I am very happy to see the Free Software Foundation going back to making good software. I have argued for long time that what made the FSF a great organization that changed the world is the fact that they didn’t only point at proprietary software as a problem but they also provided a solution with copyleft and the GPL licenses and provided working code in the GNU system. I’m glad to see that the FSF has adopted Mediagoblin’s software development and included it in the GNU system. It’s free as in freedom software as a service that allows to publish multimedia content (pictures, audio, videos, 3D models) in a federation with API support and lots of awesomeness. You can think of it as a federated replacement for things like Flickr, YouTube or SoundCloud that you or anyone can run. Just wonderful.
If you haven’t donated yet, do it now as it’s not too late. MediaGoblin 1.0 is going to support OpenStack Swift too, so if you like OpenStack you have the moral obligation to donate to the FSF to develop Mediagoblin.
Nathan Willis on LWN explains quite well the role of two GNU projects as Skype replacements: SIP Witch and GNU Free Call.
SIP Witch, the call server developed by the GNU Telephony project, made its stable 1.0 release in May. In conjunction with that milestone, GNU Telephony has also unveiled its next major project, GNU Free Call — a free, peer-to-peer routed voice calling network.
Read it all ($) GNU Telephony releases SIP Witch 1.0 and announces Free Call [LWN.net].
Is adoption of copyleft licenses really declining? Blackduck Sotware with its own secret recipe says so, as Matt Aslett reports. Whether or not this is true we can’t tell because BlackDuck doesn’t publish their method to collect and analyze its data. In any case, I think that if you look at this debate from a different angle, these numbers don’t count at all.
Twentyfive years ago there was no free/libre open source business and the GNU L/GPL licenses constituted the main corpus of free software available for use. The FSF used the strong copyleft mainly because of an ethical choice and also for practical reason to defend its code from appropriation by third party. Remember that at the time there was no ‘ecosystem’ and the notion of copyright to software was brand new.
Now free software is developed mainly by companies for business purposes: their choice is not only to defend code from appropriation but also to allow building thriving ecosystem for Open Innovation. The other reason I see for the large popularity of permissive licenses is the quantity of software developed by Apache Foundation. It’s amazing how far their code has gone from the original idea of a web server.
Whether BlackDuck has reliable numbers or somebody else does it’s irrelevant: numbers don’t count. I believe that if FSF wants to see more copyleft code out there, it needs to go back to its origin and get back to developing software that matters. The FSF needs to go beyond the GNU operating system and expand into the new areas of ‘cloud’, ‘social’ and ‘mobile’. Projects like MediaGoblin and GNU.FM are the first steps in the right direction but more is needed.
451 CAOS Theory » The trend towards permissive licensing.
When I tell people that I studied as an architect I always get a question: how did you end up in technology and why do you advocate Free Software/Open Source if you studied brick-and-mortar? The answer I usually give is summarized in the incipit of the book The Architecture of Open Source Applications
Architects look at thousands of buildings during their training, and study critiques of those buildings written by masters. In contrast, most software developers only ever get to know a handful of large programs well—usually programs they wrote themselves—and never study the great programs of history. As a result, they repeat one another’s mistakes rather than building on one another’s successes.
Free Software with its freedom 1, the freedom to study the code and adapt it to your needs, is the only way software architectures can evolve. It took hundreds of years to go from building the pyramids to the skyscrapers and all thanks to the freedom to study how things are made. I believe that if we keep the same freedom we have in the world of atoms we’ll be able to continue building a better cyberspace.
Eben Moglen is helping Free Software to keep the promise of a free society. In his keynote speech at FOSDEM Moglen has laid out the foundation for the future of the Free Software movement: make sure that digital communication between people remains free.
Our freedom depends on reengineering the network to replace vulnerable, centralized services with alternatives which resist government control.
He identified the enemy (the data-mining industry, lead by corporation and governments around the world), gave the enemy a name and an easy target (Facebook) and he gave an action plan (the Freedom Box).
Freedom Box is the name we give to a free software system built to keep your communications free and private whether chatting with friends or protesting in the street.
I noted that he didn’t mention Twitter in his speech, and I think I know why. First of all Twitter has a good track of records when it comes to step up against government requests. What I believe is Moglen’s most clear reason to mention only Facebook is that he wants to give one target to the crowd, and a fat, easy one, too. Facebook must be the evil, much like Microsoft was the only big, fat target for all FSF’s propaganda (not Autodesk or or Adobe or Oracle or IBM).
It’s important to donate now on Kickstarter: Push the FreedomBox Foundation from 0 to 60 in 30 days. I hope that FSF and FSFE now donate to this project, too: I’d be really surprised if they don’t.
PS If you want to read more here are some articles: NY Times, WSJ, BoingBoing, Slashdot, reddit, ZDNet, The New York Observer, New Europe, techPresident, LWN.
I love xkcd. This strip reminds us of the invaluable work that the Free Software Foundation has been doing for over 25 years. Have you donated to the FSF already? Donate now, it’s for a good cause.
I’m a firm believer that non-profit organizations need to have a strategy, too. Maybe even more than for-profit ones, because of the constant lack of resources. I’ve been watching without commenting the development of the five-year strategic plan for Wikimedia Foundation: fascinating. The process has entered the last phase, synthesis. There is lots to learn from it. I hope I’ll find time to blog about this later.
Some background info on HBR.
Ho tenuto oggi una lezione di tre ore al Social Media Lab dello IULM dal titolo Etica della società digitale, ovvero perché ristabilire il senso di comunità porta al successo. Oggi ho avuto la conferma che il software libero ormai non è un concetto astratto. Praticamente tutti gli studenti (delle facoltà di Lingue, Turismo, Marketing e Comunicazione) usano regolarmente Firefox, conoscono OpenOffice.org, sanno che WordPress è software libero. Quindi, diversamente da qualche anno fa, non occorre più convincere nessuno della bontà del software libero o della sua fattibilità, della sua sostenibilità economica. Oggi penso di aver fatto bene a concentrarmi sullo spiegare perché il software libero è un elemento fondamentale nella società digitale.
Durante la prima ora ho spiegato i fondamentali e la storia del software libero. Per portare i principi di Stallman all’atto pratico ho usato le metafore di Lessig illustrate in Code is law. La prima parte della lezione si conclude quindi con l’affermazione che nell’attuale era dell’informazione e per una società digitale libera il potere del codice software va bilanciato con la responsabilità morale del programmatore, ovvero con le quattro libertà di Stallman.
La seconda parte invece mi è servita a dimostrare che essere etici non vuol dire fare beneficenza e rimanere poveri. Ho usato due tipi di esempi, in negativo e in positivo. Gli esempi negativi sono i comportamenti di aziende o interi gruppi che, perdendo la bussola etica e perdendo il senso di appartenenza ad una comunità hanno portato alla recessione. Gli esempi positivi sono quelli di aziende che hanno mantenuto invece un forte senso di comunità e continuano a mietere successi. Non ho potuto fare a meno di citare Funambol in questo caso: adoro il principio Don’t upsell to your community. A chi si stupisce perché ho messo Google tra i buoni rispondo che secondo me Big G finora ha dimostrato un forte senso di responsabilità; ad esempio, qualcuno vede Facebook partecipare a qualcosa tipo dataportability? Quindi, ricapitolando, se il software libero è il modo per tenere una solida etica nella società digitale e mantenere il senso di comunità, e le aziende che hanno alti standard morali e forte senso di comunità solido hanno successo, allora il software libero è un pezzo importante per il successo.
Nella terza ora abbiamo discusso insieme questo caso di studio da HBR, un’azienda che deve decidere se e come rilasciare il suo programma con una licenza libera. La discussione è stata bellissima con spunti davvero intelligenti da parte della classe.
Le slide sono qui sotto. Mi sono divertito tantissimo e non vedo l’ora di poter ripetere questa lezione da un’altra parte: accetto inviti 🙂
There is a new way to support Free Software Foundation: get a GNU credit card. At first I thought this would never happen, but Stallman is a very surprising man: he doesn’t use credit cards because they carry too much personal information to ‘Big Brother’. Nevertheless, they’re convenient to use and with this one 0.3% of any expense will go to FSF.
FSF is also running a contest for a new design. Details on FSF blog.
Introducing The Free Software Foundation Visa Platinum Card.