As much as I understand and appreciate the sentiment you express here, I think it's an unfortunate fact that "Being divided as we are on our own planet" (as Americans, Germans, etc.) is just how we Earthlings are, so it goes that that's how the Vorlons or Xeelee or Vogons or whomever --- maybe some bacteria! --- will find us: a divided little species with big dreams, dragged down by our lowest common denominator (our social/political/religious/etc. divisions) and our often poorly sublimated will to power/surivival.
IMHO, I think that on the surface it could appear as "open sourcing", insofar as the company shared with the outside world data normally privately retained. But in digging deeper it becomes clear that there is a misunderstanding of the term "Open Source" in this application of it. Sure, I'm willing to go along with the idea that the company doesn't have a heart of gold, but I don't think it's fair to assume that the contest was in the same vein as cheap gimmicks, either. Why? Because it seems to me that they simply misunderstood the term "Open Source" (they're not an IT company, after all); --- and, too, there were so many puns to be made by reporters about data mining and the like.
Seriously, I think this just illustrates the confusion of the general public (and in the press) about what "Open Source" is/means. I think they really meant that the idea of "Open Source" inspired them to outsource in a novel way that seemed to them to be parallel to what they understood as "Open Source". Sorry that's convoluted.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess this pretty much guarantees that it will have an OpenMind.
As much as I understand and appreciate the sentiment you express here, I think it's an unfortunate fact that "Being divided as we are on our own planet" (as Americans, Germans, etc.) is just how we Earthlings are, so it goes that that's how the Vorlons or Xeelee or Vogons or whomever --- maybe some bacteria! --- will find us: a divided little species with big dreams, dragged down by our lowest common denominator (our social/political/religious/etc. divisions) and our often poorly sublimated will to power/surivival.
Depends on whether or not you consider the daytime sky a blue screen or not.
IMHO, I think that on the surface it could appear as "open sourcing", insofar as the company shared with the outside world data normally privately retained. But in digging deeper it becomes clear that there is a misunderstanding of the term "Open Source" in this application of it. Sure, I'm willing to go along with the idea that the company doesn't have a heart of gold, but I don't think it's fair to assume that the contest was in the same vein as cheap gimmicks, either. Why? Because it seems to me that they simply misunderstood the term "Open Source" (they're not an IT company, after all); --- and, too, there were so many puns to be made by reporters about data mining and the like.
Seriously, I think this just illustrates the confusion of the general public (and in the press) about what "Open Source" is/means. I think they really meant that the idea of "Open Source" inspired them to outsource in a novel way that seemed to them to be parallel to what they understood as "Open Source". Sorry that's convoluted.
At least they didn't call it a "Free" goldmine.