Post Open Source

Ghostscript free now

Wednesday, June 7th, 2006

Raph Levin announced that the GPL release of now uses current Ghostscript code.

By switching to the GPL, we’re reaffirming our commitment to the free software world. One big reason for this decision was to reduce the lead time between bugs being fixed in the development tree and users seeing the fixes, especially those users dependent on Linux distributions.

This seems notable, as for years Ghostscript has served as the usual example of the free the future, sell the present open source business model. Previous GPL releases were about one year/one version behind AFPL (which restricts commercial use) releases.

Ghostscript is also notable for having a long running bug bounty program.

Addendum 20060608: The quote above doesn’t address the business reasons for making the current codebase GPL. Perhaps all paying customers are unwilling to release under GPL. If so Artifex would lose no commercial licensing revenue and gain some goodwill and outside contributions and reduce the amount of effort required to do releases of year or more old code.

Peer production economy

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

Tim Lee points out a couple more cases where critics of open source use fallacious broken windows arguments.

Open source skeptics, particularly those otherwise economically literate, need to be beat over the head about this for awhile.

Meanwhile, I hope economists begin attempting to quantify the value of peer production output.

Buckingham markets

Monday, May 22nd, 2006

Via Chris F. Masse, who does not provide a permanent link to his “external link” post, The Journal of Prediction Markets is launching late this year with several usual suspects on the editorial board. I used Inkling’s make your own market feature to create a play market in whether the journal will be Open Access:

Pays if the Journal of Prediction Markets is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals before 2008/01/01.

See the Wikipedia article for background on Open Access.

Just for kicks — as an insider decision, this is probably not a good subject for a prediction market.

I noted with interest that the journal is to be published by the , the publishing arm of apparently the only university in the UK jurisdiction not funded by the state. Although it is small I am surprised I had not heard of this university previously due to its free market connections or in the Economist, which loves to write about the sorry state of British higher education and the even sorrier state of higher education on the European continent.

Should I take this opportunity to ask Mr. Masse (who is entirely above insinuation, a better person than I) about French universities?

Addendum 20060523: Masse thinks I’m crazy for creating a market on Inkling. He doesn’t like Inkling because they removed one of their founders from their site (irrelevant, Masse-ive overreaction) and believes that liquidity is the most important attribute of an exchange, implied corollaries being that it is dumb to start a new exchange in an area where one already exists and it is dumb to allow user-created markets, both of which will lead to diffuse, thinly-traded markets. I think the field is far too young to say that a newcomer cannot topple existing exchanges even if they are natural monopolies (We’ve discussed this before) or that large numbers of niche (and thus thinly traded) claims will not prove valuable.

Why has Masse not created a market at Inkling? Is his consultancy page correct?

Each player in the field only sees his/her little part of it —I have to have the complete, global, situational, long-term, overview outlook perspective.

Is he overconfident in his negative assessment of Inkling or merely falling behind in his research?

Peach of Immortality

Tuesday, May 9th, 2006

has been called a seminal album for many genres, but it was for me personally too. I discovered it while browsing the library’s LP collection for strange music, probably in 1985 or 1986. Having been exposed to the Talking Heads (which I grew to love despite hearing Take Me To The River first) and Brian Eno in prior year, I borrowed the record and immediately decided I liked it enough to tape it (a big investment at the time). It is one of the few listenings from that time period that I still indulge. Most of the tracks hold up very well.

This success led me shortly after to pick up Talking Heads ’77 by Peach of Immortality at a used record store. It was unclear whether it had anything to do with the Talking Heads (it doesn’t) but the store owner said it was very strange. It was the first noise album in my possession and is probably the only recording I own manufactured copies of in two formats (LP and CD). I still love it.

My Life in the Bush of Ghosts was recently reissued on its 25th anniversary. This would be unremarkable but for the release of sources for two of the album tracks today under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA license, which is great and very satisfying.

Of course I wish they had used a more liberal license and that the remix site wasn’t Flash-based or at least did not require Flash 8, which renders it inaccessible to Linux clients. Small complaints and a reminder to throw some money at , which seems to have made its first alpha release a few days ago.

Update: bush-of-ghosts.com claims to require Flash 8, bush-of-ghosts.com/remix does not and does work on Linux. Can’t say I’m sorry to miss whatever “interface” is on the home page.

Artists and open source developers as entrepreneurs

Sunday, April 23rd, 2006

No, not as in “artists need to think of themselves as businesses” or “open source business models” but as in entrepreneurs sharing the motivations of artists and open source contributors.

Entrepreneurship as a non-profit-seeking activity (PDF). The average could make substantially more money as an employee and obtain substantially better returns investing in the market rather than in the entrepreneur’s enterprise. Low risk aversion and over-optimism do not explain low financial returns to . However, the majority of “breakthrough” innovations are made by entrepreneurs rather than big firms. So why start a business?

The studies discussed give a direct indication of the non-monetary benefits associated with entrepreneurship. Being an entrepreneur seems to be attractive, not because it leads to a high income or wealth, but rather because it provides non-pecuniary satisfaction from being one’s own boss, from broad possibilities to use one’s skills and abilities, and from a resulting richer work content. Although no direct evidence has been presented, it can be hypothesized that similar aspects are responsible for Åstebro’s (2003) finding that entrepreneurs’ are willing to engage in innovative activities despite of poor expected financial returns. Amabile (1983, 1997), for example, argues that people often undertake creative endeavors simply because they like to engage in interesting, exciting and personally challenging activities.

Conclusion:

Entrepreneurship is a crucial function in market economies. It is therefore important to understand what motivates people to engage in it. In this paper, it has been argued that traditional economic views on why individuals undertake entrepreneurial activities are incomplete. Entrepreneurship is not only and not even mainly a quest for profit. Rather, it is more accurately characterized as a non-profit-seeking activity. Contrary to the belief that people engage in entrepreneurship in order to make profits, a considerably body of empirical research shows that entrepreneurship is not particularly attractive in monetary terms. Being an entrepreneur emerges to be rewarding because it provides individuals with non-monetary satisfaction from aspects like higher autonomy, greater possibilities to use their skills and abilities, and the chance to be creative in pursuing their own ideas. It has been illustrated how these non-monetary benefits can be incorporated into economic theories of entrepreneurship. Further efforts along these lines seem instrumental in arriving at an improved understanding of entrepreneurship.

None of this surprises me, though I was completely ignorant of these studies. I suspect “artist” or “open source developer” would work in place of “entrepreneur” throughout most of the paper.

Via Will Wilkinson.

Wikitravel and World66 both win

Friday, April 21st, 2006

A little over two years ago I wrote about copying content between and (they’re both using the same Creative Commons license that allows this). Wikitravel “won more” from the operation due to permitting more flexible editing.

Now they’ve both won through simultaneously announced acquisition by .

An Alexa traffic rank graph of Wikitravel, World66, and carsdirect.com, I believe the most popular Internet Brands site:

Congratulations again to Wikitravel cofounder Evan Prodromou. It’s fantastic to see projects and people like this get some commercial recognition after years of dedication to the “commons” (very broadly speaking) — see also Webjay and MusicBrainz.

Ross Mayfield has a short post on the acquisitions the best part of which is this:

Terms of the deal are not disclosed, but if you find them you could add them to this wiki page.

ChipIn

Tuesday, April 11th, 2006

Gordon Mohr just pointed me at a profile of group funding startup ChipIn. Unlike some others who have thought of this, ChipIn sees a big market opportunity.

Hopefully they’ll have great success and pursue interesting mechanisms for funding public goods.

ChipIn has a blog.

LimeWire Filtering & Blog

Wednesday, March 29th, 2006

Just noticed that the current beta (4.11.0) includes optional copyright filtering. See the features history and brief descriptions for users and copyright owners:

In the Filtering System, copyright owners identify files that they don’t want shared and submit them for inclusion in a public list. LimeWire then consults this list and stops users from downloading the identified files “filtering” them from the sharing process.

If you sign up for an account as a copyright owner you can submit files (with file name, file size, SHA1 hash, creator, collection, description) for filtering. Users can turn the filter on and off via a preference.

LimeWire.org now features a blog with pretty random content. I notice that another PHP Base32 function (which makes a whole lot more sense than the one included in Bitcollider-PHP — I swear PHP’s bitwise operators weren’t giving correct results and worked around that, but was probably insane) is available with a hint that someone is building an “open source Gnutella Server in PHP5.”

Remember that LimeWire is Open Source P2P and thus pretty trustworthy — and you can always fork.

CodeCon Extra

Monday, February 13th, 2006

A few things I heard about at outside the presentations.

Vesta was presented at CodeCon 2004, the only one I’ve missed. It is an integrated revision control and build system that guarantees build repeatability, in part by ensuring that every file used by the build is under revision control. I can barely keep my head around the few revision control and build systems I occasionally use, but I imagine that if I were starting (or saving) some large mission-critical project that found everyday tools inadequare it would be well worth considering Vesta. About its commercial equivalents, I’ve mostly heard second hand complaining.

Allmydata is where Zooko now works. The currently Windows-only service allows data backup to “grid storage” presumably a as used by . Dedicate 10Gb of local storage to the service, you can back up 1Gb, free. Soon you’ll be able to pay for better ratios, including $30/month for 1Tb of space. I badly want this service. Please make it available, and for Linux! Distributed backup has of course been a dream P2P application forever. Last time I remember the idea getting attention was a Cringely column in 2004.

Some people were debating whether the Petname Tool does anything different from what specify and whether either would make substantially harder. The former is debated in comments on Bruce Schneier’s recent post on petnames, inconclusively AFAICT. The Petname Tool works well and simply for what it does (Firefox only), which is to allow a user to assign a name to a https site if it is using strong encryption. If the user visits the site again and it is using the same certificate, the user will see the assigned name in a green box. Any other site, including one that merely looks like the original (in content or URL), or even has hijacked DNS, appears to be “secure” but uses a different certificate, will appear as “untrusted” in a yellow box. That’s great as far as it goes (see phollow the phlopping phish for a good description of the attack this would save reasonable user from), though the naming seems the least important part — a checkbox to begin trusting a site would be nearly as good. I wonder though how many users have any idea that some pages are secure and others are not. The petname tool doesn’t do anything for non-https pages, so the user becomes inured to seeing it doing nothing, then does not see it. Perhaps it should be invisible when not on a secure site. Indicators like PageRank, Alexa rank (via the Google and Alexa toolbars) and similar, , and whether the visitor has previously visited the site in question before would all help warn the user that any site may not be what they expect — nearly everyone, including me, confers a huge amount of trust on non-https sites, even if I never engage in a financial transaction on such a site. I imagine a four-part security indicator in a prominent place in the browser, with readings of site popularity (rank), danger as measured by the likes of SiteAdvisor, the user’s relationship with the site (petname) and whether the connection is strongly encrypted.

Someone claimed that three letter agencies want to mandate geolocation for every net access device. No doubt some agency types dream of this. Anyway, the person said we should be ready to fight this if it were to become a real push for such a law, because what would happen to anonymity? No doubt such a mandate should be fought tooth and nail, but preserving anonymity seems like exactly the wrong battle cry. How about privacy, or even mere freedom? On that note, someone briefly showed a tiny computer attached to and powered by what could only be called a solar flap. This could be slapped on the side of a bus and would connect to wifi networks whenever possible and route as much traffic as possible.

CodeCon Sunday

Monday, February 13th, 2006

Dido. I think this provides AGI, or a way to script voice response systems using and a voice template system analogous to scripting and HTML templates for web servers, though questioners focused on a controversial feature to reorder menus based on popularity. The demo didn’t really work, except as a demonstration of everyone’s frustration with IVRs, as an audience member pointed out.

Deme. Kitchen sink collaboration web app. They aren’t done putting dishes in the sink. They’re thinking about taking all of the dishes out of the sink, replacing the sink, and putting the dishes back in (PHP to something cooler). Let’s vote on what kind of vote to put this to.

Monotone. Elegant distributed , uses SHA1 hashes to identify files and repository states. Hash of previous repository state included in current repository state, making lineage cryptographically provable. used to quickly determine file level differences between repositories (for sync). Storage and (especially) merge and diff are loosely coupled. Presentation didn’t cover day to day use, probably a good decision in terms of interestingness. The revision control presentations have been some of the best every year at CodeCon. They should consider having two or three next year. may be the only project presented this year that had a Wikipedia article before the conference.

Rhizome. Unlike Gordon (and perhaps most people), hearing the triplet doesn’t make my eyes glaze over, but I’m afraid this presentation did. Some of the underlying code ( etc) might be interesting, but was the second to last presentation, and the top level project, Rhizome, amounts to yet another idiosyncratic , with the idiosyncratic dial turned way up.

Elkhound/Elsa/Oink/Cqual++. generator that handles ambiguous grammars in a straightforward manner, C++ parser and tools built on top of same. Can find with a reasonable false positive rate. Expressed confidence that future work would lead the compiler catching far more bugs than usually thought possible (as opposed to only at runtime). Cool and important stuff, too bad I only grok it at a high level. Co-presenter Dan Wilkerson (and sole presenter on Saturday of Delta) is with the Open Source Quality Project at UC Berkeley.

Saturday
Sunday 2005