Slashdot Mirror
Embracing Insanity
There's a continuing avalache of technical/OS and other books and manuals, but very few that remind us why we should care about this stuff and, better yet, give us the tools, arguments and data to convince others.
"Embracing Insanity," by Russell C. Pavlicek (Linux Evangelist for Compaq's Professional Services organization, and 20-year computer industry veteran) is funny, smart and warm-hearted, something one could hardly expect from a book on the origins, meaning and history of the open source movement. Even though it's written by an OS veteran, it seems to be written mostly for the non-technical who need to come to terms with a movement that is both evolutionary and revolutionary.
Many of the people reading this will know some or all of the material in '"Embracing Insanity: Open Source Software Development."
This is a book to give your parents if they are wondering what you're doing up in your room all night, your teachers if they haven no clue as to why software has political, social and cultural implications, and perhaps as important, your boss, as he or she wonders why they need to understand open source and free software if they really want to do business in the 21st century.
It's not great literature, and doesn't purport to be. It is written with great heart, clarity and authority. "Embracing Insanity" is a history, a primer and a social biography. It explains what to do regarding OS, and what not to do, the sometimes bizarre nature and traditions of the OS culture.This is not a book that will confuse or scare off non-techies with language that isn't explained, or technical information taken for granted. Quite the contrary. It brings OS to life in a way that is completely accessible, explaining it's significance as a business and social model for many kinds of institutions, and its profoundly non-technological promise.
Pavlicek traces the growth of the OS and the free software movement, but he catches the weird (insane, perhaps) history and spirit of this particularly geek-driven phenomena. He sees OS as the liberation of the geek culture, for which he obviously has great feeling and empathy. One of his very neat ideas is that OS software development is "Essential Disruptive Technology," one of a hand of particular technologies that come out of nowhere to alter the direction of technical progress, change the rules, and catch all of the regular players off guard.
"...it is not so much that Open Source ventures onto technical ground that has never been explored before. But it does bring the rules and expectations from one area of technology (large computer systems) into another area (PC systems). And, most importantly, it does so in a way that defies the norms of the computer industry..." OS, he writes, is a new way of thinking about technology and computing, especially desktop computing.
"Embracing Insanity" is an proselytizing book (with a foreword by our own Robin "roblimo" Miller, Editor-In-Chief for the Open Source Development Network (formerly Andover.net). It's clear that Pavlickek has been trying to explain to people for years why anybody should care about OS, so he's written this book to make sure the argument continues and widens. "Embracing Insanity" is the view of a true believer about a movement that is widely misunderstood, and whose commercial and social significance is still lost on much of the non-geek world.
Pavlicek claims that OS explodes the myth of the anti-social geek. In a world where dread stereotypes of geeks pop up on the evening news nightly, nothing, he says, could be farther from the truth. Geeks are quite social, they just have a different set of priorities. The OS community, he says, uses a number of ways to sociall connect with each other, from basic Net tools like email and IRC, mailing lists and weblogs to the rapidly-proliferating OS news and discussion sites (like Linux Today). In the Linux community, bands of people come together all the time to talk about OS software and, in some cases, the free software movement.
Pavlicek covers some well-known OS history, but he also breaks some original ground, including when he talks about the moral values of OS beyond technology and software. One of the key values of OS and its community, he argues, is truth. "In a world where people are constantly exchanging ideas, evaluating concepts, and suggesting enhancements, it is vitally important that everyone speak the truth as he sees it. If someone fails to speak the truth, the process of creating software will be greatly impaired." The impact of anything less in the OS environment is devastating to the process of creating software. "If someone in charge of a piece of code willingly lies about how the code functions to other developers seeking to use that code, that person has caused great harm. Someone who lies to a development team could cost that team hundreds of even thousands of wasted hours of development. In that case, the liar has caused numerous individuals to waste precious hours of time chasing down a dead-end road."
There aren't too many media, social or political movements so dependent on truth or vulnerable to posturing, inaccuracies, hype and blatant falsehoods. Pavlicek explains why out this sometimes ill-tempered meticulousness is deeply rooted in geek culture, where mistakes have consequences, and where patience for fools and dissemblers is short. That could hardly be said of politics or media.
"Embracing Insanity" is an argument for OS, but Pavlicek bluntly spells out the business realities -- pro and con -- that underlie open source development. Is it good or bad for the bottom line, good or bad for the consumer, practical or not for everybody else? In addition to writing a primer of OS terms and names, he also dispels some myth and confusion. Lots of people don't know that Open Source isn't freeware, or that OS software isn't the same thing as public-domain software.
There aren't a lot of books coming out of the Open Source movement that you can hand to anyone with an interest in the future of technology -- that would cover a lot of people -- that so confidently captures the spirit, history and potential of one of the most interesting social and technological ideas in the world. OS may have started as a programming movement, but it has mushroomed well beyond that. Pavlicek grasps this big idea, even as many of his more technically-minded colleagues still resist it.
Geeks have had a hard time explaining the significance of OS to the world beyond. Now they don't have to. "Embracing Insanity" delivers on its promise to explain why society should care about this communal movement that seemed to come out of nowhere in response to the looming Microsoftization of the planet. It's almost a cliche in publishing to say a book is long overdue, but that's the perfect description here.
"Embracing Insanity" is the right gift for the people who have no idea what you're doing with your life, but may, for lots of important reasons, need or want to know.
Purchase this book at ThinkGeek.
is it anything like freebsd? is there a netbds? is it posix compliant? can it run linxu executables?
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
ICQ# 77863057
[o]_O
And this has what to do with Enlightenment, specifically? Much like the earlier Star Wars/LEGO story being posted under the Games icon....
Like the title -- I'm definitely going to have to check this one out.
Whilst it has been a refreshing blip in the current socioeconomic structures to see a movement devoted to freedom (however small its domain) I really can't see that this movement is going to go anywhere or that it will even survive the next decade.
Let's face it, at the end of the day people need to get paid for what they do, and when the current "gold rush" has died down and programmers stop earning the rediculous sums of money they do for their monkey work, they won't have the time or the enthusiasm for "contributing to the community" or whatever BS line Stallmann and Raymond are spouting that week.
Mark my words, open source is not the future.
Last time it was out was in November 1999. I think Slashdot have got to put all the icons on the front page every 12 months or the Icons Union comes knocking...
D'you know there's an Internet Explorer icon as well? Makes a change from all the Borg ones.
D.
Does anyone think that a book like this would help open the minds of those enslaved by Microshit rhetoric and their own ignorance? I know people, as most of us do, who have blind faith in everything Microshit. If Gates, of Hell, says something, it's gospel. I like some MS products, as some are appropriate for what I do at work. However, too many other developers are never even willing to give anything non-MS a try. Anyone feel something like this, basic from the start, will help people be more open-minded?
Developers: We can use your help.
While I think that this will be worthwhile book, there might be some danger the title. THe reason for this concern is akin to the book The Dancing Wu-Li Masters. While quantum physics is an important endeavor, people talking about metaphysics and trying to explain the existence of dog does not bode well a lot of the public and damaged funding for projects because of its metaphycical aims instead of scientific goals.
It is good to try and explain physics and open source to a lamen, but care needs to be taken in how it is done.
Either give it away or get top dollar, but never sell yourself cheap.
Gee, if he went for a target audience even a little more specific than that, he wouldn't sell enough copies to justify writing the book.
--
The shareholder is always right.
Come on, Jon, Slashdot is the Linux news website. A slip-up like that just might get you ostracized (that is, if you didn't have permanent tenure here).
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
First we had cornfusion with:
PC - Personal Computer, Professional Consultant, Politically Correct, or Programmable Controller (which has since become PLC or Programmable Logic Controller)
then
ATM - Automatic Teller Machine, Adobe Type Manager, and Asynchronous Transfer Mode,
Now we've got:
OS - Operating System, Open Source. I thought it was 'OSS' Open Source Software, which should have little interferance from Office of Strategic Services or Oracle Support Service. Otherwise Linux is an OSOS, and NT is just SoSo.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
It seems to be the one great concept that I see many people here failing to realize. Many stories go by with people either screaming that because its free it should be OS, or if its going to be OS it must be free.
What really blows me away is the number of people who deem anything which runs or interacts with an OS product (read OS or any other item) must itself be OS. These same people are then so ignorant to blame companies for not developing more stuff for their pet OS software.
Maybe if its spelled out by someone trusted it may open some of the closed eyes. Open Source advocates are not necessarily open minded.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
If this book manages to demonstrate why software and ideas are different from real-life things (scarcity) and should therefore be free, I'm going to buy it.
I know this is going to sounds like flames spewing forth, but I think it needs to be said. Is anyone else sick of comments about typos in /. headlines?
Yeah, it's FreeBSD, not FreeBDS. Yes the name in the pres. poll was Ralph Nader, not Ralph Neder. You knew it, and so do I. Chances are, the /. Crew will notice it sooner or later too, and propmtly correct the mistake. I liken the annoyance of these posts to chat sessions where others correct your typos. It doesn't need to be pointed out. After all, how many typos can you find in the common comment thread? Should we correct all those too?
I am MuchTall
but I'm not going to explain it, noooo.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
This is a book to give your parents if they are wondering what you're doing up in your room all night,...
Are you kidding? I was doing what any normal, healthy, pubescent boy was doing... and praying like hell that my mother didn't walk in, and that Vivian Hsu would!!
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
> When the situation stablises,
when do you see that as being? (not that I neccesarily think that it won't, I'm just interested)
> , the inflated wages being paid out will drop to a reasonable rate.
Of course, but what exactly has that got to do with whether they are programming open or closed source software? It's true in either case isn't it?
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
You do realise that all our carefully constructed witty 'stating-the-bloody-obvious' karma-whorage is going to be marked down as 'Offtopic' now, don't you?
The only thing that comes close, it seems to me, is "One of the key values of OS and its community, he argues, is truth." Uh, yeah. Truth is irrelevant in closed development. Or investment banking or lifeguarding. Who cares if the engineers building that bridge are honest and forthright with each other?
As for the rest of it, proving that "geeks" aren't all homicidal sociopaths and borrowing "disruptive technology" from another author don't wildly impress me.
BTW, while doing a Google search to find where "disruptive technology" was cribbed from, I found this definition:
A disruptive technology is a technology or innovation "that results in worse product performance, at least in the near-term...[It] brings to the market a very different value proposition than had been available previously...Products that are based on disruptive technologies are typically cheaper, simpler, smaller, and, frequently, more convenient to use. [But, they generally] underperform established products in mainstream markets." (Christensen, 1997, p.xv)
double standard: we have to preview a story before we can submit it as a news item to slashdot. why do the editors not have to do the same thing? peer review: do it, and the end product will be better.
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
ICQ# 77863057
[o]_O
Your Linux news sites on OSDN are Linux.com and NewsForge. Slashdot is just News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
And yes, both BSD and LSD came out of Berkeley.
Will I retire or break 10K?
You really need to read this book.
Here are just a few reasons why OSS will thrive, even if the supposed end of the gold rush comes (out of curiosity, what do you think will make that happen within ten years?):
1) People have generally the same amount of free time regardless of how much they make. When I was making 40k per year years ago, I had the same amount of free time as I do now - in fact I have slightly less because I fee some obligation to produce a lot for how much I get paid. The only difference is how many things you can buy and how you can spend your free time... indeed, if I was making a lot less I would probably travel less, leaving more time to work on OS projects.
2) There's a lot of interest in OS at the college level. These people already are not making any money, they just do it for fun. Why would that change?
3) If there was a crash, there would be a lot of people who had saved up enough to retire - a number of them might go on to work on OS projects in thier spare time.
4) If you look really far ahead at when current programmers finally retire at about 80 or 90 years old, why wouldn't they take up OSS projects as a side hobby? If you look ahead at what happens at people in OSS now grow older, with new people behind them, is it not really likley that the OSS movement will grow tremendously in the next few hundred years?
5) Trolls are always wrong about future events, being short sighted and ignorant.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
it's already survived more than a decade quite nicely, thank you. The GNU project was founded in 1984; open source development is even older than that. The kind of people who produced open source software BEFORE the hype will still do it AFTER the hype, it seems to me.
Besides, many open source developers DO get paid for what they do.
I am a geek and I find some things to very interesting, things that people in general may think area boring, tedious, complicated or even nerdy. I also tend to spend so much tim on the things that I am interested in, so that i forget to eat occasionally, I don't have a huge social life, and i can also at times be considered as a traffic hazard.
There are a zillion little things that normal people care about that i neglect, i forget stuff, i say confusing things, and while girls get annoyed when other guys wonder what they look like naked, I annoy them by wondering if 3Dfx will ever return to beat nVidia.
So Im different.
Sometimes people tell me to get a life. but why would i do a thing like that? Why should I like zillions of others worry about a stain on my shirt. or about looking good, or being good at sports, or be the "hip guy" at my office or in my school?. Im not hip, im not good at sports, and I don't care about the stains.
In order to become the person I want to be I need to spend A lot of time on it, and maybe just maybe I will one day do some thing great. not because im smarter, just because i didnt spend my time trying to be an ordinary person.
E
I've said this before. Free software, and to a lesser extent, Open Source software, correct a glaring defect in copyright law with respect to software -- it fails to establish a public domain.
Not public domain in the sense of "expired copyright", but public domain in the sense that copyright is supposed to place examples of the art into the public for study and learning. Copyright is supposed to promote disclosure. Publication of object code is not disclosure. It is non-disclosure. Software copyright is a failure in that it grants a monopoly on object code without the required disclosure of the corresponding source code.
Over 99% of the people who purchase a novel will do nothing more with it then use it for entertainment purposes. However, the remaining tiny percent of the purchasers are the next generation's authors. They will read the novel, and from it, learn the art of writing new novels.
Software doesn't work that way. No amount of study of Windows 98 will teach you how to write an operating system. That's because Windows 98 doesn't come with source code. You can use it, but you aren't allowed to understand it. This is no accident. It is the express desire of Microsoft that, in spite of their receiving the benefits of a copyright monopoly, that no one be allowed to read (the technical term for reading object code is "reverse engineering") their copyrighted work. Says so right in their license. Says so, with very few exceptions, in every single license of every single piece of proprietary software on the market.
Imagine if a young student expressed interest in becoming an author, and was told: Ok, but you will have to learn how to write from scratch. There are no examples for you to learn from. You cannot read pre-existing novels. You will have to learn plot development, character development, plot twists, all from scratch -- from textbooks. You must make absolutely sure that you never, ever read someone else's novel, because that would "contaminate" you, and you could never legally write a novel, because you could be sued by the people whose novels you had read.
I don't think that the result would be a "progress" in the art of writing novels. Why should we think that by making every potential software developer "start from scratch" leads to better software?
Now substitute "software" for "novels", and "reverse engineer" for "read", and you will get a statement that most legal departments of software companies would quickly agree with.
No wonder Free software and Open Source software are considered akin to a revolution. For the first time in the history of software the doors are thrown open. People are finally allowed, and encouraged to understand software instead of just use it. The fact that over 99% of the people who use Free and Open Source software will never modify it is irrelevant. What is important is that the tiny fraction of young people who are curious and want to learn how software works so that they can write their own, finally have the opportunity to examine and play with full fledged, working, professional quality software. And in the case of Free software, they have the right to reuse and redistribute their own work -- the modified code.
Free and Open Source software are revolutionary because they transcend the political limits of copyright law, and create what copyright law should have created, but failed to. A way "To promote the progress of science and useful arts."
So, if I write a piece of code, even on my own time, my company owns it. If I write a book on my own time, I own it. Why is that? This isn't really on topic, but since he is a Compaq employee, how much of a cut is the company getting? NONE! Why do we have to give up our code!?!?
This post was made on company time.
Jon Katz intro:
"Russell Pavlicek, Linux and Open Source evangelist, has written an impassioned little book that purports to explain to the non-geek world in particular why they should care about the Open Source movement and the success of OS systems like Linux and FreeBSD. "
From ThinkGeek store:
List Price: $29.99
Save: $6.49 (21%)
Our Price: $23.50 (On Backorder)
I enjoy the irony that a book explaining and extolling the virtues of Open Source and free software must be purchased.
So, is there an open source version of this book, available for free download?
Perhaps there's an online version where people can edit and contribute new chapters, for the greater good -- many eyes creates better writing, no?
:)
-----
D. Fischer
ShoutingMan.com
Do you think maybe we could start including the list price in the summary box at the beginning of each review? I hate having to make several clicks at times just to check to see what the price of a book is on the linked book site (thinkgeek,fatbrain,etc.). It would be highly useful to me in deciding whether I want to go purchase this book immediately or want to wait for the library to pick it up.
--------- Beware the dragon, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
omelete is one way to spell the egg thingee, but omlette has nothing to do with eggs... it's a long and epic tale which would be horribly offtopic
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
ICQ# 77863057
[o]_O
-------
CAIMLAS
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
At least Jon knows that Open Source OSes INCLUDE BSD. As opposed to others, who say they are Open Source advocates, then only talks about Linux.
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
``Free software'' is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of ``free speech'', not ``free beer.'' The fact that it must be purchased is not ironic the fact that I could not buy a copy scan it in and post it on the net *is*. I think what O'Reilly does with books like the Debian book, the Samba book, and the net admin guide is a good comprimise OSS is not a very good model for writing a book but giving it away online can be. I read all three books online and then bought all but the Debian book. Just too much good stuff and I like the dead trees but I also like the fact that I knew what I was buying first. Read this to learn more
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
Sure, the UI and general workflow of a program you can duplicate pretty easily.
But what about learning how to design a a great colour correction algorithm? What about learning how Photoshop works efficently with files much bigger than availiable memory? In the case of IE, wouldn't it be nice to be able to see and learn from its rendering engine? Mozilla couldn't and had to build one from scratch.
Algorithmic and structural aspects to a program are one of the most important things to learn from, and knowing what other people have done can lead to someone else coming up with even better ideas in future products, or even in exisiting ones.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
People Can't Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms
We are the peer review.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
This is one of those books and Jon Katz rants that leans heavily on the perceived romantic, underground nature of Open Source and free software, but misses the technical issues greatly. Namely that most of the Great Works these movements are re-hashes of software that could have been used by our parents in the 1970s, leaving great figures in software and computer science wondering why we refuse to advance.
"If anyone had told me back then that getting back to embarrassingly primitive UNIX would be the great hope and investment obsession of the year 2000, merely because it's name was changed to Linux and its source code was opened up again, I never would have had the stomach or the heart to continue in computer science."
-- Jaron Lanier
Linus created Linux because he couldn't find a decent UNIX that he could get for his PC. It's not that he thought UNIX should be the future, or that UNIX is the ultimate operating system. Realize this. Somehow we've gotten ourselves all wrapped up in UNIX again, thinking that we're oh so cool, but we shouldn't have to be subjected to this nonsense. I think many technical gurus are similarly horrified that we've started a revolution that's given us exactly what we were trying to get away from (Jamie Zawinski and Rob Pike, for example). Stability, pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, yes, they are all good things. But this doesn't equate to "Linux over Windows."
The bottom line is that it's a shame Linux and FreeBSD are the crown jewels of Open Source. Sigh.
My father (as an illustration of a broader community) might benefit from this book. He believes (like many non-geeks would, I guess) that Public Domain and Open Source are essentially the same. His experience with PD software was the atrocious crap (by almost any standard) he bought on a CD from a shopping mall some years ago and now vehemently denies he ever wasted money on. I don't know if this book will do it. I don't know if it is do-able. If this book preaches to the Yet-to-Be-Converted and does so in terms that makes them realise that there may be a better way, then this is A Good Thing.
You don't need to tell me about the value of OS, but I am a small fish in a small sea...
When will this happen? I can't see this happening all that soon. The need for programmers is only going to go up, and yet (in this country, at least), the desire towards such a career is nowhere close to matching that.
Its rather obvious now, isn't it?
;)
First one reaches enlightenment, then one starts to use the penguin.
Saying that LSD came out of Berkeley is not exactly truthful. LSD was 'discovered' by a Swiss chemist in 1938 as he was searching for a headache medicine. Animal testing showed no painkilling properties, so he left it on his laboratory shelf. On April 16, 1943, he decided to do further testing on the drug and accidentally injested a small, unknown amount of LSD, thus experiencing the fun effects of LSD. (His diary entry about that day is rather interesting.) The US was first shipped LSD in 1949, and in the decade that followed, was tested on human beings to try to treat a variety of problems, including, but not limited to, alcoholism, schizophrenics, narcotics addicts, and criminals. Of course, it was found ineffective. (Source for this information.)
So, therefore, saying that BSD came out of Berkeley is like saying that Redhat "developed" Linux. Both might be instrumental in spreading the word about the respective product, but neither developed it.
>Will this book help me... get chicks?
If it does help, it might qualify as the strangest side-effect of anything I've ever done in my life! I doubt it will work, but go ahead and knock yourself out trying! 8^}
No they won't. The jobs available are available because no self-respecting programmer would work for a company that looks like a day-trader's fantasy. No programmer cares to deal with the crap of working for a company they full well will fail.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
There's a need for programmers because the companies are bogus. They don't know the first thing about the industry. They come in ready to IPO like on the first day.
No programmers who want to have time left with other people they care about are going to spend time working toward a dead end.
They're not the managers. They're not paid to design the application this industry really need. In fact they don't get much of a say to that effect.
You might find it hard to believe but people get sick of making vapor for someone else. And it's not even a question of some useless altruism. It's a question of sanity. That's all. There's a point where the buzzwordphiles make it impossible to get any bearing on where the company is going what they are developing and whether the developers really have a future. The hype becomes unbearable. Put simply the lack of any direction is disorienting and nauseating.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Wait a little while, ESR is writing a how_to_get_chix-HOWTO, it will be on Userfriendly. But not just yet...
Does anyone find it annoying that they are talking up the open source movement and then charging for the book?
----------
while (alive) { Work(); PayTaxes(); Eat(); Sleep(); }
Bool
You're talking (mostly) about dot-coms. When I talk about the need for programmers, I'm refering to the fact that almost everything is becoming computerized these days, and I'm not talking about programmers just pounding out web applications or even store-shelf software. I'm refering also to programmers who write the code on embedded systems chips that actually do the driving in new cars, the chips that can be found almost everywhere these days. I'm refering to programmers, yes, at the dot-coms, but also at the large respected companies with a good vision like Sun, HP, Microsoft, and Apple (and sure, why not, RedHat too).
Disillusion in the dot-com world? Sure, I'll give you that. But the real reason people aren't jumping into the field is society's disregard and even disdain for "nerdy" professions. By the time teenagers grow out of that phase, they can be stuck in a non-technical job with no technical skills.
Why name a book about a new revolutionary movement "Embracing Insanity"? I personally wouldn't shun the idea so quickly. Personally, a title like that would be a turn off. Why not call it "Embracing Sanity"? Is there anything I've missed?