalkers, and irrelevant and unfiltered data that makes up 99% of what is out there. Add to this our over 100,000 trusted experts who can make our little world the most trusted place to go to online.

    I see a clear trade-off between unattended and open communities, like Orkut, and deeply controlled and closed communities like asw. I believe Eric is right saying that there was a need for communities like asw, just wondering if we might eventually see communities with an high level of trust democratically controlled by its own members..

    Technorati Tags: Social Networks, asw, DLD

     

    • Heidi P. Trabert 7:08 pm on May 6, 2007 Permalink

      Are you a member of asw? Or would you like to be one? And why?

    • Roberto Galoppini 8:39 pm on May 6, 2007 Permalink

      Yes Heidi, I am a member of asw. I believe that social networks like that, with an high level of trust are a viable tool. As a matter of fact I got useful travel tips, business contacts and I also met few interesting people.

      Does it answer your question?

    • Mirande 9:09 pm on June 3, 2007 Permalink

      Hi,

      My name is Mirande. I am an ex-model and also an attorney who has authored a number of publications. I run a group called Models (Women of Beauty and Substance). The group is geared toward attracting and promoting women with broad and diverse interests who can be viewed as both beauty and role models. I would love an invitation to join ASW. I believe that my group of beautiful and accomplished women would add value to the events that we frequent.

      I will gladly send you more information about me and my background if you e-mail me at mirande@modelsnyc.net. For example, all of my scholarly and professional literature is available and can be verified online.

      Mirande

  • Roberto Galoppini 10:59 pm on March 22, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Licensing: FSFE on simplicitity and lenght of licenses 

    FSFE stating that everyone would like that free software licences were shorter, talks about GPL and LGPL lenght, claiming that a longer GPL doesn’t have to mean more complex.

    FSFE fellowshipFSFE Fellowship initiative by Stefano Mainardi

    The number of words needed to ensure that software users had the four freedoms in the 1970s was zero. There were no software patents, no DMCA/EUCD laws, software generally came with source code, and there was generally nothing limiting a person from redistributing software.

    As software distributors started blocking these freedoms by legal and technical means, it became necessary for software that was intended to come with those freedoms to be accompanied by licences granting those freedoms and requiring others to pass them on when they pass on the software.

    GPLv1, written in 1989, had 1,500 words. GPLv2 has 2,300 words. Draft 2 of GPLv3 has 4,000 words. The most important implementation detail is that it has to work in court, and this can’t be compromised for the sake of making a shorter text. But if you can see ways to make it simpler, that would be very useful because it’s not only technology lawyers that have to read the GPL, it’s software developers and judges too.

    Read the full article.

    Technorati Tags: GPL, LGPL, FSFE

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 9:16 am on March 22, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source IP: Palamida says SCO’s furore has died down.. 

    Palamida, a firm providing software assurance management products and audit services arrived on the scene about one year after Black Duck Software, states that legal concerns over Open Source Intellectual Property are not over yet.

    lawyers in pantsLawyers in pants by LordKhan

    Mark Tolliver, Palamida CEO, talking to Martin Veitch said:

    The SCO furore might have died down, but the bigger issue of mixing and matching code from various sources has not gone away. I don’t know when the last time was I discussed SCO. It’s not particularly relevant to today’s world, but one of the outcomes of the rise of open-source software is that you have less visibility as to what’s in your code.

    I really doubt that with open source you have “less visibility as to what’s in your code”, I would rather say the opposite, don’t you?

    Open Source Insurance firms are looking for cases, but Tolliver talks also about mergers and acquisitions:

    If you’re buying or selling software companies, there’s a large question as to what you are buying and how to value that. Palamida frequently gets involved in the nitty-gritty of deals, and often turns up surprising omissions in the declarations of what code bases contain. In one deal, the target company had disclosed [code from] three open-source products and our work showed 98 products. In our experience it’s zero malicious intent, just poor record-keeping.

    This makes definitely more sense to me.

    Read the full article.

    Technorati Tags: Open Source Insurance, indemnification, Palamida, SCO

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 10:57 pm on March 18, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source Prize: Google Summer of Code deadline is approaching 

    If you are a student interested in participating to Google Summer of Code 2007 – no longer accepting applications from open source organizations – you have to submit your applications by the March 24th deadline. Thomas Cort succesfully participated last year and he is sharing through his blog some suggestion for your applications.

    summer of codeSummer of Code Brazilian poster by omaciel

    explain what the project is and what will be accomplished, explain why you are perfect for the project, convince them that you won’t drop out half way through, show some previous Free software or school work you’ve done so that they know you aren’t full of crap, popular projects ideas may get many good applications so choose your desired project carefully, become familiar with the organization that you wish to participate in, and know what you are getting yourself into. The best way to do the last two is to actually read through the project’s website and browse some of the code.

    By the way no student has applied to the province of Rome contest yet. If you live here please take your chance!

    Technorati Tags: Google Summer of Code, Open Source, Rome

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 8:36 pm on March 16, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source ERP: Compiere’s new CEO first post 

    Don Klaiss, who recently joined Compiere as its new CEO, just wrote his very first post “Will Compiere remain an open source product?“, and it starts this way:

    Shortly after joining Compiere as the new CEO, people began asking me about my plans for Compiere and whether we would be evolving from an open source business model to become a proprietary product. The answer is absolutely not!

    Sometimes people make really weird questions..

    supriseKinder Surprise Egg by knowwonnose

    With more than 1.1 million downloads of our software, we have become by far the most popular open source ERP project. I look forward to working with our customers and partners to create an even more active, vibrant community around our technology.

    As I already wrote I’m looking forward to see Compiere fostering its own community through its new partner program, and I really wish Don all the best.

    Technorati Tags: Commercial Open Source, Compiere, ERP

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 12:08 pm on March 13, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Free Culture: “Free me”, a DVD about Free Culture 

    The Free Me DVD is an attempt to help raise awareness of Free Culture. On the disc I have provided loads of different kinds of media – some of it can be played in your DVD player while other bits can be found when you put it in your computer. All of these works have been created and released under less restrictive licenses than the traditional “All Rights Reserved” copyright notice.

    free me

    Get your own copy or learn more.

    Technorati Tags: Free Culture

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 7:23 pm on March 11, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source IPO: Sourcefire public offering 

    Sourcefire, a Maryland-based firm specialized in intrusion detection and prevention system technologies based on the famous Snort – originally written by Martin Roesch, founder and current Sourcefire CTO – on the 9th of March launched its Initial Public Offering.

    NasdaqNasdaq by samy73

    The pricing of its initial public offering of 5,770,000 shares of its common stock at $15.00 per share (before underwriting discounts and commissions). Of those shares, Sourcefire is selling 5,320,000 shares and selling stockholders are selling 450,000 shares. The estimated net proceeds to Sourcefire are $71.8 million.

    Sourcefire, making business selling proprietary versions of Snort with integrated hardware and support services, has recently been a market leader by Gartner, and despite the failed acquisition by Checkpoint in 2005 Sourcefire has continued to grow.

    As reported by the Magic Quadrant for Network Intrusion Prevention System Appliances:

    Sourcefire has addressed criticism of relying on SNORT signatures by increasing the team doing culnerability research to the point that most signatures now are Sourcefire generated rather than SNORT generated.

    Keeping it in mind I understand why the prospectus doesn’t spend many words on Sourcefire’s commitment to its community, as pointed out by Matt Asay:

    While I’m happy for Sourcefire, if it doesn’t have a plan for actively seeding and feeding the Snort community, I can’t help but view it as a parasite that will limit the amount of value it can get from “its” community.

    Sourcefire has proven to be committed and supportive of its community much more than others Open Source firms – whatever it means – and we should judge (and respect) them by their actions, not by a report made for potential investors.

    Technorati Tags: Commercial Open Source, IPO, Sourcefire

     

    • Ron German 12:13 am on March 12, 2007 Permalink

      Looks like Sourcefire’s CTO is on record as being committed to maintaining and expanding the open source community around Snort by advancing the technology. Looks like a pretty strong statement to me.

    • Roberto Galoppini 5:09 pm on March 12, 2007 Permalink

      Thank you Ron to join the conversation, the post you referred is pretty interesting. Some excerpts from it:

      Some have theorized that doing things like adding a new detection engine to Snort that could do gigabit speeds and then giving it away was a Bad Idea because it allowed our Snort-based competitors to have a more level playing field with which to compete against us. My opinion is that it keeps the ball moving forward and keeps people’s eyes on what we’re doing instead of letting them get bored and going off to check out some other more rapidly developing OSS technology or a commercial solution. Letting your technology get stagnant is almost as bad as closing the technology, once the community is bored they’ll be looking elsewhere for something exciting. One important point to note in this regard (in a product company) is that just because you’re releasing advances to the open source community at large doesn’t mean that you are required to drive your differentiation from that technology to zero. If you want to be able to get people to want to pay for what you do, then having some sort of key differentiation is a must! At Sourcefire we did things like developing a complementary technology that allowed us to address one of the toughest problems in the intrusion detection world, false positives. If you can’t maintain differentiation against your open source product or your competitors that use your open source technology, then you’ve got a problem that you need to get creative around, closing the technology isn’t an acceptable answer in my opinion.Once you’ve open sourced your technology then you have to approach its continued development as a community building exercise that works best by advancing the technology and trying to maintain community-friendly policies and programs. If you do this and try to be clueful about interacting with the open source users as the company grows (a whole different topic) then you have the foundation necessary to build a business of substance. That’s the principle that I originally built Sourcefire on and so far it has worked pretty well.

  • Roberto Galoppini 9:03 pm on March 9, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    DRM: FSF writes an Open Letter to Steve Jobs 

    Apple’s CEO Steve Jobs recently jumped into the DRM debate and now in return is going to receive an open letter from the Free Software Foundation signed by thousands of users.

    Steve Jobs mosaic-style

    The letter is quite long, here a meaningful excerpt:

    It has been three weeks now since you published your pledge to drop DRM, and there have been many responses from commentators who have outlined actions you could take to back up your words. The fact that you have not taken any action leads us to ask the question: How genuine is your pledge?

    What will Steve answer, eventually?

    Read the letter.

    Technorati Tags: DRM, FSF, Steve Jobs

     

    • Krissy 9:47 pm on March 9, 2007 Permalink

      I doubt this will get any response from Apple. As many have said, his essay probably had some Steve-like intentions behind it. I mean, I can’t see him just going DRM-less so easily. (Plus, he can’t really.)

      DRM, I imagine, is here to stay.

      – Krissy

    • Roberto Galoppini 12:31 pm on March 10, 2007 Permalink

      Hi Krissy,

      I went through the article, and I can’t share those conclusions: from wrong hypothesis (Apple making money out of hw selling, and not from music) you obtain wrong results.

      Anyway I agree, DRM is likely to stay, let’s see how and at which extent..

    • ← Older posts

    Newer posts →

    c
    Compose new post
    j
    Next post/Next comment
    k
    Previous post/Previous comment
    r
    Reply
    e
    Edit
    o
    Show/Hide comments
    t
    Go to top
    l
    Go to login
    h
    Show/Hide help
    shift + esc
    Cancel