Tsikbal: from my perspective

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...

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 nee...

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...

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 kno...

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 vigilan...

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 w...

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...

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. Cens...

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 s...

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 partic...

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 wi...