Slashdot Mirror
Google And Open Source
Nate writes "Former Slashdot editor, games programmer and consultant Chris DiBona talks about his new work at Google in a brief interview over at Linux Format. Most notably, DiBona points out that Google wants to follow IBM's lead in not attempting to control open source, and he also highlights the reasons why Google will never be a 100% open source company." From the article: "So I don't see the word 'sponsorship' as being appropriate. Because sponsorship also implies stewardship. We don't want to run open source, that's not who we are. I have to tell you, I've admired how IBM has gone about this. They've for the most part not screwed up: they haven't taken things over, they haven't managed to break anything, they've done a lot of good work. We're not going to use that as a model for what we want to do, because we're different companies, but I really want to get code out there, I don't want just... money. Money's not enough."
A lot of projects benefit from IBM's money, but as importantly, a lot of the Linux codebase benefits more from their hardware compatibility. We run a large farm of IBM e-Series servers (x306, x335, x336, x345, x346), and it really, really helps when we can grab the source for drivers straight from the IBM website.
Hardware compatibility: thank you IBM.
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
I don't want just... money. Money's not enough.
He can PayPal me any of it he does not want. I could sure as hell use it.
Any person or company who contributes *anything* to the OSS community is helping it thrive. Google contributes in a variety of ways from actually releasing source code, funding summer of code, and even just existing as an excellent search engine making it easier for OSS developers to search for previous solutions to the problems they are facing.
Hexy - a strategy game for iPhone/iPod Touch
First: We're not going to use that as a model for what we want to do, because we're different companies, but I really want to get code out there, I don't want just... money. Money's not enough.
Then: We're never going to release PageRank [Google's trademark system for ranking web pages in its search index], we're not going to release things like that, because to release them would ruin them. If you release how you do the ranking function, suddenly every web scrambler in the world screws up the rank and Google search becomes useless. We don't want to do that.
Or, you could release it so others can learn how it works and perhaps come up with improvements or more sophisicated algorithms/systems that are rank scrambler proof.
But that endanger profits right? think of investors, lifesavings etc. Fair enough.
> I don't want just... money. Money's not enough.
What he means is that he wants power, prestige, and chicks!
Seriously, what happens when money's not enough? You go for power (politics), and then you get caught in a scandal with some chicks, and it all comes crashing down. It's happened too many times.
Tell him to post a new slashdot poll for old times sake.
Hell, just tell ANYONE to post a new slashdot poll; that most-used-key-combo thing has been up there since LAST Valentine's Day...
ConsultingFair.com
Oh, I thought "Google and Open Source" was going to be the new name for Slashdot.
I should have known that was wrong.. if that were happening, it'd have to be "Google, Apple, and Open Source".
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
It's that money isn't enough. He wants the rest of the Universe as well. However, I would like to offer my services in any experiment to prove whether money really is enough.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
It is all right there:
Am I wrong?The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
The very same argument could be used from Microsoft's point of view. We're never going to release Windows [Microsoft's trademark operating system], we're not going to release things like that, because to release them would ruin them. If you release how you do the operating system internals, suddenly every hacker in the world screws up the code and Windows becomes useless. We don't want to do that.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
How unreasonable is that? I too want (at least) one thing from each group. I want food: that's from the money group. I want to earn respect from my peers. That's from the not-money group (at least, if you have the right peers). Why is that scary?
Linux IT Consulting and Domino Development in Michigan
It follows that he wants everything money won't buy, as well, not instead of. That, to me, is scary.
Why is that scary? There are many wonderful things that money won't buy. Some of the things that mony won't buy, such as love, may be scary; I don't understand finding it scary for people to want things that money can't buy. Money can buy sex, it can even buy somebody who says that they love you, but money cannot buy real love. Money cannot buy personal satisfaction, money can't buy you time, money can't buy your health (although it helps). I believe that the reason that many people who have money aren't satisfied and feel that they need even more money is that they don't realize that money doesn't buy the things that they are really missing.
I agree that no one can own open source software, as it's released from the moment of its creation. However, what Google is trying to say is that they don't want to control or influence open source development. Instead, I think that Google wants to find a way to encourage the current evolutionary process by which many projects are tried, and only the most viable get the critical mass of developers needed for continued growth.
As far as Google's vested interest, I'd say that Google has an interest in identifying promising open-source efforts to integrate into their offerings.
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
they haven't managed to break anything, they've done a lot of good work. We're not going to use that as a model for what we want to do,
That doesn't sound promising.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
I don't want just... money. Money's not enough.
Yeah, you want power. The power to control people's lives. Hundreds or thousands or millions of people's lives. Through propoganda and censorship. That's what you want.
And how do you go about getting it? Keeping your friends close and your enemies closer.
Its all about trust, for me. Never about money or power. And I don't trust Google. They're too powerful to trust at this point, like IBM, a monopoly or a government. They would have to fully embrace the GPL or some other form of selfless act to be taken seriously. Free wireless is nice, but so are free cell phones.
With regard to GNU software, I trust the code. The license makes that easy for me. I don't have to trust the project leads or copyright holders. They've already given up their power by using the license. But Google isn't like that. They like the money AND the power.
I'm suprised that no one has taken advantage of the availability of the google search appliance to get insight into the detailed workings of the google backend
I'm glad to see that Google understands that they don't need to be 100% open-source or 100% commercial. Nor does it have to be 50-50. Whatever Google decides is there decision and is their own decision.
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.