A single goverment?...

With communications technology allowing us connect with people that whom we couldn't connect otherwise, and to arrive almost any place in the world in the space of a few hours, the idea that a single world government isn't all that outrageous.

The question now is, if it would gather enough popular support to make it possible to work a way to do so.

But, is it something that is necessary or that we would want to do? Or should we continue to have independent states to better serve the people who physically live at any given geographical location?

I believe that the answer lies somewhere in between the two extremes.

People should have a lot more say on the communities where they live. And those communities should be able to interact with each other as a group as they see fit. Not only that, the individuals should be able to move any other community as he sees fit with as little impediments as possible.

The same goes to the communities on the Internet. Each one should have the freedom to self-regulate.

May be, we should rethink governments and they functions on how they regulate human interactions. It seems that small communities are better able to meet the needs of those who live within, and then interact with other communities.

And since individuals now are part not only of the communities they live in, but also are part of virtual communities, they could make the search for local, regional, and international solutions a lot easier than ever before. Now, more than ever, is easier to find and share messages with more people in a relative small period of time.

It is time for the people to start self governing themselves. We need to take more responsibilities to what's going in our communities, and to take the actions to make our communities better.

Let's make a community where everyone is accountable for what he does, and that makes easy to people to be together.

Not everything can be the next big thing...

For me is both funny and irritating seeing how every time a new thing comes our way, it is touted as the best thing since sliced bread or that it would bring forth doom and death to all.

To be honest, the things that were true game changers tend to not come along all that ofter. And they don't impact every one the same way. Those things that have a really wide impact are even rarer.

For me it's even more annoying when what ever certain companies, or individuals, do is shown as if it is yet another game changer. Come on, let's be honest and realize that while we can expect good things constantly from those players, not every thing they do can have high impact.

We should learn to take things with more care. The truth is that even though the last hundred years have seen mayor changes in the way humanity lives, not all has been as great, or as bad, as many want to believe.

Its important to realize that each one of us needs to find what fits to our wants and needs.

Just because something worked wonders for someone else, it means that the product or service will be useful for you. Or, just because it didn't meet the expectations of someone else, it doesn't mean that you should avoid it.

When we are looking for whatever we need at that moment, we should head to the voices that are knowledgeable in what we are looking for. Those are the ones that can give us the best guidance, or advice, in what we are looking for.

So, let's keep out feet on the ground and have our heads cool.

What I like of open source...

For me, one of the most annoying things that happened to me since I started using open source software on the regular basis is receiving criticism from people that haven't used it, or ready understand what's it about.

Using open source, for me, is about having access software that gives me the control on how it works. And it's also about the philosophy, and principles, that the open source community brings to the table.

People coming to collaborate in projects, in a open way is the way to move forward and it's in the best interest of the community at large.

In the short, and long, runs collaborating this way offer the best way to do things in all the fields. Since all happens on the open, we all can see how things are done and the individual is free to participate in the way, shape, or form that fits his or her personal interests.

Collaboration in an open way can speed things up, since the ideas and information used in the project can be shared with the most people possible. This means that solutions can be found a lot faster, and new ways to use the information and the ideas can be found with a lot more ease.

Another one, is that is harder to use the projects in a way that can be harmful. Since there are a lot of eyes looking at every aspect of each project done this way, it's a lot harder to put in anything that can be detrimental to the project, and it also means that it can be fixed a lot faster if somethings does go through.

It also means, that parts of existing projects can be used to create new projects, or enhance current projects. And since the projects are open, any one can see from where, by who, and when any particular piece of the project was pulled. Or, if it was a new piece created specifically from the project at hand.

Collaboration between individuals, and groups, in an open way should not only be allowed to do so, it should be encouraged.

The pros of doing things in an open way to the community at large, vastly outweigh any cons that could come from it. Information and ideas, are the building blocks of knowledge. We all have the right to access knowledge without any impediment.

Knowledge can not be allowed in ownership of any particular individual, or group. Knowledge is only valuable when it can freely flow among the societies and communities at large. It needs to be shared and used freely by anyone who's interested, or has a use, for any particular knowledge.

At the end information, ideas, and knowledge is a commodity that belongs to everyone.

On the shoulders of giants...

If we hope to further our knowledge, the best chance is standing on the shoulders of the great minds that came before us.

And how can we hope to do so if the ideas, and knowledge, that those giants came upon is out of the grasp by the people?

In many ways, the current state of the copyrights and patent laws do just this. And is even worse when laws are proposed that can hinder even more our ability to freely share, look, and use the existing trove of information and ideas.

No single set of persons, public or private entities, should be able to put any kind of limitations on how information and ideas flow. We all should be able make use of all current knowledge in the way we think is most appropriate. Is also equally important that we are able to share with other the knowledge we have.

The truth is that, no one can be sure where the next breakthrough in any field can come from. New insights can come from anyone. That team, or individual, just need have access to any knowledge to work with.

It's foolish to believe that new knowledge can come just from certain places or individuals. We need to remain open to the fact that it can come from any number of places, and isn't necessary going to come from the usual ones.

If we can spread knowledge far and wide, solutions to current problems can be come by sooner.

At the end, innovation comes when someone sees new ways to do things. So, anyone driven to solve a problem that can't be solved using any current means will be required to innovate. This can be done either by using current knowledge in new ways, or coming by new knowledge.

By limiting who, and how, gets what knowledge we are limiting ourselves. It's foolish, and a waste of time and resources, to have people reinventing the wheel just because they can't share with other people how to do make a wheel.

If knowledge is shared, we all benefit in the long run.

Let's keep our eyes open...

After SOPA and PIPA acts were defeated by the protests against them last Wednesday, I've been seeing mixed reactions to the news.

Some were ecstatic, since the voice of the people was heard by the Senate and the House. While others where rather pessimistic, saying that we just postponed the defeat of the free and open Internet.

My take is a bit more pragmatic. Yes, we do have reason to celebrate and be happy about the result. The voice of those who defend the free and open Internet, and all what it stands for, was heard. Yet, we need to remain vigilant to the threats that will continue to appear from those who want to put limitations to the Internet.

And while it's true that there is a chance that a law with the same aims as SOPA and PIPA are going to keep being proposed, thus the Internet will be always be threatened by those who want to limit it. But, our defeat is not set on stone.

Neither are our victories.

The truth, is that we need to remain vigilant. We need to keep constantly keep checks on the government and companies, so that no laws can be passed that hinder our rights.

There always will be people that feel threatened by changes that take away the power they've gathered, or that fail to adapt and innovate in order to keep themselves relevant. So, they try to keep things as they were by passing laws or playing the system to keep their edge.

That's why we need to keep our guard up, and to press the changes needed to fix things in order to keep big companies from stepping on the new comers.

And the best way to do so, is to band together to defend our rights and freedoms. If we don't, we are truly headed to a world where we our voice won't be heard.

Open source and open standards....

Open source and open standards may well be our most powerful tools to keep our freedom.

With open source software, one can see the source code of what he is using, and how it works. So, any one can modify it in order to make it work according to what the individual needs. Being able to check code can be important, since this gives everyone the same degree of control over what is going on within, and how should it work.

And since everyone can check what it's on, it becomes harder to make the product do things that the owner doesn't want it to do. With proprietary software, one has to blindly trust the vendor. But with open source software, anyone can check that the code really do what the coder said it does.

Also, if a feature that one wants or needs isn't included in the package, adding it is as easy as coding into it the feature, or hiring some one else to do so.

Open standards are an important companion to open source. Open standards give users a common way to encode and decode their files. And since they don't depend on a single vendor, or entity, they can be used as a format by anyone.

It's important to make them easy to use and access to everyone who wants, so that their use is as widespread as possible.

Why open standards are important? Because they give us a tool to be able to use our files independently of what piece of software we are using at any particular time. Since the standards are open to everyone, incompatibility issues would become less of a problem.

We should be able to modify our software according to what we need, and to see our information where ever and how ever we choose to do so. No single vendor should be able to lock us in to use their piece of software.

Freedom to access information...

How long it has to be before it is understood that information should be free to be accessed by anyone who either wants, or needs that information.

Information is not something that can be owned in the sense you own a car, a computer, or things of that nature. Informations is more of a platform on which individuals, and societies, relay to take decisions or make things happen.

The value is more valuable depending on its use. And is more valuable in direct proportion to how many people can use it, or put it to work on a way that is beneficial to them. So, information is a resource that should be at the disposal of the society at large in a way it can be used by any member of the society.

It should be allowed to flow freely among all, with any restriction on the flow being imposed by each individual as he sees fit. No one else should decide who access, and how, any piece of information.

All informations should be stored in open standards, so that no single entity has the key on how the information can be retrieved or distributed. Each individual has the right to access and store whatever information he needs in any medium he prefers to do so.

Every standard that is used to store information, should be free of any kind restriction that impedes the free flow of information from one individual to another. And all hardware that can be used to play back the information should be able to reproduce it, so that information can be shared and consumed as each individual sees fit to do.

In essence, information should be considered the ultimate common good. We all own it, and should be free to share and use it as we all see fit.

Freedom of information....

It's important to realize the that open standards are crucial to innovation, and to keep vested interests from monopolizing the information.

Information is at it's valuable when it's available to all who need it, or use it. No restrictions should be placed to the free flow of the information. It's on the interest of everyone, that we can be able to access and use any information as we see fit.

It's our right to be able to use the information, and to share it how and with whom we want. To restrict the information is not something that should be allowed, since information is the tool on which societies can grow and adapt better to changing circumstances.

Information should have no owner, and should be exchanged freely among who ever wants to share on any particular piece of information. As it is, information is valuable because of the use that can be given to it by its end user.

All attempts to censor, need to be repealed as soon as they appear. Censorship constraints our freedom to choose what do we want to ourselves. Any attempt to censor the information goes against our fundamental rights. Because we need good and complete information to make choices on our daily lives, some of them that are fundamental for our well being.

It's worrying that laws are being proposed can be used to censor the information that could be accessed by the majority, in order to protect the interests of a minority.

At least, is good to see that many people are doing things in order to stop those laws. We have the right to be free to access any information at all, and we are the judges of what information is the one we want to see and which one we don't.

The censorship should be at the level of each individual, and not being decided by someone else.

Freedom...

By principle, I oppose anything that limits the individual rights to do as he wants with what he owns or with his skills.

Each individual should be able to use his skill set and charge for it as he sees fit, without having any interference from a third party. The same goes with any property he has. He should be able to exchange it as he sees fit, even to modify it in any way it serves his interests.

The limitations set, should only be the ones put in place by the parties involved in the transaction as it suits the interests of everyone directly involved in it.

If we want to progress as individuals and as a society, we should have the freedom to use all the tools we need at our disposal and be able to modify them as we need. Also, we need to be able to share the information with other people with no interference. This is helpful, so it helps to innovate or get to solutions that other wise we wouldn't be able to do or would take more time that what is practical.

No single party, or group, should be able to control how we manage our daily life or decide who has access to which information. Both need to be free, and have the bare minimum rules so we can function in a practical level.

Yet, those set of rules should be set not by a group but by the community that will use them. And, they should be easy to modify as needed, since things change and rules need to be adjusted accordingly.

Anything that limits our ability to freely exchange our resources with each other, should be avoided.

Each individual should be able to move from one community to another as he sees fit, without being impeded in any sort of way that is not necessary or that makes it difficult to move as the individual sees fit to his interests.

The freedom to do as one believes, is what important to create the environment that foster society to move forward. If we don't evolve and adapt, we don't have a future.

Free and open society...

I've being doing a lot of thinking about the importance of having an open and free society, and how on many occasions society itself is one of the biggest obstacles to obtaining such open and free state.

Mainly because most of the people simply don't care enough to take the action they need to make in order to have the openness and freedom they claim to want.

This kind of society requires active participation of its members, in order to take depositions on how to manage the working of the interactions of its members. The fewer people know and take decisions, the easier is to make them behind close door and benefiting just a few.

How things are now, all is structure in gear toward being closed as possible in order to facilitate the taking of decisions by small groups in the name of the community at large. If we want to change this, we all need to start taking actions to retake control of the decisions that should be ours. We have the right to have access, and participate, in anything that affects us in any shape or form.

It is in our best interest that all that is done in the name of the community is done in an open way. Also important to us all, is that all members of the community are free to participate in whatever way they seem appropriate to their interests.

What is done in the name of the community, should always be done in an open to all the members of it. And all members of the community must be free to participate in any way each individual wants to.

But, having such a society requires that all of us remain engaged in what happens in our community. The moment we stop being active and give more power to others to take decisions for us, the easier it becomes for others for them to do as they see fit without the community being able to do much about it.

At the end, it is in out best interest to make sure that all decisions that are made in the name of the community we live in are open to all of the members of our community. And, that all the members are free to participate on them.

We don't need SOPA....

It's sad that the US is even thinking about setting something like SOPA. For me it's also strikes me as hypocritical, since it's something that US government has criticized about other governments around like world.

But, what worries me the most is that SOPA doesn't really protect the rights of the people. SOPA is framed to protect the interest of big companies. To make it worst, many of those companies have outdated business models that they want to keep instead of innovating.

I don't want my rights being stepped over by companies that refuse to change their models. Why should risk being framed as a criminal just because I mentioned a company, or a product, just because it doesn't like the way I did so?

The Internet should be a free field for the exchange of information. It is imperative that we keep special interest from broking it in any shape or form, so that every one can access the information he or she needs to keep informed and in contact with other people.

For all matters and purposes, the Internet belongs to everyone. No group, country, or company should have any say on what can be done or said over the Internet. Building any kind of barrier is detrimental for everyone, since the Internet is a tool that enables us to share ideas and information with other people from places it wouldn't be able to do so in other way.

In many ways, the Internet enables innovation by making possible to share ideas far and wide. Thus, any ideas gets more exposure enabling others to have a possibility to come with something new, or a new way to use things.

So, we should stand against any measure as SOPA by principle.