Ask Bruce Perens About Linux and Open Source

A lot is going on these days, ranging from the endlessly amusing SCO soap opera to plenty of mostly positive news about Linux and Open Source adoption by both corporate and government users, not to mention an increasing number of commercial applications being ported to Linux. And, of course, LinuxWorld is right around the corner. Bruce Perens is certainly as appropriate a person as any to help us get a handle on the current (and possibly future) state of Linux and Open Source. We'll send him 10 of the highest moderated questions, and post his answers as soon as he gets them back to us. As usual, one question per post, please, and don't bother asking questions that can easily be answered with a couple of minutes' worth of online research.

Comments

Bruce?

[James A. A. Joyce]

What do you feel is the greatest threat to the open source movement? Is the threat corporate, legal, self-inflicted, or a mixture of both?

(Oh, and FP.)

Re:Bruce?

[Anonymous Coward]

What should we, the Linux Community do to respond to this endless barrage of FUD and ruthless attacks from that corporate giant in Redmond?

Re:Bruce?

[mal3]

I hate to say this given the forum, but the reverse is also true. Open Source also does not equal quality. We have alot of people out there advocating solutions that maybe aren't the best option just because they're open source. If someone gets burned using a open source product that's not up to snuff it brands all of Open Source software. When you advocate make sure you're advocating good solutions not good licenses.

--Mal

Re:Bruce?

[ichimunki]

I kind of disagree. I think what you're pointing out is the major flaw in the whole Open Source movement's approach as compared to that of the Free Software movement-- and I know some people think they're interchangeable, but I feel like there are at least two prevalent strains within the larger GNU/Linux and BSD user communities.

The Open Source people want to concentrate on all the fiscal and technical reasons to use Free Software. By framing the argument as monetary, you get into this long debate about things like Total Cost of Ownership, and you have to spend hours splitting hairs and qualifying everything in order for Open Source to "win". Same with technical issues. A lot of Open Source software lacks features that proprietary software has. But the Open Source zealot goes on about "shallow eyeballs" or whatever and makes claims that the software improves more rapidly or is more secure or of higher quality because what right-minded programmer would want to show the world his or her crappy code and so on... but bugs do get into release versions. Software is found to have security holes. It's a part of designing complex systems. It's easy for someone to, as you say, "get burned", especially if they've had their expectations raised by this kind of advocacy.

The Free Software zealot, on the other hand, simply says: "So what if the software is not as feature-filled as proprietary software XYZ? So what if there's a bug? At least with Free Software I have the freedom to add that feature or to fix the bug. That's something proprietary software XYZ will never allow. Therefore, the choice is simple because freedom is too important to give up for a couple bucks or a nifty feature." That's a sort of advocacy that won't get users burned later because they'll be aware that they may be making tradeoffs... but at least they'll understand why.

Any background moves?

[leandrod]

Are you aware of any background moves by the major players in this farce that could bring a speedy resolution? Or, do you have any hopes for a speedy resolution?

Re:Any background moves?

[Sri Lumpa]

There were a few before they were posted on /.

future of SCO Linux Licensing

[stonebeat.org]

What is the future of SCO Linux Licensing. Will large corporation fall for it, just to be on the safe side? Or are the corporation going to avoid using linux, till the final outcome of the saga.

For the desktop...

[JeffTL]

In all honesty, what is the best overall desktop operating system at this time, and what do you think will be the best overall desktop operating system in a year? Two years? Five years?

Re:For the desktop...

[cshark]

I'm a big fan of using the Altaire for my business applications. My fingers never get tired...

Why?

[Dark Lord Seth]

Isn't Mr Perens a slashdot regular himself or something? Wouldn't that more or less defeat the whole purpose of holding a slashdot interview, then send him the question he can read himself and then making him answer them while he could have answered them by just replying?

Re:Why?

[ichimunki]

It does seem a bit odd to ask interview questions of a guy who reads the site regularly, but given that he is one of the Free Software community's leading lights, I think a formal interview makes sense... and here's my question:

Whenever the topic of Free Software (or Open Source) comes up outside Slashdot, we only seem to hear a few names (not that this is all that different from proprietary software news where the number of recognizable names is possibly even smaller)... In your opinion, other than RMS, ESR, Linus, and yourself, who's out there that's really saying good stuff about Free Software? Who is not only doing interesting stuff, but talking about it in a way that keeps you interested past the sound bites? If the four of you were, um, somehow "unavailable for comment" for an extended period, who from the Free Software community would you hope would take up the reins of being in the public eye and doing spokesperson-like things?

Turning the tide

[daeley]

In recent weeks, we've seen a concerted attack of FUD regarding open source in general but Linux in particular; all signs point to this being but the first in a series of new battles. I think it's been too easy for a lot of people to scoff at SCO's brazen and seemingly suicidal behavior, mistaking what is in fact a serious threat.

With that in mind, what are some ways you think open source/free software users and organizations can counter these attacks and, much more importantly, attack back?

BSD

[Anonymous Coward]

If Linux development is supremely messed up by SCO, do you see the BSDs picking up, and taking over where Linux once did?

Re:BSD

[Arandir]

It's important to remember that Linux got a huge boost in popularity when BSD was being sued by USL. It was the wrong lawsuit at the wrong time.

As a FreeBSD user, I'm still ambivalent in the attitude towards BSD gaining popularity via the SCO FUD campaign. One part of me thinks it's great, but another part is embarrassed to be profiting at a friend's expense. It's not "fair" that people will be choosing BSD based on the childish rantings of Daryl McBride. But neither is it "fair" that people choose Linux just because the media tells everyone that Linux == Open Source.

Wag the dog

[stratjakt]

The political/ethical/moral spin that everyone wants to put on open source adds an unnessesary, IMO, emotional baggage in a field that should be directed by logic and the right tool for the job.

We see softwares of various levels of Free shoehorned into tasks they werent created for, or arent suitable for.

When will software choices be made by virtue of technical merit, and not political views?

Re:Wag the dog

[lordcorusa]

I agree with another response to this post that it is not a question, but a bit of rhetoric, and should thus be excluded from the interview.

However, I would like to point out that much of the "political/ethical/moral spin" attributed to open source may in fact not be "emotional baggage", but simply another level of non-functional software requirements specification.

For example, when I choose software, one of the first things I look at is license. I typically choose software with a free/open license (if available and adequate) over software with a proprietary license, even if the proprietary software happened to have a slightly larger feature set, slightly better performance, etc... That is not to say that I would never choose a piece of proprietary software, just that it has to have an *extremely* compelling feature for me to do so. Fortunately for me, virtually all tasks I do with software can be performed adequately by open source software.

I don't consider my choice to be an emotional one, I consider it to be a rational one. By choosing OSS, I guarantee that I am free from licensing/auditing issues, that I will not suffer unduly from an orphaned product or be forced to upgrade because of vendor lock-in, that I can more easily diagnose/fix bugs, etc... These are all what are known as non-functional software requirements.

Perhaps you have had no training in the engineering side of computer science, but there are two overall kinds of software requirements: functional and non-functional. Functional software requirements are the kind you clearly prefer, however not all software requirements can be boiled down to the cold, hard logic and math needed by functional requirements. You cannot specify non-functional requirements numerically, nor can you define them with predicate calculus, but they are requirements which have benefits, costs, and rationals none the less. When gathering software requirements, you ignore non-functional requirements at your own peril.

So take care the next time you accuse people of making emotional decisions. Perhaps you simply are not looking at all of the layers of their decision-making process.

Re:Wag the dog

[rgmoore]

When will software choices be made by virtue of technical merit, and not political views?

What makes you think that software will ever be chosen exclusively by technical merit? Even if you exclude "political issues" there will always be factors like price that will have significant impact on decisions about which software to use. And neglecting the importance of those "political issues" (presumably mostly licensing) is extremely foolish. The ability to modify software and use it legally in the way that you want to is a very important real-world consideration, and deriding it as a secondary political question is a mistake.

Or, to put it a different way, people will make decisions based on technical merit rather than political views when those political views are no longer a relevant factor. Since they currently are and are likely to remain so for the forseeable future, the answer is no time soon.

Civil Disobedience

[ccarr.com]

Bruce,

A while ago IIRC you cancelled plans to demonstrate a technology which would have run afowel of the DMCA in defference to the wishes of your then-employer HP. Now that you are no longer with HP, do you plan to go ahead with it?

I'm not trying to goad you on, mind you. Breaking the law is a serious business and if you have reconsidered, I certainly won't think any less of you.

Beyond the SCO court case

[Marx_Mrvelous]

Putting the current SCO thing aside, what do you think about software producer liability? Microsoft recently made a big deal about increasing how much they'll "protect" their customers, but that's mostly a PR stunt. Do you think that there will be a major court case incolving IP that "slips" into software, and that it might change people's trust in Open Source software?

Hinderance to Adoption

[DarkBlackFox]

What do you think is the biggest hinderance to open source adoption at this point? Is it the lack of a central structure for support (e.g. people seeking support for Microsoft products go to Microsoft, a single solid entity as opposed to numerous communities and organizations of open source), or is it simply because there are too many choices out there? Do you think open source will eventually become organized enough to have a single representation, such that there is one massive repository of information for all to use?

Re:Hinderance to Adoption

[Alethes]

As long as people can get proprietary software they're already familiar with for free (illegally), then they have no motivation to look for legally free alternatives.

I'm not Bruce, but that's my opinion. :)

Do you understand dselect?

[defile]

Seriously. Because we can't. That thing's demented.

Re:Do you understand dselect?

[SquadBoy]

apt-get install aptitude

Much better front end also what I do a lot is search the package archive on the web site and use apt. dselect sucks and just about everybody thinks so that is why there are better tools out there now.

Re:Do you understand dselect?

[MrHanky]

When you ask about dselect, you're really asking about the strenghts of Debian. As you problably know, Debian's greatest achievement is the unproblematic installation and upgrading of binary packages. In order to upgrade a whole system without any snags, you need: 1) a good system 2) a competent admin. dselect, obviously, has nothing to do with 1), but gives you 2) through the concept of natural selection. To use dselect effectively, you have to be extremely intelligent, like we Debian users are. Morons are turned off by having to use dselect when installing Debian, and run off screaming back to Mandrake or whatever.

Debian is great, because its users are great. I know I am great, because I use Debian. And isn't that what life is all about?

See that, Gentoo/*BSD users? Binary. Yes, Binary.

Re:Do you understand dselect?

[IM6100]

Every time that I've installed Debian on a machine I've been dragged by default into the Dselect pit as part of the install.

Has that changed in the approx. six months since I did a Debian install?

Linux replacing Windows on the desktop

[flea69]

Based on the ability of most users out there, especially in the corporate world (I work in tech support). Is there any chance of Linux EVER replacing Windows on the desktop?

Re:Linux replacing Windows on the desktop

[leifm]

I work in support as well. I don't think there is any chance of Linux replacing Windows on the desktop overall. I think we'll gain some converts with NGSCB comes along, but not many. There are just to many applications only avail. on Windows, and people are used to how Windows works. I agree with Tim O'Reilly, who is basically saying that the next generation of apps are going to be internet based, and Linux is on the forefront of that. He often refers to Amazon.com and Google as examples of heavily used "applications" that are based on OSS. I think it'd do the OSS community well to continue building the foundation for the next generation of computing, where (hopefully) the network provides the useful applications and individual machine platform is irrelevant.

Re:Linux replacing Windows on the desktop

[An Onerous Coward]

After watching my Mom struggle with various Windows offerings, I think the question should be rephrased, "Based on the ability of most users out there, is there any chance that we'll ever have a truly intuitive computer interface?"

Right now, I don't think there is one, even for someone who understands the concepts of files, directories, and applications.

Re:Linux replacing Windows on the desktop

[arth1]

I'm more concerned about the opposite -- if there's ever going to be a headless distro that works without graphics card, sound card and keyboard attached, to better capture the NON-desktop market. As it is now, you either have to buy a pre-installed server, use a workstation as a server, or roll your own distribution. All three are needlessly expensive methods of getting Linux servers up.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:Linux replacing Windows on the desktop

[MrResistor]

Are you on crack?

Any distro can be run headless. I've done it several times. The only problem is if your BIOS halts boot on a keyboard error, but that's easily fixed. I typically use SuSE with a non-graphical install.

Re:Linux replacing Windows on the desktop

[ablair]

"Is there any chance of Linux EVER replacing Windows on the desktop?"

And is there any chance of Macintosh ever replacing Windows on the desktop? The answer, as virtually everyone but the most mislead Mac zealot knows, is No. But unquestionably Apple has the user experience & terminal tools down pat; if Apple dosen't have a hope, how can Linux?

They obviously have a system that's "good enough" - what else does it take? What can Linux learn from Apple's experience trying to break into the mainstream?

To the general public

[kmak]

Sure, to slashdotters, we all know what it means, but how would you explain the Open Source movement to someone that isn't so technically inclined?

What would you tell them that would, say, change from Linux to Windows?

Sustainablity of open source

[spuke4000]

I have been wondering for a while how sustainable open source is. It seems like there is a great open source solution for every possible need: OS, Web Server, database, etc. If these tools get widely adopted, and push the commercial products out of the market, will they be shooting themselves in the foot by making many, many developers unemployed, thereby destroying their own developer base? Or do you see a situation where open and closed (ie free and for-profit) software exist in equilibrium?

Re:Sustainablity of open source

[RevMike]

Uber-Geek ESR already wrote an excellent tract on this subject - The Magic Cauldron.

One of the key points is that very few developers are involved in developing "commercial" software. The vast majority (maybe 95% or more) do implementation and custom development for in-house projects.

If OSS were to eliminate "commercial software" completely, these jobs would still need to be filled, and since less budget would be spent on licensing, more money would be available in corporate budgets to fund custom development.

The state of the community

[Telex4]

Bruce, we all know you're very active on the political side of hacking, and we also know that as a community, hackers aren't especially active. Given that a hacker who reads Slashdot cannot fail to be aware of the many issues that we face, and their gravity, what do you think hackers and geeks as individuals can do to be useful, and as a related question, how do you think the hacker community can best respond to the threats of the DMCA, EUCD, copy protected CDs, Palladium, and other digital rights issues?

Smaller projects

[dze]

What are your favorite smaller open-source projects that not everyone may have heard of, that you feel should be better known?

Unasked Questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Are there any questions you think people should be asking you, that they never do?

How to Convince People To Use Open Source Software

[Shackleford]

Mr. Perens, you have stated in an interview that one of the main reasons that open source software has taken off recently is because of economic reasons. Many companies are indeed adopting open source solutions. However, there are many that are not. I recall speaking with an individual who said that no matter how often he tried to inform people that open source is a good idea, they were not convinced. What is the reason for this? FUD, perhaps? And how can one successfully convince people that open source solutions should be adopted?

I believe that you can do well at advocating the use of open source software. So, how can it be done?

Open Source and Apple

[Jon Abbott]

With regard to Apple and their adoption of open source, do you think that their contributions to open source projects have been generally one-way (i.e. only Apple benefits) or two-way (everyone benefits)? Do you think they should be more open, or are you happy with how they currently contribute to open source projects?

Re:Open Source and Apple

[JoeBuck]

Speaking as a very small part of the GCC team, I am very happy with a lot of the work Apple is now contributing: they have a sizable compiler team now and are contributing all that work back. Some of Apple's team are long-time gcc hackers, others are well-known C++ gurus, who can work almost full time on free software thanks to Apple picking up their paycheck.

In particular, gcc 3.4 will have precompiled headers (this work was contributed by Apple).

Re:Open Source and Apple

[Jon Abbott]

Indeed -- I don't question that the Konqueror and KJS contributions are two-way benefits. I guess I'm more curious about their open source contributions that seem somewhat self-serving. Namely, compiler optimizations for the CPUs they use, the Objective C compiler, Darwin kernel source, etc. etc...

Visiting Apple's Open Source pages, a number of projects seem to benefit everyone (X11 patches, Rendezvous, etc.), while others are what I would consider self-serving (Quicktime Streaming Server, WebCore, etc.), primarily because they only run on Mac OS X (as far as I know). I'm just curious what Bruce thinks about how helpful these contributions have been to the open source community.

HP

[golgotha007]

Hi Bruce,
could you please tell us a bit about your experience working with HP? I am interested if you were able to share your views on open source with the HP execs. What were their thoughts about it?

Do you see open source becoming more accepted by large corporations or will it remain largly popular with the developer/hobby crowd?

Further steps...

[bryam]

Hi Bruce:

Recently Open Group ask to you for develop one Open Source Strategy. Which others groups/enterprise do you like/wish to contact you for similar task?

Regards,

-Bryam

Linux in 10 Years

[suwain_2]

Where do you see Linux in 10 years? Will it be a completely ubiquitious OS, used on every computer? Will it just dominate one market? Will it fade away? Or will it be outlawed? There are people who will have you believe any one of these scenarios; which do you think is most likely, and why?

How will this affect MS?

[saintjab]

How do you see the future of OSS development affecting Microsoft? Do you have any predicions on how they will tailor marketing, propoganda, FUD, what have you? I personaly see OSS taking off in both the Desktop and Server market and I'm very curious as to how you think MS will react? This is not a troll in any way. I'm very interested in how the future or the Tech industry is going to play out.

viable business models

[JimCricket]

Open source really turns the business of software upside-down. Some open source-related companies have done well, others have not. In your opinion, which business models are the most appropriate?

Linux on the Xbox

[preric]

What's your opinion of the Linux scene revolving around Microsoft's Xbox?

Ham radio

[Lxy]

I recently learned that you are a ham radio operator. I think both the open source community and ham community share very similar views on most issues. Do you see any ways the two communities can benefit each other?

Re:Ham radio

[nomadic]

I recently learned that you are a ham radio operator. I think both the open source community and ham community share very similar views on most issues. Do you see any ways the two communities can benefit each other?

Do you really want to get two groups of people with that much sexual magnetism together? The resulting condensation of machismo might create some sort of irresistable sexual vortex, drawing women irresistably in.

Why?

[Anonamused Cow-herd]

Bruce, Assuming that governments and corporations form the foundation of the adoption base (considering that many people would first come into contact with free software at work, and then later be comfortable enough to use it at home), and noting also that governments and corporations are not generally that money-conscious (meaning that the "free"-ness of free software is not a large selling point over win32), then

What incentive do you think GNU/Linux and other free software offerings give these entities to use free software? What functionality does it enhance in practical terms for both governments and corporations? (and security doesn't count; it's not like the penguin is devoid of known holes, and under a whole lot less scrutiny than Windows)

And finally, if the functionality/effectiveness differences between free and closed OSs really are as minor as they seem at first corporate glance, what path do you think the Open Source community should take in regards to making free software distinctive and superior?

All the best,
~Tris.

PS (to all slashdot flamewar-starters) -- No, I don't like Windows. Yes, Linux might well be the second coming (ra ra ra, join the hurd (hoho mildly clever)). It's for the sake of argumentation and making a point. Now, go ahead and subject me to the Spanish-Linux Inquisition

Slashdope 1: Do you worship only one Linux?
Slashdope 2: You mean GNU/Linux!
Slashdope 1: Erm... yes. Well, do you?
Me: I suppose so.
Slashdope 1: Not good enough! Send him to the --- comfy chair!

Powerful friends for Open Source

[Oswald]

Bruce,

It would seem that hardware manufacturers taking (financial) interest in open source may be the force we need to counter-balance entrenched Big Software. Econ 101 supports this idea, as lowering the total cost of owning computers should result in more being sold. Having IBM and HP (maybe Sun?--they seem conflicted) on board is great, but there are a lot of hardware companies that still don't get it. Obviously, companies like Intel and AMD and ATI and NVidia have to weigh the benefits of actively (and monetarily) supporting Linux and other open source against the problems it might cause in their current business arrangements (read: don't want to piss off Micrsoft).

The question(s): Do you think their current lukewarm (at best) support represents enlightened self-interest, or are they missing the boat? Is there anything the community can do to improve the returns for companies that do jump on the bandwagon?

What if SCO Wins?

[suwain_2]

While I think we all know how absurd SCO's claims are, suppose they win. Where will Linux go? Overseas? /dev/null? Will it be rewritten from scratch? Or will people simply buy licenses willingly?

Re:What if SCO Wins?

[An Onerous Coward]

One point: If SCO's licensing scheme becomes ubiquitous, Linux is dead anyways. SCO doesn't have the right to distribute Linux under anything but the GPL (unless their ridiculously expansive concept of "intellectual property" stands up in court, which it won't). Nobody will work on Linux just to increase SCO's revenues, and we all know how well they maintain their own Unix offering, so they won't be doing it in house.

The legal alternatives, I guess, would be HURD or the *BSDs. Maybe a GPL'ed fork of one of the BSDs.

I'm confident of one thing. If SCO wins, the current community will be brushing off their old copies of MINIX before contributing to SCO/Linux.

And

[sulli]

won't the real bruce perens please stand up

Re:That TV series

[Jonsey]

Do you often find that people confuse you with other easily typable names: Bruce Brackets? Bruce Curly-Braces? And the like?

Bruce () does however, rock.

OS X - Friend or Foe?

[Phat_Tony]

What do you think the net influence of Apple's OS-10 is on Linux?

There are reports of people fleeing Linux to OS 10 because they still get *NIX but with a more easily usable/configurable software suite, but on the other hand, Apple's contributing to open source, manufacturing another hardware platform for Linux, and generally providing another alternative to Redmond.

So, is the competition good for Linux, or not so much?

Direction The Open Source Community Should Take

[Shackleford]

Mr. Perens,

I recall reading an article that was posted on Freshmeat that said that the open source development community should only work on developing the more popular open source software projects. It was said that the projects on sites like Sourceforge with low activity levels should just be abandoned so that open source software that stands out will be get the most attention and so it will be more likely to be considered superior. What is your opinion on this? Do you think the Open Source Community should rally behind the big projects?

You're here on Slashdot where, as you know, you have the opportunity to tell much of the community what to do. Here's your chance to direct us. :)

Re:Direction The Open Source Community Should Take

[nicholasharbour]

I'm not sure what perins will say but I would like to know who you think will be the ones abandoning software? If all open source development were consolidated into a few big projects only a few people would actually get to hack. What would be the fun in that? I say ignore what you read on freshmeat, the author obviously don't understand the spirit of hacking. Personally I like the fact that free software isn't being controlled by any authoritative figure. Most of us who contribute are told what to code at work and when we come home we like to play with stuff that interests us. If you have to ask bruce parens what you should do with your spare time I think you should seek help.

Cross-licensing

[Random BedHead Ed]

Hi, Bruce. The guy who founded Microsoft - I forget his name - recently commented that open source and free software suffers from its inability to cross-license its technology.

I see cross-licensing as the product of a broken patent system - if patents were given out only for truly original and non-obvious inventions, cross-licensing would be very rare. But along with the litigation that necessitates it, it's a fact of life. How much of a threat to GNU/Linux do you think the inability to cross-license presents, and do you think it might create a barrier to its use?

Re:Cross-licensing

[Cyno]

I think GNU and the FSF threaten the current state of the patent system and the concept of cross-licensing in general. Capitalists are so inefficient. OSS just shows the masses an alternative. Its like taking out the middle man, only in this case, the middle man is lawyers, store owners, merchants, CEOs, Marketting departments, etc. Just about everyone besides the developers themselves.

So naturally everyone loves/hates it.

Economy

[Anonymous Coward]

How has the open source movement been affected by the current economy, in particular by the outsourcing of development jobs overseas?

Who are the other bad guys besides SCO - Sun?

[Glasswire]

Bruce:

You've surely noted that others are indirectly jumping on the Linux FUD wind blowing out of SCO.

Sun's McNealy, for one, has been insinuating that Linux is a risky proposition (compared to the clearly legally-unencumbered Solaris UNIX which Sun owns outright). At first, this just seemed like slams against IBM (the old: my UNIX is better than your flawed UNIX), but Sun's AIX attacks seem to have given way to suggestions that Linux and Linux users are endangered by the SCO situation.

Have Slashdotters and the Linux community generally given Sun a free ride on this and who else do you think have been shameless opportunists here? Who else deserves some of the vilification that SCO is getting?

Not Another SCO...

[suwain_2]

Suppose I work at Microsoft designing Outlook, and then dabble in programming for Evolution when I'm at home. What's to stop me from thinking I'm doing the OSS community a favor and slipping some of the newest Outlook code into KMail to give it a new feature?

Sure, I'd be legally liable if MS found out I did it, especially if it was deliberate. But what should/can be done by OSS project leads to ensure that all code others contribute is entirely legal?

Re:Not Another SCO...

[ewhac]

what should/can be done by OSS project leads to ensure that all code others contribute is entirely legal?

Well, first of all, if all the symbols are in Hungarian notation, it's a fairly safe bet it's tainted code. No competent, sane programmer uses that style.

Second, a port of code from Outlook to KMail would introduce a bug, not a feature.

And finally (a serious answer), there is no way for OSS project leaders to determine by looking at it if a piece of code labors under copyright or trade secret restrictions. Patent problems are ostensibly easier to check, since patents are public (ha ha, very ha), but in practice it's just as impossible. Indeed, from the outside, there is no way to tell if tainted code introduced to an OSS project was an "honest mistake" or deliberate sabotage by hostile forces.

The only reason closed-source software vendors haven't fallen on each other like a pack of hyenas is because they keep their code -- and their potential copyright and patent transgressions -- hidden. (And they don't always succeed; just ask Informix.)

This is but one reason why Open Source is superior. It doesn't have the luxury of concealing wrongdoing, so it has to not only be scrupulously reliable, it has to be scrupulously honest. Open Source interprets patents as damage and codes around them. Thus, patent holders are not infringed against wantonly, OSS remains immune to frivolous patent claims, and you get reliable, inexpensive software. Everyone wins.

Schwab

The Corporate Challange

[Liquorman]

/. readers are all aware that Linux and Open Source apps can be greatly customized and thus can be a better fit for many corporate computing situations as opposed to MS's "standard" install. However, this flexibility is a hinderance to Open Source acceptance. I get the feeling that many IT directors see that Linux may be the better "investment" in the long run. However, they feel that their organization is not currently set up to deal with the new paradigm that this type of initiative requires. In other words, the current IT deptartment is built around MS's support structure and it would require a reorganization (and in many cases new people) to change to Linux/Open Source.

Do you agree with this analysis? And if so, how does the Open Source community combat this?

Thanks, Tom

Bruce-my Software Dev Process Questions

[linuxislandsucks]

My question is more aobut the OpenSource dev process....

Recently there has been further baby steps by Sun moving the Java API-JSR process towards theOpenSource appraoch..some say by dragging sun by the hair every step of the way..

What can a Language standardization and improvement process learn from OpenSource and Linux in the software dev process?

The Desktop: when?

[10Ghz]

When will we see REAL support for Linux on the desktop? The Kernel is ready, the desktops are ready, the distros are ready, we have tons of apps. Only thing missing is real support from the OEM's. Sure, they support Linux on the servers, but few offer Linux-desktops. And those who do have very limited selection and they are hidden deep deep. No OEM pushes Linux on the desktop, not even IBM.

Do you see any change occurring in this space? At what pace can we hope to have some REAL support for the Linux-desktop? I dream for the day when Linux will be the default OS OEM's offer with Windows being the optional extra.

Open Source vs Free Software

[SWroclawski]

Bruce,

You say that you use the two terms Free Software and Open Source interchangibly. At the same time, depending on the year, month, phase of the moon, etc. you seem to declare your loyalty to one or another of these two camps almost to the exclusion of the other.

Can you please elaborate your views on this disconnect in people's mind on where exactly you stand on the issue?

- Serge

Re:Question

[Roblimo]

Umm... a dupe?

That interview you reference was in 1999, four years ago almost to the day. It was the first Slashdot reader-generated interview ever, which is why I particularly wanted to talk with Bruce this week.

I don't know how things have been in your life, but in mine, in Bruce's and in the rest of the world -- and most especially in the worlds of Linux and Open Source -- many things have changed since then.

Good historical interest to see the differences in questions *and* answers between then and now, but I wouldn't exactly call it a dupe.

You may not have noticed, but some media outlets interview the same people over and over.

Heck, I saw an interview with that President Bush guy a couple of days ago on the TV news, and I swear they quoted him just last year...

- Robin

Is OSS adequate proof that IP is not necessary?

[kaltkalt]

It seems to be taken as a near-universal trusims that copyright is necessary to foster the arts and 'creativity,' while patents are necessary to stimulate the sciences and the 'innovation' of new ideas. In other words, without intellectual property monopoly rights (be they temporary or perpetual) humanity will cease to create anything (other than marijuana plants and dirty laundry). To many of us, OSS (and namely the success of Linux--the official #2 threat to Microsoft, from their own mouth) is proof enough that the "intellectual property bargain" truism is nothing but a falsity. A falsity that hinders innovation, creativity, the arts and the sciences. From reading some of your interviews, I get the impression that you feel the same way. I think we can all agree that copyright terms are ridiculously and unconstitutionally lengthy (Eldred notwithstanding), but do you think these IP monopolies need to exist in the first place? Could you elaborate on what your views of copyrights/patents (IP laws in general, not just software patents) are and should be?

ATM Receipt

[Graymalkin]

The entire concept of the GPL and the general meme of Linux is source availability. I think one of the most important aspects of Linux being a tool of the little folks as well as the big folks is the little folks have as much access to it as the big folks do. Debian itself is a very successful distribution of Linux specifically because the entire distro is readily available after a few choice pecks at a terminal keyboard. In short, the ability to readily download Linux makes it very accessible.

I think an important part of distributing Free as in speech information are places like UNC's ibiblio project. UNC being a good example, many universities the world over put a good deal of money into similar projects such as SunSITE. I don't think Open Source peojects would behalf as successful was it not for this extremely wide availability. While relatively cheap, for most people large amounts of storage space on top of large amounts of bandwidth are simply unavailable. Without both projects like Debian would not likely exist in their current form. Tools like apt-get wouldn't be as useful as they are if the sources list was constrained to cdrom:/cdrom and file:/mnt/nfs/debian.

How repeatable a project do you think SunSITE is, not merely in terms of mirrors but as a repository of Free information and ideas? Also what do you feel the Free software community as a whole or individually could do to better secure availability of places like SunSITE?

Open Source not on Linux

[gosand]

A lot of people equate Open Source with Linux, but what are your opinions on Open Source on Windows? Of course Open Source works well on Linux, it falls more in line with the philosophy of the OS. In your opinion, is it more beneficial to keep the concepts of Open Source and Linux coupled, or to get the message of Open Source out there in any way possible?

Pushing Linux from Government

[RupertJ]

Bruce,

As a former government employee, I found that there was a certain degree of hostility towards open-source software solutions. This was due (in part) to the fact that senior management didn't have a single entity with which to lay the blame when things went wrong. With the continuing business and market prescence being generated by companies such as Red Hat, do you feel that government organisations will start to take Linux (or other OSS) more seriously? Yes, we've seen the articles about the German uptake of Linux (80% of which will run VMWare/Win2k). Do you think that the governmental adoption of open source software will help encourage members of the public to become more technology literate and encourage further development?

Ta!
-Rupert.

Sun and Free software

[Chalst]

How seriously do you think Sun's recent commitment to free software should be taken?

I'm not trolling, just asking what others won't

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to work on Linux professionally at a very large, three letter acronymed company around the same time you got yourself fired from HP.

The perception from our side of the fence was that you were a egotistical, idealistic hothead that was doing more harm than good as a representative of GNU/Linux and the open source movement.

Specifically, you were looked at as an advocate/spokeperson for the Debian project, and that association at the time was hurting Debian's chances of being taken seriously as a first-tier distribution option for vendors doing commercial work.

My question is simple: did you get a bad rap? What were you trying to accomplish at HP, and what are you trying to accomplish now.

Posted anonymously as to protect my own marketability.

California

[jefu]

There is to be a recall election for the governor of california and the rules for this election are not quite the same as the usual election rules. To put a candidate on the ballot does not require much -- either 10,000 signatures or 65 signatures and a $3500 filing fee. The Democratic party has stated it will not be putting a candidate on the ballot which will also change the dynamics of the pre-election media coverage. In contrast to the usual election process a relatively smallish investment in money and time could get the right candidate media coverage and an opportunity to raise issues of interest in the public eye. Given the national and international coverage of this election and the short timespan until the election, that investment could potentially be leveraged into far more visibility than would usually be the case.

So might it be worthwhile for the Open Source community (and its friends and cousins) to somehow sponsor a candidate for governor?

Such a candidate would have to have a good computer system for a website or the slashdot effect might make actually reading about the issues a bit difficult.

better yet - ask about WRC-03

[linux_author]

- ask him why he thinks high-frequency radio operations will be better off if the FCC removes the requirement for 5WPM CW testing for upgrading to a General class radio operator license... - Perens supports a 'no-code' license for amateur radio operators to use the HF bands (see http://www.nocode.org)... - the 5WPM requirement is a reduction from previous levels of CW WPM operator expertise, but is considered by many to an essential demonstrable skill (radiotelegraphy) for HF radio operations...

Proposition regarding software patents in Europe

[philippe_grenet]

Mr Perens, The European parliament is scheduled to vote for or against software patents on the 1st of September. A number of MEPs, most of them British, try to push the Parliament to adopt laws similar to the US ones. Microsoft and legal firms specialized in IP are pushing hard for it. In fact, the first proposal for this directive was written by an employee of BSA. Currently patents related to software algorithms are illegal in Europe, which does not prevent the European Patent Office from accepting them anyway. Bill Gates made clear in a recent interview that IP was a problem for Linux. Do you think Microsoft could in the future sue Linux companies on the basis of patent violation? If this happens, what should be the reaction of the open source software community?

Will Open Source Spur Non-Unix-Derived OS's?

[reallocate]

Both Linux and the broader open and free software communities are rooted in developers' desire for free and accessible Unix platforms. Does the success of Linux mean that consumers can look forward to only two operating system choices dominating the market -- what Microsoft offers and what Linux/open source offers -- or do you expect to see open source prompt the development of other non-Unix-derived players in the OS market?

Doing anything else woudln't be practical

[kaltkalt]

If we did a "post questions for bruce perens and he'll answer what he feels like here" thread, it would be a total mess. He'd feel obligated to answer a lot of questions, and that would mean short answers for nearly everything. Doing it this way, with the highest modded questions being given to him, and then giving him time to respond, is the best way to do it. Besides, it's the way all slashdot interviews are done. I'm sure we've done plenty of official interviews with people who read slashdot regularly (in fact, didn't one of the DoJ lawyers admit to reading slashdot quite often?). Only the best questions (i.e. mine) should be given the time to be modded up to +5 and then sent off for answering. Letting the interviewee pick the questions lets them censor themselves, and that's not good... in fact that's bullshit. "hey bill gates, read this thread and answer the questions you want!" Would you expect any good questions to be answered (even though bill, unlike bruce, is probably adverse to most of our questions... hostile witness if you will).

Open Source a risk to corporate health?

[shooz]

Between the SCO lawsuit, Bill & Steve's IP remarks, and the Gartner group's recommendation, it looks like the corporate adoption Linux may have a tough road ahead. While most people here believe that Linux will come out on top of this particular issue, I feel this exposes a huge problem regarding Open Source software and its adoption in large corporations. Specifically, the end-users of Open Source software can be the targets of lawsuits if a company claims the software infringes on their intellectual property.

So my question is, as a consultant who promotes Open Source software, what is the answer to a potential business client that asks the question "Does using Open Source software make my company a possible target for a lawsuit?"

I realize this is an issue in the closed-source world as well, however, it seems that the closed-source software vendor would be liable for infringements (see recent changes regarding indemnity in Microsoft's EULA), plus the fact that it is closed-source may make it harder to discover these infringements in the first place. Would buying your Linux from RedHat put the legal burden on RedHat? What about some random Open Source project? Does downloading the RPM from redhat.com make RedHat the vendor?

Whether or not the vendor covers you is another story -- it all comes down to perception -- and right now it seems that Open Source software may be perceived as a risk to corporate health.

Is it true?

[Tom7]

Is it true that your last name is really short for "Parentheses?"

Why have you not stepped away..

[Anonymous Coward]

Why have you not stepped away from the words "Open Source"?

If you go here there is a venn-like diagram showing that Open Source is a broadly inclusive definition, and how the GPL that you push is a small part of the Open Source universe.

You had said on Techocrat.net:
"It is not the job of Linux advocates to support BSD"

At The Bazzar you said:
'The new BSD licence is great. It allows a GPL license to be added, and the code protected'.

And in the Open Group Open Source document you talk about "Assure that Open Source developers can participate in standards that are operated or facilitated by the Open Group, including the certification programs operated for those standards. This may require a special rate structure or coordination of corporate sponsorship for the Open Source project to go through certification.

Promote broad certification of Open Source software by encouraging certification of a publicly available and redistributable version of an Open Source program, rather than a particular vendor's instance of that program. This will allow multiple Linux vendors to coordinate their activities on certification, so that a larger collection of Open Source becomes certified than any one vendor would achieve on their own. "
This document ignores Open Source running on platforms like Solaris, AIX, AT&T-UNIX-IP-Free'ed-BSD's, or even Windows. How does running on GNU/Linux like platforms make it an "Open Source" program and 'worthy' of certification?

If you only wish to support the GPL and GPLed software, why do you keep using the words Open Source? There is a definition of what you actually advocate in word and deed called Free Software.

counter-sue?

[karnowski]

We've seen Australia and Germany use some counter-legal action against SCO's FUD. Why is it not happening in the US? Surely there must be some laws in the US preventing people from claiming ownership of something without having proved it (yet)? They are damaging an industry with no evidence of their claims (yet), there must be some legal recourse for that industry to recover damages or at least shut them up?

PS: I posted this question earlier but it didn't seem to make it, so am posting it again.

Linux: Market share and penetration?

[cshark]

I've noticed a lot of talk lately about Linux market share. Because of it's free model, it seems to me that tracking and managing Linux market share would be incredibly difficult to do. Is there any way of reliable way of knowing how many Linux boxes are actually out there besides sales statistics from hardware vendors and those of the major distros?

Patents

[molarmass192]

My question is regarding the current trend of the USPTO issuing overly broad technology patents. Eventually this has to result in a technological gridlock where nothing can be done without infringing on an existing patent. Open source software is especially vulnerable to this since the community model is not designed to address patent threats. My question is what can we do to stay clear of the patent fray and do you think that there will eventually be an undoing of the current patent mess?

If you could ask yourself anything....

[JoshuaDFranklin]

Bruce,

Thanks for your stories and comments on Slashdot. This seems like a good time to ask you a question that I think has been on everyone's mind:

If you could ask yourself anything, what would it be?

Thanks.

Bruce,

[Will The Real Bruce]

You have a unique position as a well-known figure in both the Free Software community and the underground rap community; as you are well-known for your involvement in Debian, speeding the corporate adoption of Free Software and protecting the IP of the Free Software community, as well as laying down the phat beats and representin' for the community, I have a few questions to ask of you about these enormous responsibilities.

First, what do you do to try to get your message out to the community? What do you tell the kids who are looking for a positive role model, to show them that it's entirely possible to have legally obtained their bling-bling, and yet still have street cred, even if that street may be Wall Street? Also, have other people in the industries--like ESR or Puff Daddy--accused you of 'selling out', or 'forgetting where you came from'? And did you correctly identify them as playa hatas, who are just jealous of your successful and honest nature?

Don't let them get you down, Bruce; you have shown everyone that it's possible to be an intelligent and responsible white man, and yet still make some mad loot, not give in to the big corporations, (software, recording, or otherwise) score with the ladies (husband *and* father!), and lay down some phat beats in the mean time. You're 100x the role model that Eminem will ever be, and I mean that, from the heart, as one wigga to another.

Unless, of course, Eminem wises up and takes a page or two from your book, and starts researching intellectual property law and free software. In your honor, Bruce--let's all stand up.

Your Answers!

[Steal This Account]

Windows 2004
Windows 2006
Windows 2008

(Saving you the trouble of waiting for the answers.)

Re:Your Answers!

[eclectro]

Actually it will be more like;

2004: Windoes ESP: Extra SPecial edition, continuous contact with Redmond will insure trouble free operation. There will be a small monthly fee.

2005: Windows Rainbow!! now in a new multi-colored box, just like the butterfly!! There's a pot o' gold at the end of every rainbow, ya know! Even if it's your gold. The cylcle for Windows XP support officially comes to an end. You are going to need to buy new hardware again.

2006: Windows Platinum: now with full Palladium!! because you really don't want to use your computer certain ways. Full suport for computers with coin slots too!!!!

2008: Windows DDS: Delta-Deploy Support - a team of delta commandos will be ready to assist you when Total Information Awareness system tells us that the RIAA/MPAA/Disney EULAS are not being followed properly.

2010: Windows TTC: Now with Total Thought Control!!! Support for wrist implanted RFID program activation!!! Listen very carefully..... your eyelids are becoming heavier...you feel very very sleepy....

I could go on, but that might violate the NDA that I signed.

---->see my other posts for more insightful responses to other questions that are sure to be modded down. Who needs Bruce Perens????

Desktop Breakthrough's

[Bruha]

The 2 largest barriers for Linux hitting the desktop in large numbers seem to be adequate drivers and desktop applications/games. We've seen breakthroughs such as Nvidia's graphics card and Nforce2 chipset support along with Transmeta's WineX allowing more DirectX games to be played on Linux.

In the forseeable future do you think that these barriers will continue the trend or will they be broken and things will get better for the Linux crowd?

Historical standpoint???

[Jack Wagner]

Yes, Hello Bruce,

As one of the more well known Open Source pundits you seem to have a pretty good handle on the main issues, from both a corporate and a hacker standpoint.

It seems to me that what we are seeing more of is a battle between pure capitalism (Microsoft, SCO, etc) and socialism (the open source method of making software) and history has proven that capitalism usually wins this war. Do you feel that, given you have been on both sides of the fence, in the long run this will be the case or do you feel that there will be a paradigm shift that will allow the open source software movement to overcome historical odds and succeed?

Warmest regards,
--Jack Wagner

Open Source Usability

[hcetSJ]

I recently spent a weekend trying to update my internet browser. While it was an educational experience for me (which was a main reason to switch to Linux for me to begin with), it made painfully clear why Linux, and Open Source in general, is still unfit for the average user's home desktop. Do you think Open Source on (almost) every desktop is a reasonable vision, and if so, what needs to be done to make open source projects not only easy to use, but easy to install and maintain?

"No cost" versus "No limitations"

[introverted]

Mr Perens,

Much of the pressure exerted on governments and big business to adopt "Free" Software seems to hinge on the idea that you don't have to pay anyone in order to obtain the software. (The mistaken belief that zero acquisition cost equals no cost at all.)

Do you have any thoughts on what we, the Geek community, can do to educate the public about "Cost of Ownership" without driving them away from Free Software or unduly confusing them about what we mean by "Free" in the first place?

Open Source Methodologies in other industries

[John the Kiwi]

Hi Bruce

Open Source methodologies have turned the software industry on its head. Many proprietary principals and processes have proved to be uncompetitive and ineffective compared to equivalent Open Source methods.

I've been wondering why a lot of these principals can't be applied to other industries as well. For example, I've always thought that the political arena could benefit greatly from being Open, if every politician had to make their tax returns publicly accessible then the underlying principals and the way said politician votes would be available for everyone to see - in a similar manner to peer review of source code.

Vehicle manufacturing could also be partially Opened. Sure we don't have an Open Source manufacturing plant but shouldn't anyone with the knowledge and ability to design a car be able to submit a design (or improved design) for peer review to someone like Ford before they begin the manufacturing process? I think that companies like Ford should be that confident in their designs that they should have nothing to fear by making them Open to the public? It's not like someone can get a design and be in the position to manufacture millions of cars anyway.

So my questions are thus:

With Open Source making so many inroads in software manufacturing in such a short amount of time do you see realistic potential for the same changes to take place in other industries using similar processes?

What industries might they be?

And have you been approached by anyone that is not in the IT sector to change their businesses practices to be more open in line with the OS software model?

Thanks for reading

John the Kiwi
www.johnthekiwi.com

Homeland Security

[pstreck]

Bruce, As I am sure you are well aware that the United States government has chosen Microsoft as the platform of choice for our Homeland Security. First, do you think this was choice will bad consequences ranging from financial to top secret data being stolen? Second, do you feel that open source software would have been a more responsible choice by our government?

Point Blank

[tabdelgawad]

Is the Linux kernel free from copyright and patent problems? If the answer is "yes", what can the kernel developers *actively* do to counter the continuing FUD? If the answer is "no", what are they doing to fix the problems? And if the answer is "it's impossible to tell", then how can we claim that 'go-slow' or 'wait-and-see' advice to corporate IT departments is anything but prudent?

Better Question.

[Malcontent]

If the adoption of Linux is slowed down by the SCO lawsuit in the US do you think it will impact the competitiveness of US companies VS foreign ones.

I think this suit has the serious potential to harm the US economy by preventing US companies from adopting cheaper and better technologies. A the same time that US industries are delaying or scaling back their open source plans Japan, China, India, and most of Europe and South America seem to be speeding ahead. What does this mean for American industry and the economy in the short, medium and long term.

I would love to hear your views.

virtual machines wars and open source

[ozten]

We have had the OS, and then the browser wars, and personally I believe we are coming to the age of virtual machine wars. Assuming that there is a shift from the OS platform to the VM platform, these VMs like parrot or mono may allow java, C#, Ruby, Python, etc to run "freely" on many more platforms; this may lower deployment barriers and offer cross language libarary reuse for Open Source projects. Any thoughts on how these virtual machines will help or hurt Open Source development?

I'm sick of this troll.

[twitter]

I have been wondering for a while how sustainable open source is.

Oh sure you have. In 1976 Bill Gates put it better. It's "Sharing is bad and if you don't pay me money, there will be no software." It's shifted to "free software will never make a working kernel" and "free software will never make easy to use software." and finally, "free software must be stollen to work." Get with the program, you are way out of date. Free software has produced many working kernels, losts of software that's easier to use than comercial software and shows no signs of slowing down.

A few snake oil salesmen have gotting rich does not disprove doctors earn a living or even that you can make a living selling snake oil. People earn a living making things work, not writing one size fits all, must be replaced every two years, standards ignoring, buggy, software. These people will continue to earn a living when Microsoft and friends are just a bad and seemingly unbelievable memory, like national news anchors talking about blow jobs in the White House.

Your question should be reversed and asked elsewhere. "Given the colapse of so many closed source shops, like Netscape, Lotus or SCO, how stable is your firm? Are you going to be here in five years? How can you keep your market when your users are co-operating to make software that works better than the stuff you sell? What do I have to gain from developing software for your platform again?"

Mod parent down

[sleepingsquirrel]

The parent's question was copied verbatim from the original Perens interview. It was question #5 and submitted by a Mr. John L Grantham.

Apple Steals from Open Source...

[ablair]

Certainly many (in fact, most) OSS-savvy IT industry workers I have come across think Apple is merely using open source for a free ride. Certainly Bruce Perens thought so, and Richard Stallman very pubicly rejected Apple's licensing efforts and questioned their intentions. The Free Software Foundation even boycotted the company. These comments have reinforced IT scepticism of Apple Computer and acceptance of Apple technologies in this field remains close to nil. ZDnet's Evan Leibovitch points out many problems with Apple's (lack of) efforts in Open Source's Black Hole, problems which still remain more than 2 years later.

Your question is good because it would be interesting to see if Bruce's opinions on Apple are still the same, and does he now think the company is genuine? Has it given back a sufficient amount or is it paying lip service only?

Much of what we're doing in Open Source...

[Simon Brooke]

Is based on ideas which are thirty years and more old. Back in the early eighties I was working on Xerox workstations with ethernet networking, distributed hypertext, large bitmapped screens with WIMP user interface, WYSIWYG printing, embeddable components...

Of course part of the reason for this is that the seventies and early-eighties were an incredibly creative and productive period for software ideas. But... why has it stopped? The successful open source operating systems - the BSDs, Linux, the Hurd - are all based on UN*X, based on paradigms about how people use and share information which are rigid and hierarchical.

Of course there are open source operating systems based on other ideas, but so far none of them is making any break through. Is there a radically different Open Source operating system that you, personally, are excited by? If not, why not? Have we learned nothing in the last thirty years?

Changes in the law

[sotweed]

If you could change one thing about copyright or patent law in the United States, what would it be?

The best feature of the "other" OS?

[dasunt]

I'm sure there are going to be plenty of linux, SCO, GPL, and other excellent questions posted, but I prefer the more interesting, lets not preach to the choir here (heck, I can guess Peren's opinion on the SCO vs. World case, on IP, on the Linux desktop, etc).

Here's my question (actually 2 questions, cleverly disguised as one):

What are the five best technological features of Windows (2k, XP, etc) that the OS movement (GNU/Linux, and xBSD) is missing? From a technological perspective, where has the OS movement failed, and proprietary software succeeded?

Software Vendors and Distribution Compatibility

[burnitall]

I work for a software developer that targets various products at a number of different platforms including Linux and Windows. We very much want to provide a single binary package that will work on as many Linux distributions as possible, and are having problems with distributions (Red Hat) breaking compatibility with previous versions of their own distribution, let alone others. As more proprietary vendors such as Oracle and IBM move their apps to Linux, how do you see distributions handling this? Red Hat currently has the market -and- mind share to force their own way, but this is hardly good for open source or Linux. Will vendors (like final scratch) be forced to distribute their own distro tuned to their specific software? Can't we all just get along?

I think this question needs a qualifier...

[Kjella]

...because otherwise you'll very quickly get the "developers do what they want because they want to write this specific software, not to server some big political goal", albeit with a few exceptions like GNU.

But I imagine many OSS developers have many programs they want to develop, both big and small. And in that respect I think the question is very good - is it the big projects or the small projects that push software forward? Where is the work most likely to bring out good results?

Kjella

Most important projects

[jbolden]

What 3 projects do you consider the most critical over the next 2 years for the continuing growth of open source solutions and why?

Spam

[anthony_dipierro]

What percent of the email sent to bruce@hams.com is spam?

The Linking Mystery

[ichiji]

Question for Bruce: What are the conditions, if any, under which code can be linked to GPL code without the requirement of re-licensing under the GPL? Different sources at FSF seem to have different answers to this question. The answer "none" is not borne out by industry practice -- particularly for hardware drivers.