5th Anniversary of Open Source

Augustus De Morgan writes "Five years ago today a brainstorming session in Palo Alto led to the adoption and promotion of the "open source" label. (You can find references to the label much earlier, however.) For some, it was a dark divergence from the free software movement; for others, the beginning of the adoption of key software principles into mainstream. Here's a growing set of resources and stories about the history of free and open source software, and a lament about the decline of altruism in the open source community."

Comments

Re:In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, according to Merriam-Webster, the term dates back to 1576. That would make it 427 years old.

Do you make your own clothes?

[airrage]

THIS ARTICLE IS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO BE VIEWED BY ADULTS AND THEREFORE MAY BE UNSUITABLE FOR CHILDREN UNDER 17. THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: PROVOKING THOUGHTS (PT), EXPLICIT SARCASM (ES), OR CRUDE INDECENT SPELLING (S).

Do you make your own clothes?

In response to a recent comment of mine, a reader responded with the following: "as long as it is open source, and I have the code". And for the first time, I really understood what he was saying. I mean I had read this comment in one form or another all through slashdot for years, but had never, ever, really understood the underlying context.

I asked myself, why this fervent clutch on free, open, uncompiled software? I mean do you make your own clothes? Obviously, no matter where you shop, it's much cheaper to make your own clothes (excluding your time, which open source doesn't take into account anyway), so who here makes their own clothes? I certainly don't. Who here built their own car? Cars are definitely closed. It would definitely be cheaper to build your own, because labor is 60% of a car, remove marketing, factory costs, overhead, you could build probably a nice car for a few thousand dollars. Has anyone constructed their own car? We, as a society, accept closed source in 99.999 percent of our lives: drugs (the legal kind), mail, electricity, phone, highways, pornography (bad example).

But the point, my dear brother, is that we keep getting pushed back by the tide of commercialism shoved down our throats. We stand, naked, on the beach in a fierce winter rain, sleeting, and we shake an angry fist. That's the point of open source: "as long as I have the code". Damn right. So we grit our proverbial teeth, and shivering, we slowly take the heel of our foot and draw a line in the sand. We get on all fours, hunkered against the wind, like some Gollum clawing the earth, and make our way forward. Our anger keeps us warm. I'll listen to the music you choose, I'll take your word on what I should view, I'll read only your approved books, I'll pay double, I'll watch all the commercials, I'll carefully listen to all telemarketers, I'll read spam, but I will not, under any circumstances, give up the code which talks to my mouse.

So why stand firm on open source? I don't believe it's because of some great ideal set forth in the constitution. I don't believe because it's any better, really, than closed systems. I do believe, and I hope I get it right here, is that it's because we've had enough and it's the last vine in the jungle. Because maybe, just maybe, a struggle means there is hope. And hope is a good thing. Maybe it's the hope that someday I could design my own car, or house, or remove the need for a phone, or create my own expressions of art, business, passion, and provide some modicum of balance and power, but only "as long as I have the code". Fuckn'a right.

Re:Do you make your own clothes?

[ch-chuck]

A better analogy would be, do we DESIGN our own cloths, automobiles. And, as a matter of fact my mom has made lots of cloths. She used to run the sewing machines a lot. Now she knits. Man she knits up a storm. Every night I sleep under these incredibly warm afghans lovingly made while she watched TV. Most of those cloths and patterns were, however, purchased plans, kits, etc.

Anyway, It's not at all inconceivable that a group of Ford engineers, in their spare time, make a 'dream design' automobile THAT THEY SHARE WITH ANYONE WHO WANTS A COPY. Say they work by day to earn a living, but are unhappy with the 'cost reducing' and shipping lousy products because of a n agressive marketing deadline. So they get together at Billy's Bar and Brainstorm and dream up the ultimate street rod, draw up plans most any shade tree mechanic can follow and publish it in Hot Rod, sell plans for mostly cost of reproduction. Sure, why not.

DO I Make my own recipies? Sure, I like to experiment in the kitches. They are usually derivities of someone elses (someone better at it than me!). There's plenty of 'do it yourself' people around.

To me it's all a matter of being independant. The thing that scares me the most is becoming dependant on some greedy a$$hole, with no alternative but to pay what they demand or die. They do want to enslave you, and freedom is a constant struggle, because there has always been greedy, domineering, petty tirants, in business and government, just like there have always been obsequious sheep ready to follow them to the slaughterhouse.

Re:Do you make your own clothes?

[lenski]

I am Not an economist... I AM a longtime software developer...

Moore's law has allowed, for what may be one of the first times in history, the de-insdustrialization of a major economic product: Computer software. When I started 30+ years ago, computer access was for the dedicated geek (this I know... :-) ). A DEC PDP-8 cost 10 grand. Its 2.5 Mbyte RK05 was an additional 9 grand.

Today, just about anyone can afford a crappy little out-of-date 400+MHz, 256Mbyte, 20+gig system, which can make a single individual developer economically productive.

Coupled with The Internet, such people can virtually gather together to be economically more productive.

This has caught all sorts of people by surprise, and those who are accustomed to simply "managing" or "owning" the means of production have been caught flat-footed by this sea-change in the possession of economic productivity. (I think this is why the OSS/libre software movement is critically important for the developing world, and why I wish that I had enough savings to stop working for money today in order to make a real contribution...)

One of the points (in my opinion) that we must remember is that there are people and/or organizations what want to return to the days when the few could control the resources required for economic productivity of the many.

FYI, I am using agricultural societies (exemplified by feudalism, as observed in places like Europe) and industrial society as basis for this thinking.

I am not a communist, but I will refuse to ever allow someone else to take away my freedom to code, and additionally, to team up with others of like mind to satisfy our needs for information systems productivity.

altruism needs help

[Kunta Kinte]

altruism - Unselfish concern for the welfare of others; selflessness.

Taking the welfare of others may be a problem when one can not secure their own.

I've heard some people suggest programming is not a real occupation ie. hobby programmers are all we need, and others have reportly suggested programmers should wait tables to make a living while continuing to code in their free time.

I've noticed that funded open source projects do best, while unfunded projects usually don't usually become a force in their market. This goes for open-source and proprietory software equally.

altruism and open source should not be seen as the same thing. Some projects are started because the programmer had an alruistic motives, but unless that/those developer(s) have some source of funding/resources, it becomes very difficult to spend the 3+ hours it takes sometimes to get a decent size project of the ground.

Ask yourself can you, are you, spending that about of time serving the needs of others outside your family in anyway? Without anything in return?

Erm. Limited to KDE, Gnome, and Linux kernel?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's all the high-complexity projects he feels are linux successes?

What about NetBeans, Apache, JBoss, Mozilla, PostGres and OpenOffice to name a few? All the applications that Linux worth using.

Yes, several of these have corporate investment, but still.

Earliest occurrence in google groups?

[Anonymous Coward]

(You can find references to the label much earlier, however.)

That link points to something from 1993, but there is at least this from 1990:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1990Dec4.1100 45.13335@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG

Re:Altruism....

[JimDabell]

Altruism is important, but ultimately people make most decisions on an economic basis. And people develop Open Source software for the recognition and geek-chic fame they get, for the opportunity to be the key player in a project when perhaps they are more of a cog in their day job

The term "Open-Source" was specifically coined to promote open development as a sound business decision. That is the difference between Free software and Open-Source software - there is no "software should be libre" ideal, only "open development can make you more money".

What should come next...

[CaptCanuk]

Open Specifications and Open Documentation. There has to be an organization maintaining a list of specifications and documentation for hardware/software. Software tends to be better at this but I always hoped that product manufacturers would give out more specifications on their hardware instead of just assuming that their people can produce the best drivers. At the very least, it would allow for individuals to create new drivers for Operating Systems/Environments the company isn't providing drivers for.

I understand that some companies want to maintain a competetive edge but how about releasing documentation on hardware from their previous rev?

Plus a central repository for all of this information would be nice instead of looking at each company's site or going through dedicated external developer liasons.

Re:The Decline of Altruism and the Triumph of Busi

[La Temperanza]

When I first started looking around at the parallel universe of BSD, it was quite an interesting experience. In the Linux community, I was quite disgusted by the numerous commercial entities that used available code freely, but found ways to bypass the GPL when it came to their own innovation, as well as their attitude of "we distributors know better then you programmers."

Well, BSD doesn't attempt to force companies that use its code into open-sourcing it or providing it for free. Which means that those companies who do are the type you want on your side in the first place, because they *believe*.

By the way, to Anonymous Cowards waiting with baited breath to perform a repetitive action involving a certain Netcraft article: Try performing a repetitive action involving your genital areas instead. It's much more intellectually rewarding.