Ben makes an excellent point in saying that "the NC license is incompatible with strong copyleft licenses such as the GFDL used by Wikipedia," because this is true. And the Wikipedia's GFDL is incompatible with the CC By-SA license used by Wikieducator. And Wikieducator's CC By-SA license is incompatible with the CC By-NC-SA used by MIT OpenCourseWare. And MIT OCW's CC By-NC-SA is incompatible with GFDL used by Wikiversity. And Wikiversity's GFDL is incompatible with the CC By-SA licensed images on Flickr. The higher-level point is that "copyleft" clauses (which require that derivatives be licensed with ~exactly~ the same license) are the biggest legal problem with open textbooks and open educational resources generally. Every copylefted open educational resource is incompatible with every other copylefted open educational resource with a different license.
The first of these online community projects is about to take off in the form of the OSLO Group's Open Learning Support, which is a formal collaboration with MIT to build community infrastructure that wraps around the OCW materials.
I looked around the web site and couldn't find any mention of the relationship between this project and the original OpenContent project that maintains the Open Publication Licence. What's the story?
I hate to gripe (ok, not really), but where is the mention of Open Content in this article? The project released its first non-software license (the open content license) almost four years ago... Raymond's book the Cathedral and the Bazaar is licensed under the Open Publication License, as have been a variety of other books (example). It's pretty disheartening to get passed over in favor of the GNU project who were
*much* later getting involved in the content/non-software world formally, with specific licenses, etc. This is the kind of non-recognition that makes busy people drop their time-intensive, unappreciated projects... Geesh.
My own book (The Instructional Use of Learning Objects) is available online for free (under the OPL) as well as in costs-money print form. Not only does this give you the opportunity to have people submit live errata, etc., but the electronic version of the book is the best press the print version could get. We pre-sold around 500 copies before the book was even to the printer by having the material online.
The other great opportunity afforded by having the book online is the community / discussion you can facilitate if you can convince your publisher to put the URL to the free online version on the cover of your printed book (this was not so easy for me).
The EduCommons project at Utah State University is comprised maily of an educational P2P application that allows teachers, students, and researchers to share syllabi, lecture notes, research instruments, and data sets they already have laying around their machine directly with each other. After securing some funding from the University itself to get the project going, the project team is expecting to hear regarding two seperate NSF grants within the next month or so.
This is just the type of legitimate app you are looking for. NSF spends millions each year on the development of collections of digital educational resources through its NSDL initiative, when many of those resources already exist on Joe Professor's computer in Nebraska...
This spring I spent most of my Internet2 talk time in front of university NOC folks saying "Sure, you're planning ways to shut down Napster now, but in 6 months we're going to have a P2P app directly in line with your organization's mission that you won't be able to just 'turn off'. You'll actually have to deal with it".
By the way, the project is all open source, and we're still looking for client/peer programmers on the Linux and Win32 side. =) EduCommons project. --------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
Richard is famous for his lack of tact, but come on, GNUpedia? Why choose this name when the Nupedia project (same concept -- free online encyclopeida) exists and is already very well established? This seems like either (1) a blatent attempt to confuse would-be users and steal audience through confusion, (2) a remarkable failure to do the required homework before starting a project (remarkable because Richard is supposedly so bright), or (3) just plain insensitivity. It's enough to drive any feeling, thinking person as far away from GNU as possible. Geesh... --------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
The San Fransisco Gate reported last week that neither Cisco (who owed 1.8 billion in federal tax) or MicroSoft (who owed double that) paid any federal tax last year thanks to big-corporation-friendly loopholes. Is it right that a graduate student such as myself should pay more federal tax than MicroSoft? If not, how do you propose to see that they do pay taxes, and how strong a commitment would you make to seeing your plan through? --------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
UK folks have nothing on Japanese CD prices, where one disk can easily set you back 4300 yen (40 bucks or so). Ever tried importing one of these babies? Get ready to shell out $50 per disk.
Rob has joked about these TLDs helping him avoid porn, etc. The implication being that, actually, they would make it easier to find. I agree that this is the case.
What I don't understand is this: when such a TLD scheme would make porn easier to find for people who want to find it, and easier to avoid for people who want to avoid it, why not have it?
People get upset about censorship, and show how external efforts to "protect" people from certain things will always fail. I agree that they fail miserably. They fail because they are effected by people other than those who want to be "protected," like some software vendor generating an endless list of keywords, for example, or blocking access to entire sites (like www.bomis.com) just because some of the pages contain links to porn. Instead of external compulsion, how about some internal regulation by the porn industry itself? Why not move to a top level domain like.xxx or.sex?
I agree with derogatory comments about external agencies "protecting people from themselves," but the folks who get lost in the argument are those who actually, actively want to protect themselves (instead of being protected). What if I really don't want to see porn online? What if I'm offended by it? A TLD and some self-regulation by the industry would make it easier for me to avoid. On the other hand, it would make it that much easier to find for those who want to, as well.
I guess I'm not sure what's wrong with the plan unless we think it's a "good thing" for people (kids or otherwise) who think they're going to NASA's or the Whitehouse's site to be greeted by frolicking, naked, variously engaged women and faceless men. I, for one, absoultely support such a TLD scheme because it accomplishes three things:
(1) makes it easy for those who want to avoid to avoid, (2) makes it easy to find for those who want to find, and (3) puts an end to the endless accidental porn sightings we all experience unwittingly.
Bring on the.sex TLD!!! -------- meta4 dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org http://davidwiley.com/
New Open Publication License
on
GPL for Books?
·
· Score: 1
I posted this previously but/. didn't seem to think the story was worth running... OpenContent is currently updating our license per this announcement. It definitely sounds as if you want something like the Open Publication License; if it isn't exactly what you want, come help us fix it so that it is. -------- meta4 dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org http://davidwiley.com/
Anyone ever heard of metadata? Instead of indexing every word in a document we should be capturing accurate, relevant metadata about it and facilitating the searching of that. As non-text content increases (like mp3s, videos, images, audio streams, animations, etc.) on the internet, the need for a new search paradigm increases as well. Of course there's the the Dublin Core, but much more interesting to me is the IEEE LTSC's work. Their metadata standard, currently at version 3.8, is very close to being finalized. In addition to providing general fields, it also includes some that supposedly facilitate the instructional use of the object of the metadata.
If you had scrolled way down the page, you would have found this:
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
It is, therefore, an object of the present invention to provide a host processor with apparatus for enhancing the operation of a microprocessor which is less expensive than conventional state of the art microprocessors yet is compatible with and capable of running application programs and operating systems designed for other microprocessors at a faster rate than those other microprocessors.
This and other objects of the present invention are realized by apparatus for use in a processing system having a host processor capable of executing a first instruction set to assist in running instructions of a different instruction set which is translated to the first instruction set by the host processor comprising means for temporarily storing memory stores generated until a determination that a sequence of translated instructions will execute without exception or error on the host processor, means for permanently storing memory stores temporarily stored when a determination is made that a sequence of translated instructions will execute without exception or error on the host processor, and means for eliminating memory stores temporarily stored when a determination is made that a sequence of translated instructions will generate an exception or error on the host processor.
These and other objects and features of the invention will be better understood by reference to the detailed description which follows taken together with the drawings in which like elements are referred to by like designations throughout the several views.
Ever heard of OpenContent? They have a couple of licenses you could use. They're like the GPL, but only applicable to non-code works, like text. See http://opencontent.org/ and check out the OpenContent License and the Open Publication License.
Slashdot Mirror
Ben makes an excellent point in saying that "the NC license is incompatible with strong copyleft licenses such as the GFDL used by Wikipedia," because this is true. And the Wikipedia's GFDL is incompatible with the CC By-SA license used by Wikieducator. And Wikieducator's CC By-SA license is incompatible with the CC By-NC-SA used by MIT OpenCourseWare. And MIT OCW's CC By-NC-SA is incompatible with GFDL used by Wikiversity. And Wikiversity's GFDL is incompatible with the CC By-SA licensed images on Flickr. The higher-level point is that "copyleft" clauses (which require that derivatives be licensed with ~exactly~ the same license) are the biggest legal problem with open textbooks and open educational resources generally. Every copylefted open educational resource is incompatible with every other copylefted open educational resource with a different license.
The first of these online community projects is about to take off in the form of the OSLO Group's Open Learning Support, which is a formal collaboration with MIT to build community infrastructure that wraps around the OCW materials.
I looked around the web site and couldn't find any mention of the relationship between this project and the original OpenContent project that maintains the Open Publication Licence. What's the story?
FLE3 is an open source web-based learning environment meant specifically to support CSCL (computer-supported collaborative learning). Very cool.
I hate to gripe (ok, not really), but where is the mention of Open Content in this article? The project released its first non-software license (the open content license) almost four years ago... Raymond's book the Cathedral and the Bazaar is licensed under the Open Publication License, as have been a variety of other books (example). It's pretty disheartening to get passed over in favor of the GNU project who were *much* later getting involved in the content/non-software world formally, with specific licenses, etc. This is the kind of non-recognition that makes busy people drop their time-intensive, unappreciated projects... Geesh.
My own book (The Instructional Use of Learning Objects) is available online for free (under the OPL) as well as in costs-money print form. Not only does this give you the opportunity to have people submit live errata, etc., but the electronic version of the book is the best press the print version could get. We pre-sold around 500 copies before the book was even to the printer by having the material online.
The other great opportunity afforded by having the book online is the community / discussion you can facilitate if you can convince your publisher to put the URL to the free online version on the cover of your printed book (this was not so easy for me).
John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid took a similar approach with The Social Life of Information.
The EduCommons project at Utah State University is comprised maily of an educational P2P application that allows teachers, students, and researchers to share syllabi, lecture notes, research instruments, and data sets they already have laying around their machine directly with each other. After securing some funding from the University itself to get the project going, the project team is expecting to hear regarding two seperate NSF grants within the next month or so.
This is just the type of legitimate app you are looking for. NSF spends millions each year on the development of collections of digital educational resources through its NSDL initiative, when many of those resources already exist on Joe Professor's computer in Nebraska...
This spring I spent most of my Internet2 talk time in front of university NOC folks saying "Sure, you're planning ways to shut down Napster now, but in 6 months we're going to have a P2P app directly in line with your organization's mission that you won't be able to just 'turn off'. You'll actually have to deal with it".
By the way, the project is all open source, and we're still looking for client/peer programmers on the Linux and Win32 side. =) EduCommons project.
--------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
Richard is famous for his lack of tact, but come on, GNUpedia? Why choose this name when the Nupedia project (same concept -- free online encyclopeida) exists and is already very well established? This seems like either (1) a blatent attempt to confuse would-be users and steal audience through confusion, (2) a remarkable failure to do the required homework before starting a project (remarkable because Richard is supposedly so bright), or (3) just plain insensitivity. It's enough to drive any feeling, thinking person as far away from GNU as possible. Geesh...
--------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
There are scads of great educational resources available in the OpenContent database.
--------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
The San Fransisco Gate reported last week that neither Cisco (who owed 1.8 billion in federal tax) or MicroSoft (who owed double that) paid any federal tax last year thanks to big-corporation-friendly loopholes. Is it right that a graduate student such as myself should pay more federal tax than MicroSoft? If not, how do you propose to see that they do pay taxes, and how strong a commitment would you make to seeing your plan through?
--------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
UK folks have nothing on Japanese CD prices, where one disk can easily set you back 4300 yen (40 bucks or so). Ever tried importing one of these babies? Get ready to shell out $50 per disk.
--------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
Rob has joked about these TLDs helping him avoid porn, etc. The implication being that, actually, they would make it easier to find. I agree that this is the case.
What I don't understand is this: when such a TLD scheme would make porn easier to find for people who want to find it, and easier to avoid for people who want to avoid it, why not have it?
People get upset about censorship, and show how external efforts to "protect" people from certain things will always fail. I agree that they fail miserably. They fail because they are effected by people other than those who want to be "protected," like some software vendor generating an endless list of keywords, for example, or blocking access to entire sites (like www.bomis.com) just because some of the pages contain links to porn. Instead of external compulsion, how about some internal regulation by the porn industry itself? Why not move to a top level domain like
I agree with derogatory comments about external agencies "protecting people from themselves," but the folks who get lost in the argument are those who actually, actively want to protect themselves (instead of being protected). What if I really don't want to see porn online? What if I'm offended by it? A TLD and some self-regulation by the industry would make it easier for me to avoid. On the other hand, it would make it that much easier to find for those who want to, as well.
I guess I'm not sure what's wrong with the plan unless we think it's a "good thing" for people (kids or otherwise) who think they're going to NASA's or the Whitehouse's site to be greeted by frolicking, naked, variously engaged women and faceless men. I, for one, absoultely support such a TLD scheme because it accomplishes three things:
(1) makes it easy for those who want to avoid to avoid,
(2) makes it easy to find for those who want to find, and
(3) puts an end to the endless accidental porn sightings we all experience unwittingly.
Bring on the
--------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
I posted this previously but /. didn't seem to think the story was worth running... OpenContent is currently updating our license per this announcement. It definitely sounds as if you want something like the Open Publication License; if it isn't exactly what you want, come help us fix it so that it is.
--------
meta4
dw2-dont-spam-me-@opencontent.org
http://davidwiley.com/
Anyone ever heard of metadata? Instead of indexing every word in a document we should be capturing accurate, relevant metadata about it and facilitating the searching of that. As non-text content increases (like mp3s, videos, images, audio streams, animations, etc.) on the internet, the need for a new search paradigm increases as well. Of course there's the the Dublin Core, but much more interesting to me is the IEEE LTSC's work. Their metadata standard, currently at version 3.8, is very close to being finalized. In addition to providing general fields, it also includes some that supposedly facilitate the instructional use of the object of the metadata.
If you had scrolled way down the page, you would have found this:
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
It is, therefore, an object of the present invention to provide a host processor with apparatus for enhancing the operation of a microprocessor which is less expensive than conventional state of the art microprocessors yet is compatible with and capable of running application programs and operating systems designed for other microprocessors at a faster rate than those other microprocessors.
This and other objects of the present invention are realized by apparatus for use in a processing system having a host processor capable of executing a first instruction set to assist in running instructions of a different instruction set which is translated to the first instruction set by the host processor comprising means for temporarily storing memory stores generated until a determination that a sequence of translated instructions will execute without exception or error on the host processor, means for permanently storing memory stores temporarily stored when a determination is made that a sequence of translated instructions will execute without exception or error on the host processor, and means for eliminating memory stores temporarily stored when a determination is made that a sequence of translated instructions will generate an exception or error on the host processor.
These and other objects and features of the invention will be better understood by reference to the detailed description which follows taken together with the drawings in which like elements are referred to by like designations throughout the several views.
Ever heard of OpenContent? They have a couple of licenses you could use. They're like the GPL, but only applicable to non-code works, like text. See http://opencontent.org/ and check out the OpenContent License and the Open Publication License.