From Gizmo Manuals to Gitmo Manuals

Nobody reads the manual, right? Well, here's one that people probably will want to read on the fine Wikileaks site: it's for Guantánamo Bay....

Isn't openness a wonderful thing?

The disclosure highlights the internet's usefulness to whistle-blowers in anonymously propagating documents the government and others would rather conceal. The Pentagon has been resisting -- since October 2003 -- a Freedom of Information Act request from the American Civil Liberties Union seeking the very same document.

JK Rowling Misunderstands the Magic of Sharing

"It is not reasonable, or legal, for anybody, fan or otherwise, to take an author's hard work, re-organize their characters and plots, and sell them for their own commercial gain. However much an individual claims to love somebody else's work, it does not become theirs to sell."

Sorry, darling, it is not only reasonable to produce this kind of reference work, it is actually beneficial - to you, and the world. Not least because it discourages people from coming up with killer one-liners like this:

The big news from the world of Harry Potter isn't that Dumbledore is gay. It's that J.K. Rowling is greedy.

Unlocking the Value of Open Innovation

It's a truism that there are more clever people out there than in here, wherever "here" may be. So it makes sense to try to tap into that cleverness - which is precisely what open source and cognate movements attempt to do. Now it looks like business is slowly getting the hang of this:

Barrick’s Unlock the Value program is a unique opportunity for scientific problem solvers. We invite proposals for an economically viable way to recover silver from silica-encapsulated ore. For proposals judged to have merit, Barrick will:

* Fund your research
* Pay you a consulting fee
* Provide resources and expertise
* Help you develop and test your idea

For a method or technology that is successfully implemented, Barrick will pay a performance bonus of $10,000,000.

(Via Peter Murray-Rust.)

Oh, Tell Me the Truth About Mobile

I don't really understand mobile, but I do understand its importance. So the news that the British company Volantis will be releasing a big gob of code as open source was clearly nice:

Volantis Systems, which provides the Intelligent Content Adaptation software delivering mobile content to more than 250 million mobile phone users worldwide, today eliminated price as a barrier to entry for companies that would like to capitalize on Volantis solutions to deliver content to mobile users. The Volantis Mobility Server is available immediately as a free download, and in the first quarter of 2008, Volantis will release the product under the GNU General Public License (GPL), version three, in the process contributing 1.2 million lines of code, based on seven years of development, to the community.

With more consumers and corporate customers moving toward the mobile Internet, enterprises need a simple way to build Web sites for mobile devices. Volantis Mobility Server provides an inexpensive path for companies to create this content and easily distribute it to the wide variety of mobile browsers on the market.

Which is all well and good, but couldn't you just do that with a CSS stylesheet? I asked Mark Watson, co-founder and chief executive officer of Volantis. He very kindly explained to me in words of one syllable why it was a smidge more complicated than that.

The basic problem is that there is no standard 640x480 resolution on mobile devices, which come in just about every shape and size imaginable, with handset manufacturers constantly adding more as they seek to differentiate their products from the others. This means that you need to reformat your Web stuff hundreds, if not thousands of times, depending on the device. And no, Google's Android doesn't really help here, because you've still got the hardware to cope with. This is clearly a pain, and where there is pain there is always a business opportunity to reduce that pain for gain - hence the existence of Volantis.

So, you might ask, why is Volantis giving away its crown jewels? The usual story: it currently has a number of jolly big customers, and thinks, probably rightly, that it will make more dosh if is has thousands of smaller customers. Since the latter are unlikely to fork out large sums for software, the code is going open source, with money made on services, as per usual.

Sounds sensible to me, but what do I know?

Yikes! I've Been Blognapped

Not that I egosurf or anything, you understand, but I happened to notice that somebody was linking to me:

glyn moody wrote an interesting post today on
Here’s a quick excerpt
CARTES & IDentification 2007, Villepinte, France, November 13, 2007–Gemalto, the world leader in digital security, today announced it has attained Gold Certified Partner status in the Microsoft Partner Program. …

Except, of course, I wrote no such interesting post....

Bizarre.

Android: Kitted Out with WebKit

Well spotted by GigaOM: one of the key components of Android is WebKit:

WebKit is an open source web browser engine. WebKit is also the name of the Mac OS X system framework version of the engine that's used by Safari, Dashboard, Mail, and many other OS X applications. WebKit's HTML and JavaScript code began as a branch of the KHTML and KJS libraries from KDE.

As Om notes, this is a significant vote of confidence for WebKit, and a reminder that most other browsers - even rather popular open source ones like Firefox - are behind in this particular race. Also, rather a pat on the back for KDE....

Of Bazaars and Dangerous Co-location

I often bang on about modularity in this blog, and its critical importance to creating and running open projects. Here are some more thoughts on the subject, along with many interesting ruminations on creating a Raymondian bazaar, and the state of open source companies today. It concludes by answering a key question it posed itself:

Why do so many open-source projects not have the active community of external contributors they are hoping for? Because they have been largely developed by co-located teams of hired software engineers, 100% dedicated to the project, managed and organized like any traditional software development effort. This seems to be especially true for the new crop of ‘custom build’ open-source companies, which would like to take advantage of the open-source business model. They might hope to also enjoy the advantages of the open-source development model one day, but achieving that requires a conscious effort.

Good stuff.

Sick, Sick, Sick: The Sickness Deepens

I've warned you about this bloke before:

Intellectual Ventures LLC, a low-profile investment firm run by former Microsoft Corp. executive Nathan Myhrvold, is laying plans to go global: It hopes to raise as much as $1 billion to help develop and patent inventions, many of them from universities in Asia.

The move could help the firm, formed seven years ago to purchase patents and help inventors dream up new ones, expand its already-vast store of patents. But the new push also could exacerbate concerns that Intellectual Ventures will begin launching lawsuits to pressure companies to pay for use of its intellectual property.


Mr. Myhrvold said that his firm hasn't sued anybody for patent infringement but that he can't rule it out in the future.

That's a "yes", in case you were wondering. (Via Against Monopoly.)

More on Dzonghka: Microsoft's Morals

Regular readers of this blog will know that I have a soft spot for Bhutan's Dzonghkha language and its use in free software, so I was naturally intrigued by Andrew Leonard's recent post on the subject. This led me to the following, which somehow I had missed when it first came out:

Microsoft has barred the use of the Bhutanese government’s official term for the Bhutanese language, Dzongkha, in any of its products, citing that the term had affiliations with the Dalai Lama. In an internal memorandum, Microsoft employees were told not to use the term Dzongkha in any Microsoft software, language lists or promotional materials since “Doing so implies affiliation with the Dalai Lama, which is not acceptable to the government of China. In this instance, replace “Dzongkha” with ‘Tibetan - Bhutan’.”

How's that for a perfect confluence: Dzongkha-Tibetan-Chinese repression-Microsoft-free software? Nothing like a little moral prostitution to boost that bottom line, eh Microsoft?

UK Government Votes for e-Voting Quagmire

The UK Government has this crazy idea about IT: that if they say "make it so" often enough, it is so. But what they fail to realise is that complex IT projects are, er, complex, and often/usually go wrong. Stamping your pretty little foot ain't gonna fix it. As a result of this institutional ignorance/stupidity/wilfulness, it looks like the government is ploughing on with the doomed e-voting idea. When will they ever learn?

Go, gOS, Go!

Recently I wrote about the Everex Green gPC TC2502, sold by Walmart. On the product page at Walmart there are some fascinating comments, including the following:

I was surprised/shocked when it booted to Linux instead. My initial thought was someone had bought the machine, put Linux on it and returned it. However once it loaded up and was "green" everywhere I realized it was the way it's supposed to be (it matched the box's color).

So I began to think I'd need to take it back, but after working with it and letting my relative work with it I was absolutely amazed at how quickly she picked up on the concepts and ideas. The large desktop icons make it very easy for her to navigate, the big search bar makes it even easier.

We cleaned off the apps I don't think she'd be interested in or ready for (facebook, stuff like that) and left her with a wonderfully simple desktop that she was hooked on.

Assuming that this isn't a really cunning GNU/Linux fanboy masquerading as a super-satisfied customer, I think this is a significant straw in the wind. For those whose computing needs really are basic - typically older, rather than younger people - this ultra-low cost, ultra-simple PC could be a really effective solution.

One, moreover, that Windows-based PCs will never match until Microsoft starts giving away its software - as, precisely, it is starting to do in places like China and Russia. Even then it will have problems because of software bloat that GNU/Linux is mercifully unaffected by.

Google Book Search: Boons and Banes

You're probably not big into antedating - the academic game of finding earlier citations of words and phrases. But here's an interesting tale, because it shows the pros and cons of Google Book Search:

this discovery is typical of how Google Book Search now provides limited assistance to participants in what Erin McKean recently called "the competitive sport of antedating." Bonnie Taylor-Blake happened upon the relevant volume of Car Life but had no way of determining the precise context or even the correct issue and page number because of the limitations of Google's "snippet view." Fortunately, the metadata for this record includes accurate volume information ("v.9 1962-1963"), which allowed Bonnie to zero in on the correct page in a library copy of Car Life.

In other words, Google Book Search tantalises the antedater by showing earlier uses, but makes it awkward if you want to pin down the details. This is yet another reason why we need full-text open access to all books: otherwise, imagine the antedaters' anguish.

Android's Unity in Diversity

By choosing the relatively liberal Apache licence for its Android platform, Google runs the risk of fragmentation - something that the stricter GNU GPL tends to avoid. The company is evidently conscious of this:

a spokesperson for Google told ZDNet.co.uk on Monday that the OHA had foreseen these pitfalls. "All of the partners have signed a non-fragmentation agreement saying they won't modify [the code] in non-compatible ways," said the spokesperson. "That is not to say that a company that is not part of the OHA could not do so."

That's all fine and dandy, but it will interesting to see how it pans out in practice.

Also Spricht Peter Suber

There can be little doubt that the principal voice in the open access conversation is that of Peter Suber, who tirelessly gathers every crumb of information in this area, and then garnishes it with insightful comment on his Open Access News blog.

So it's rather paradoxical that the literal sound of that voice is something that is rarely heard. Good, then, to have this chance to encounter the man himself in this extensive interview, which also provides a handy primer on what exactly all this open access lark is about.

Finally, MULTICS Goes Open

The source code for the grandfather of Linux, MULTICS, has finally been released:

This is extraordinary news for all nerds, computer scientists and the Open Source community: the source code of the MULTICS operating system (Multiplexed Information and Computing Service), the father of UNIX and all modern OSes, has finally been opened.

Multics was an extremely influential early time-sharing operating system started in 1964 and introduced a large number of new concepts, including dynamic linking and a hierarchical file system. It was extremely powerful, and UNIX can in fact be considered to be a "simplified" successor to MULTICS (the name "Unix" is itself a hack on "Multics"). The last running Multics installation was shut down on October 31, 2000.

(Via OSNews.)

The Androids Are Coming

Well, they've arrived, actually, but what exactly does that mean? If you want to start to find out, the new Google site has plenty of technical info. Alternatively, for a more analytical perspective, there's a good piece at ONLamp.com, which draws on a chat with Mike Cleron, Senior Staff Engineer at Google and Technical Lead for Android.

Patently Outrageous

Europe does not allow software patents, but that doesn't stop some people - patent lawyers, mostly - from circumventing that clear and specific intention. One of them has not only written a book on how to sneak software patents through the system, but is now challenging an eminently sensible ruling on the subject by the UK authorities last year.

But the bits that stick in my craw are the following sections of the accompanying press release:

High-tech businesses can obtain a European-level monopoly over the distribution of computer disks and internet downloads of programs that configure an apparatus to perform a patented process. Now, in Britain, they cannot.

and

“A lot of people think there is no problem here because disks and downloads are protected by copyright,” noted Nicholas Fox, of Beresford & Co, the patent attorney acting for the high-tech five. “However, that is just not true. Copyright protection only protects code against copying. In contrast, patent protection enables a company to monopolise an invention even if competitors independently come up with the same idea.

Got that? These poor little companies just absolutely must have a monopoly on ideas to stop others from coming up with the same idea *independently*, because, you know, intellectual monopolies - like all monopolies - are just so good for society, and we can't allow other people to have the same ideas on their own without paying, oh my word no, because - heavens! - art and science might actually progress. And we can't have that, can we?

It's sad enough writing a book on how to get around a clear legal statement of intent; but brazenly demanding the right to a monopoly in what amounts to mathematical knowledge (as all software is, embodied in logical operations and algorithms) really takes the biscuit.

Full of Fail

Lovely piece here on the underwhelming launch of somebody's phone thingy in the UK. Makes yer proud to be British....

Fun Fiscal Facts of Firefox

Somewhat belatedly, The New York Times has caught up with the rumblings in free software community about all the dosh Firefox is raking in thanks to its search engine deals, and its possible over-dependence on Google. Nothing really new there, but it does have some juicy figures:

According to Mozilla’s 2006 financial records, which were recently released, the foundation had $74 million in assets, the bulk invested in mutual funds and the like, and last year it collected $66 million in revenue. Eighty-five percent of that revenue came from a single source — Google, which has a royalty contract with Firefox.

Despite that ample revenue, the Mozilla Foundation gave away less than $100,000 in grants (according to the audited statement), or $285,000 (according to Mozilla itself), in 2006. In the same year, it paid the corporation’s chief executive, Mitchell Baker, more than $500,000 in salary and benefits. (She is also chairwoman of the foundation.)

Hm: $500,000 a year - who says free software doesn't pay?

The Art of the Remix

One of Larry Lessig's favourite concepts is that of the remix: taking pre-existing stuff and doing something new with it. Recently I came across one of the purest expressions of that remix idea in the shape of the Georg Baselitz exhibition at the Royal Academy.

After a series of rooms packed with often deeply disturbing images, the show culminated in one devoted entirely to the remix. More precisely, the pictures were remixes by Baselitz of his earlier works, which created a powerful double resonance. The ultimate remix, perhaps.

Ouch!

That has got to hurt. (Via Salon.)

Certifiably...Open

Here's a slightly different approach to encouraging openness:

Today sees the launch of the trial period for Certified Open, a programme to evaluate the technical and commercial lock-in of ICT solutions. Certified Open promotes fair and effective competition in the delivery of software, hardware and services.

...

Graham Taylor, Director of OpenForum Europe said: "Certified Open represents a complete solution for public and private sector users to check the openness of their ICT solutions. We frequently see examples where organisations have become locked-in to a system due to the costs involved in change. Analysis carried out by OFE has indicated that 90% of public sector organisations no longer have the freedom to choose ICT solutions on the basis of competitiveness, functionality or price because of lock-in.

Certified Open is designed to ensure freedom from lock-in and openness to fair competition. The framework assesses dependence on proprietary or undocumented protocols, dependence on undocumented or proprietary data formats, licensing terms that preclude the use of alternative products, extensions to standards to ensure good performance and the use of pseudo-standards dependent on patents or other restrictions that prevent compatible competing implementations."

Certified, indeed.

Everything You Wanted to Know About the GPLv3...

...but were afraid to ask in case it made plain your inability to grok the legalistic subtleties. Though hardly an idiot's guide to the version 3 of the GNU GPL, this Quick Guide to GPLv3 from the FSF itself is certainly very welcome.

Groklaw Interviews Becky Hogge

A couple of days ago I mentioned two key players in the fight to get the BBC to do the right thing over its downloads service. Groklaw has put up an extremely detailed discussion with one of them, Becky Hogge, capo dei capi at the Open Rights Group, about what's a stake. Well worth a read if you want to understand the issues.

Digg, Dugg, Dugg

The perils of being Dugg:

At around 4am PST today, the last of the Firefox 3 Beta 1 release candidate builds appeared on our public FTP. This was mistakenly reported on Digg as the official release of the first Firefox 3 Beta. It’s extremely flattering to get this sort of attention, and we know that it’s motivated by the very best of intentions, but it does cause us three major problems:

1. The release candidate builds have not been thoroughly tested by our QA group,
2. we haven’t completed all the steps required for a beta release (see below), and
3. these builds aren’t being mirrored properly on our servers.

Perhaps they should give would-be downloaders a little coding test before giving them access to ensure that they are *really* serious hackers.... (Via Linux Journal.)

Wu's He?

On Nov. 5, Google (GOOG) unveiled what many in the phone business had long awaited. CEO Eric Schmidt explained how the search giant was ready to create new software for mobile phones that would shake up the telecom status quo. A Google-led "Open Handset Alliance" would provide consumers an alternative to the big cellular carriers and give them new choices among mobile phones and the types of nifty services that run on them, from e-mail to Google Maps.

Google's brain trust was again trying to change the rules of the game. Behind the scenes, they owe a sizable debt to a man nearly unknown outside the geeky confines of cyberlaw. He is Tim Wu, a Columbia Law School professor who provided the intellectual framework that inspired Google's mobile phone strategy. One of the school's edgier profs, Wu attends the artfest Burning Man, and admits to having hacked his iPhone to make it work on the T-Mobile (DT) network.

And the ever-modest Larry throws in the following helpful signpost:

Lawrence Lessig, a Stanford University law professor who has been the leader in arguing for reduced restrictions on what can go up on the Internet, predicts that Wu will become even more influential than he himself has been: "The second generation always has a bigger impact than the first."

Clearly, a name to remember.

Red Hat Enters Cloud Cuckoo Land

There has been a lot of interesting blogospheric comment on Red Hat's latest move:

Cloud computing with Red Hat Enterprise Linux is a web-scale virtual computing environment powered by Amazon Web Services. It provides everything needed to develop and host applications: compute capacity, bandwidth, storage, and the leading open source operating system platform, Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Cloud computing changes the economics of IT by enabling you to pay only for the capacity that you actually use. Compute capacity can be scaled up or down on demand to accommodate changing workloads and business requirements. Red Hat Enterprise Linux for cloud computing makes it easy to develop, deploy, and manage your new and existing applications in a virtual computing environment.

One point, though, seems not to have been picked up. And that is that open source has unique advantages in the cloud, er, space. Since open source applications are freely available, there is no barrier to expanding your use of the cloud at no extra cost (though I do wonder how support contracts are going to work there). Moreover, anyone can provide cloud computing versions of open source apps running on GNU/Linux, including dedicated services concentrating on specific sectors - leading to a highly efficient market.

I suspect that for the mainstream proprietary apps, the only people who will be able to offer them will be their respective software houses (given the complexities of licensing on in-house servers, imagine how messy it's likely to get with virtual systems potentially varying by the hour). Not much of a market there, methinks.

DRM's Worst Nightmare: Profit

This is what will finish off DRM:

Killing DRM is saving digital music, reckons British retailer 7Digital. The company says DRM-free music sales now outnumber sales of DRM-enumbered music by 4:1 , and credits EMI with the shift.

Removing the locks and keys also helps shift albums, with 70 per cent of MP3 sales by value being full albums.

Music companies that fight the move to DRM-less music are fighting against profits - and their shareholders might not like that....

Using a Commons to Protect a Commons

Here's some joined-up thinking: providing open access to key greenhouse figures:

The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (A.B. 32) requires CARB to adopt regulations creating a greenhouse gas registry by Jan. 1, 2008, putting in place what appears to be the country's most comprehensive and sophisticated greenhouse gas registry.

The proposed regulations were developed with input from public and private stakeholders, state agencies and the general public. Modeled after the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR), a voluntary greenhouse gas reporting program started in 2001, the regulations detail which industrial sectors will report, what the reporting and verification thresholds and requirements will be, and how calculations will be made. Approximately 800 facilities will be required to report greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which CARB estimates will represent 94 percent of California's total carbon dioxide production from stationary sources.

(Via Open Access News.)

Openbravo Acquires Librepos

Here's a classic example of an open source micro-acquisition:

This acquisition will benefit the Librepos community of users and developers for several reasons. First, the continuation of Librepos is now guaranteed, Librepos will be an independent product of the Openbravo portfolio hosted in Sourceforge, and is and will be open source and licensed under the GPL. Forums will continue actively and there will be frequent releases of Librepos. Openbravo is a company truly committed to open source and believes in the strengths of the community to drive innovation.

Second, I will continue to be involved in the future of Librepos. I am the founder and main developer of Librepos since I published Librepos in January 2005. Now I joined Openbravo as Senior Architect and Librepos is part of my responsibilities. This is also great for me because previously to this acquisition I used to spend my spare time on Librepos, now I will have more time for Librepos, because now Librepos is part of my job.

One of the biggest problems with young open source projects that depend on one or a few key coders is ensuring their survival and continuity. Being bought is one obvious way to do that, with the benefits listed above. In fact, the benefits are far greater in the case of a small open source project than they are for a small closed-source product company.

As the comment above points out, open source projects, even successful ones, are often part-time jobs for the coders - something that is rarely the case in the world of traditional software. Bringing several smaller software projects together, as with Openbravo and Librepos, really is a case of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts.

What's Wikipedia Got Against Open Source?

This is curious:

In case you didn't notice, Openbravo does not have an entry in the English edition of the Wikipedia, the fine community driven encyclopedia.

For some reason, the word Openbravo has been "blacklisted" and any attempt to create an entry about Openbravo gets automatically deleted.

Given the open source-y nature of Wikipedia, you would have thought it would have had a natural tendency to look favourably on open source companies like Openbravo. So what gives, Jimmy?

Comparisons Are Odorous...

...but useful. Here's a nice analysis of the rather crowded open source systems management sector, with a graph of downloads by month. As the post notes:

The volume of downloads is indicative, like search trends, of the relative mind share for each project. Download volume isn’t a perfect measure, but it is one of the best available. I doubt even the projects themselves have an absolutely accurate idea of how many installations they have.

(Via 451 CAOS Theory.)

BBC: Bound to Be Beaten on iPlayer?

Interesting:

We met with Mark Taylor, President of the Open Source Consortium (OSC) last night, directly after his meeting with the BBC to discuss opening-up the iPlayer to run on more platforms than just the Microsoft browser.

It appears that the meetings were positive and boiled down to two points, the BBC feels they haven’t communicated their desires for iPlayer properly and that they want the iPlayer to run on an open platform.

That seems to offer some hope things are moving in the right direction. This, on the other hand, guarantees it:

Both Mark Taylor (OSC) and Becky Hogge (Open Rights Group) will be taking part in a discussion with the BBC to further discuss the iPlayer situation this Friday at 10am.

The BBC stands no chance against those two....

Update: Here's the OSC's official report on the meeting.

Happy Birthday, GNU/Linux

RMS sends his own characteristic birthday greetings to celebrate the marriage of GNU and Linux:

15 years have passed since the combination of GNU and Linux first made it possible to use a PC in freedom. During that time, we have come a long way. You can even buy a laptop with GNU/Linux preinstalled from more than one hardware vendor, although the systems they ship are not entirely free software. So what holds us back from total success?

(The answer, in case you were wondering, is "social inertia".)

More on Mobile Linux

Both the Open Handset Alliance and [the LiMo Foundation] leverage open source business models, and both rely on industry leaders to contribute market-proven technologies to open source community. Many of the players/members/founders are the same OEM and silicon companies in each camp to remain relevant to operators who narrow down to a single Linux platform, whichever they select.

LiMo and the Open Handset Alliance will likely both achieve many of their consortium goals in the market, avoiding a zero sum game. In fact, it doesn’t have to be that Open Handset Alliance is the exclusive platform for any OEM or carrier, or even exclusive Linux platform, but very clearly the open source counterbalance will be a LiMo compliant platform. Linux fragmentation still exists and will for some time Outside of the Linux world, however, competition from other platforms including Symbian and Microsoft is immense, intense, pervasive, and won’t sit idly by as the Open Handset Alliance and LiMo try to gain traction. For either partnership’s long term survival, its imperative that the two determine how to co-exist and even mutually benefit from one another at the expense of the non-Linux and fragmented Linux parties.

This is particularly interesting because it comes from Wind River, a member of both the Open Handset Alliance and the LiMo Foundation. Even more interesting is the fact that it was a long-time rival and opponent of mobile Linux, but afterwards saw the light, and is now an important promoter of the latter.

Why Linux is Great, Part 9392

What makes the code in the kernel so great is not that it goes in perfect, it's that we whittle all code in the treee down over and over again until it reaches it's perfect form.

So says Dave Miller, and he should know.

Beyond a Game

Sixth Floor Labs LLC, a Linux game development company, has launched their business today. Founded by Ethan Glasser-Camp and Carl Li, the company aims to improve Linux's desktop feasibility through the creation of high-quality games. Games are "sold" to the Internet community through the "ransom model" -- for one large payment, the product is released under the GPL and freed forever.

If this reminds you of something, maybe it's this:

The ransom model offered by Sixth Floor Labs follows in the footsteps of the Blender Foundation campaign, which raised 100,000 EUR in seven weeks, and the Free Ryzom ampaign, which raised pledges for 170,000 EUR in twenty-five days.

But this goes far beyond games - or even open source. It's essentially the model that has been proposed for many domains, for example drug development.

Instead of today's creaking system of drugs protected by pharmaceutical patents, one suggestion is to offer a bounty - a big one - for the company that comes up with a solution to a medical problem. Instead of patenting that solution, it is then put into the public domain - rather as Sixth Floor Labs propose doing with their games once the "ransom" has been paid - for anyone to exploit.

MuleSource Hits a Million (Downloads)

MuleSource is not the highest-profile of open source companies, but it is certainly storming away:

MuleSource (www.mulesource.com), the leading provider of open source infrastructure and integration software, today announced that Mule has surpassed the one million downloads milestone. Following an initial open source release in 2003 by creator Ross Mason, Mule has become the enterprise developer's most-used integration platform, and is currently deployed in more than 1,000 production environments worldwide. A partial list of Mule users and customers can be found at http://www.mulesource.com/customers/.

This kind of hidden success is just so typical of open source these days: there's lots going on, but only at moments like this does it surface.

How Do You Do, Dojo?

New one on me:

Dojo is an Open Source DHTML toolkit written in JavaScript. It builds on several contributed code bases (nWidgets, Burstlib, f(m)), which is why we refer to it sometimes as a "unified" toolkit. Dojo aims to solve some long-standing historical problems with DHTML which prevented mass adoption of dynamic web application development.

(Via 451 CAOS Theory.)

Let a Thousand Mobile Linuxes Bloom

One of the (many) question marks hanging over Google's Open Handset Alliance is how it fits in with the other mobile Linuxes out there - and what they think about it. Well, this is what LiMo says:

“The LiMo Foundation welcomes the news of Google’s mobile initiative. We believe Google’s entry into the mobile industry and the launch of the Open Handset Alliance further validate mobile Linux as the foundation technology enabling convergence within and beyond mobile,” said Morgan Gillis.

But Mandy Rice-Davies doubtless applies.

Radiohead Do It Again

They really get the hang of this new music stuff, don't they?

LIMITED EDITION 7 ALBUM USB STICK - 10 DEC

Strictly limited edition 4Gb USB stick, shaped in Radiohead's iconic "bear" image and housed in a bespoke deluxe box. Contains all seven Parlophone albums (including one live album) available as CD quality WAV audio files. Also contains digital artwork for each album.

Let us count the ways: time-limited edition; .Wav format, original digital artwork, wacky physical format. Yup, that's cool. (Via paidcontent.org.)

The Java Phoenix

What a difference a year makes.

In 2006, Java was looking distinctly long in the tooth. Widely used, yes, but hardly an exciting technology. Then Sun finally adopts the GNU GPL, and - whoosh. Two clear signs of this have appeared just recently (it takes that long for these things to work their way through the system.)

The first, obviously, is the gPhone, which seems to be using Java extensively (although it's hard to tell how, just now). The other is Red Hat's agreement with Sun:

Red Hat, the world’s leading provider of open source solutions, today announced an agreement with Sun Microsystems to advance open source Java software. Red Hat has signed Sun’s broad contributor agreement that covers participation in all Sun-led open source projects by all Red Hat engineers.

In addition, Red Hat has signed Sun’s OpenJDK Community TCK License Agreement. This agreement gives the company access to the test suite that determines whether an implementation of the Java Platform Standard Edition (Java SE) platform that is derived from the OpenJDK project complies with the Java SE 6 specification.

Red Hat is the first major software vendor to license the Java SE Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK), in support of Java SE compatibility. To help foster innovation and advancement of the Java technology ecosystem, Red Hat will also share its developers' contributions with Sun as part of the OpenJDK community. These agreements pave the way for Red Hat to create a fully compatible, open source Java Development Kit (JDK) for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, including the Java Runtime Environment (JRE).

GPhone: Microsoft Still Not Picking It Up

So the GPhone has landed, or rather:

“We are not building a GPhone; we are enabling 1,000 people to build a GPhone,” said Andy Rubin, Google’s director of mobile platforms, who led the effort to develop the software.

And, of course, it's how they're enabling those 1,000 companies to create GPhones that's critical:

The software running on the phones may not even display the Google logo. Instead, Google is giving the software away to others who will build the phones. The company invested heavily in the project to ensure that all of its services are available on mobile phones. Its ultimate goal is to cash in on the effort by selling advertisements to mobile phone users, just as it does on Internet-connected computers.

It's a totally different model: you make it as easy as possible for companies to design the phones, you help them sell as many as possible, and then make your money from the user-base. Microsoft's John O’Rourke, of course, still doesn't get it (or maybe just pretends not to):

“They may be delivering one component that is free,” he said. “You have to ask the question, what additional costs come with commercializing that? I can tell you that there are a bunch of phones based on Linux today, and I don’t think anyone would tell you it’s free.”

Sorry, John, that's was "free as in freedom", rather than "free as in beer".

Update 1: Lazy me: here's the original press release. And another thing: note that as well as GNU/Linux, as expected, there is also Java. Now consider what might have happened had Java not be GPL'd....

Update 2: Here's a nice quote from one of the Mr Googles hisself:

Sergey Brin: “As I look at it I reflect, ten years ago I was sitting at a graduate student cubicle. We were able to build incredible things,. There was a set of tools that allowed us to do that. It was all open technologies. It was based on Linux, GNU, Apache. All those pieces and many more allowed us to do great things and distribute it to the world. That is what we are doing today, to allow people to innovate on today’s mobile devices. Today’s mobile devices are more powerful than those computers I was working on just ten years ago. I cannot wait to see what today’s innovators will build.”

RMS will be pleased at the rare call-out for GNU there.

Update 3: Whoops, should've spotted this:

The one I really can’t figure out is this: how did Google (and friends) manage to build a “complete mobile phone software stack” built on the GPL licensed “open Linux Kernel” that’s itself licensed under the “commercial-friendly” Apache v2 license that protects would-be adopters from the “from the ‘viral infection’ problem.” Before you ask, yes that’s a direct quote, and yes I think using it is an exceptionally poor decision. I expected more from you, Google.

Very odd.

A Question of Standards

Andy Updegrove's Standards Blog is one of my favourites, because he clearly knows what he is talking about, and this means his analyses in the area of standards are highly insightful. But here's an interesting move:

In my case, this blog is the tool that I control that can project my voice the farthest. And unlike so many media channels today, its audience is not self-selected to be conservative or liberal politically. What this tells me is that I have the opportunity, and perhaps the responsibility, to use this platform when appropriate not to tell people what to think, but to raise questions that need to be thought about, and perhaps encourage others to do the same as well.

Accordingly, this is the first in a series of pieces that you can expect to appear on Mondays on an irregular basis, each introduced with the name "The Monday Witness." The topics will vary, but the common theme will be to highlight instances of action and inaction in the world today that violate widely held standards of human decency.

I think this is absolutely right: as blogs grow in importance and stature, they become an important new way of communicating with people that cut across traditional - and usually unhelpful - political lines. This doesn't mean that all bloggers should immediately starting ranting on random subjects close to their heart (besides, I already do that...), but it does open up interesting possibilities for engaging in a wider discourse.

The 3D Digital Commons as Metaphor

A few months back I wrote about a video showing an intriguing project that built on the commons of public images posted to Flickr and the rest. By patching these together it was possible to recreate full, 3D representations of public spaces.

There's now a site with more info about this, as well as a paper on the subject:

With the recent rise in popularity of Internet photo sharing sites like Flickr and Google, community photo collections (CPCs) have emerged as a powerful new type of image dataset. For example, a search for “Notre Dame Paris” on Flickr yields more than 50,000 images showing the cathedral from myriad viewpoints and appearance conditions. This kind of data presents a singular opportunity: to reconstruct the world’s geometry using the largest known, most diverse, and largely untapped, multi-view stereo dataset ever assembled. What makes the dataset unusual is not only its size, but the fact tha it has been captured “in the wild”—not in the laboratory—leading to a set of fundamental new challenges in multi-view stereo research.

What's striking about this research - aside from the results, which are pretty dramatic - is that it provides a perfect metaphor for the benefit of pooling digital resources to create a commons. In this case, 2D pictures, many of limited value in themselves, are patched together to create an astonishingly detailed 3D representation of places that goes far beyond any single shot. And the more photos that are added, the richer that commons becomes. Exactly like all other digital commons.

Web 2.0 is Dead, Long Live Openness

An interesting post from Tom Foremski, who, even if he doesn't always grok the underlying dynamics of open source and its offshoots, is certainly plugged into the right people in Silicon Valley, and is very sharp about spotting trends there:

Whenever I meet with VCs I've noticed that there is a growing distaste for Web 2.0 startups. The "Web 2.0" term, in connection with a startup, and as a collection of concepts, is very tired in this community.

I think this is good news. Although I've used "Web 2.0" as a shorthand for a group of sites/services/technologies, what is much more important are the driving forces behind them. And those, quite simply, are openness, sharing and the Net-based, distributed methodology pioneered by open source. The more we concentrate on those core currents underneath, and the less on the trendy froth on top, the better.

The Bookless Author

Somebody looking at the bigger picture:

The past few days I have been in talks with Sina's VIP Book Channel. We will sign a contract on 11 November so that henceforth I will no longer put out books in print. I will write exclusively online, giving my readers material on Sina VIP. Qimen Dunjia will be my last print novel.

Many readers may be asking themselves: why?

The reason is very simple: environmental protection. Since I began writing horror novels in 1999 I have published 14 books [list of titles omitted]. How much paper was used to market these books across the country? How many forests were chopped down? The unlimited space online wastes neither paper nor ink—it doesn't consume resources. Sina's VIP Books has opened up a new model for reading: authors get income, the environment is preserved, and the audience can read things easily and cheaply. At the same time it is a blow to piracy—it accomplishes several things at one stroke.

Open Source and Virtual Deals

As usual, Matt Asay is spot-on with his analysis of Fonality's acquisition of Insightful Solutions, especially here:

With this Fonality + Insightful/SugarCRM solution, customers will benefit from a unified solution that connects employees with presence management, instant messaging, fixed and mobile calling, and provides a single 360-degree view of customers and business partners.

Given SugarCRM's technology role in this deal, I'm surprised that SugarCRM wasn't involved in the press release. However valuable Insightful's technical understanding of SugarCRM, it's still SugarCRM's code that sits at the heart of this acquisition.

Having said that, it's perhaps telling that open source enables a close relationship with SugarCRM...without a close relationship. Most of SugarCRM's code is open, thereby enabling Insightful to build expertise that would be difficult to achieve with a proprietary product.

In effect, deals can be "done" without asking permission or even telling the other partners involved. The latter nonetheless benefit from the enrichment of the ecosystem surrounding their products that new uses generate.

A Passionate Plea Against Patents

One of the winners of the the 2007 essay contest on "Equitable access: research challenges for health in developing countries" is the following passionate diatribe against the murderous inequity of patents:

The usual, if untenable, reason for granting patent monopolies is that excess revenue is spent on research for new drugs and that this stimulates further research and leads to more innovations. On the contrary, there is hardly any pharmaceutical company that spends more than 15% of its annual revenue on research. The rest goes to other things: advertising, marketing, lobbying, etc. Their research on diseases found in developing countries has always been insufficient. New drugs for the treatment of tropical diseases are rare and far between, and are often not the result of pharmaceutical industry research. Research is expensive and requires lots of money, no doubt. It takes resources to generate innovation. However, maintaining pharmaceutical patents is even more expensive. Like Belding Scribner’s shunt, innovation must address needs and reach the people who have those needs; otherwise it is not innovation.

What we need is a paradigm shift, a new way of organizing, promoting and financing research and innovation, one that would ensure an intercontinental balance of interests and research priorities.

(Via Open Access News.)

I'm Sorry, Dave, I Can't Tell You That...

One thing I often hammer on about is the essential re-usability of open content. Here's a good example: AskWiki, a kind of semi-intelligent front-end to Wikipedia that lets you frame questions it attempts to answer autonomously using that body of information:

AskWiki, developed in partnership between AskMeNow and the Wikimedia Foundation, is a preliminary integration of a semantic search engine that seeks to provide specific answers to questions using information from Wikipedia articles.

What's particularly cool is that is also applies classic Darwinian evolution through collaborative refinements:

Users can improve the accuracy of the AskWiki engine via the categorization feedback mechanism. Users can categorize each AskWiki Answer as an article deemed either Correct, Incorrect or Uncertain. This user feedback is processed by AskWiki to improve the search capabilities and accuracy of the AskWiki engine.

Members of the AskWiki Community are encouraged to expand upon correct answer articles and correct the incorrect or uncertain ones, re-categorizing the articles as they are updated. These efforts are tied directly into the AskWiki engine as well.

Although very simple at the moment, this has great potential. Wikipedia is rather passive, waiting for you to find stuff; AskWiki, by contrasts, tries hard to "understand" what you want, and give it to you. Now extrapolate the "understand" bit, and you get something very interesting.... (Via Language Log.)