FOSS is the way...

I've been thinking about the software I would pay for, and the answer is that I'd pay for software that add value to what I do. Or, that actually enhance or facilitate what I do most often.

Also, I'd pay for technical assistance that I actually need or to build features that I don't have the time or the technical know-how to make.

But, I'd always prefer FOSS software over proprietary software. FOSS software gives me the advantage to change the software according to my need more easily, since I can ask anyone with the technical skills to do it. That person doesn't have to be part of the entity that made the software in the first place, giving me a lot more flexibility when I need to change anything.

The restrictions that FOSS comes with are a lot less cumbersome, and actually let the user use the software in ways that are more effective in meeting his or her needs. It doesn't force the user to work in the way envisioned by the original designer.

Users can adapt the software to its needs, not adapt its needs to the software.

And since software can be more readily optimized to what the user needs, the features that it contains can be exactly the ones the user ask for. Not only that, functionalities can be added or subtracted as needed faster since they can come in modules that can be plugged in, or out, as the need the need arises. And can be a lot cheaper, since one pays only for the functionalities that the user needs.

If we don't need a feature or functionality, we shouldn't be forced to pay for it and have it use resources that could be put in a better use.

More importantly, we should get what we see.

Open source in education...

One of the places where I'd love to see free and open source software to take off, is on education.

Open source software has the ability to give equal access to all students to the tools and information to receive a better education. Mainly because it gives the teachers a platform on which they can give greater access to the materials and content relevant to the curses they give.

Not only that, teacher would be better able to share between then ideas and materials to use in their respective classes in an easier and more effective way. And, since the cost of the software could be much lower than with closed sourced software it would be practical to have the most up to date versions of the software they use. And thus, granting their students access to the most current information and tools available for them.

This is more crucial than ever, since technology is moving faster than ever. Is important to give students not only with the knowledge they will need to face life with. We also need to give them the ability to adapt to the changes that are occurring faster, and faster.

And having our students learning and using older software because of cost prohibitions, and because the vendors aren't able to bring new technologies to their software, is going to have a negative impact on their chances to be able to coupe with newer technologies later on.

Open source software can be use to help students develop an open mind, and thus to cope better in a world where change is constant.

There should be standards, but this should be open as well. Since no student should be left out of accessing crucial information because he or she doesn't have the money to be able to access the class curriculum.

Open source software and standards, can give all students a level field on which they can develop their own talents and interests. The limits of what they can do, should be set by their own set of abilities.

Let's make open source software and standards the rule on classrooms.

The community gives strength...

In my mind, the best type of governance for open source projects is that comes for the community of active contributors and it's users.

Active contributors and users should at least have a voice to express where the project should go, and what features should be included or excluded. After all, the project benefits most when most of it's core base believes on what's being done and what's to make it work in the best way possible.

This approach also has to be pragmatic, since not everyone will be pleased with the choices made. And sometimes, features have to be dropped since there wouldn't be a practical way to keep them going within the project.

Discussion and dialogue should be encouraged, since when it's done in a constant way it helps to bring the community together. Also, it helps to spot errors or areas where there is a need to work on faster since things that can be overlooked by someone can be picked up by other.

When people are encouraged to collaborate with their peers freely, and on equal terms, is the way when the best results are most often achieved.

Any structure with in the project should come naturally. The structure should be allowed to be fluid, to change according to need of the moment so it can better adapt to the context of the moment the project is in.

If a project want to harness the best of the people that work on it, and use it on regular basis, it need to be open to have an easy and effective way to communicate with them. Any project is as strong as the community that supports it. The projects needs more of the people who support them, than the people need the projects themselves.

Great projects can become stronger when the community behind them come to own them, and work with them. When the community truly takes ownership of the project, it starts working harder on it to make it grow in ways than many might have not intended or seen. Some times, it may give rise to forks that take the core ideas to paths that are not interesting for others to pursue, yet still render great results.

The creations of the communities truly take a life of their own, and pull us to a better place.

Please, compete through innovation...

With all the lawsuits flying around patents on how such companies stole my idea, even though they implement it in a different way or use a different core to run them, on how people do things are suppose to be intuitive for people who use them seems to me a rather ludicrous idea.

I mean, we all do things that are intuitive in the same way mainly because we are all wired to do it in pretty much the same way. That's the main reason why it's easy to use those things in that way, since we don't have to give it much thought.

And when you look even further, more often than not innovating products combine technologies, or practices, in a way that is new. Sometimes, you just change existing implementations in ways that make more sense in a given context making it easier to use. May be, even practical.

Let's be honest, we are all influenced by our surroundings. What we hear, see and read leaves an impression on our mind. In effect, makes up the repository from which we draw to make choices and even create new things.

Something can't come from nothing. There is always something from which all innovations come from, and many times is a recombination of several things that we have experienced to that point. It is possible to come to the same conclusion from different paths. And, there is no reason why the parties that came to the same conclusion to have been in contact to come to it.

In other words, theft is not necessary the cause they came with similar implementations and conclusions. Most likely, the reason is that particular way of solving the problem is the best way to solve the problem.

The design of the interface is where one can truly differentiate between proposals. We all have preferences on how we want things to look, even though what we use behaves in the pretty much the same way. We even expect things to behave in a certain way, and when they don't we stop using them.

There are some cases when we use thing that feel awkward not because we want to, but because we have to. Here is where truly innovating people shine, they bring together different thing they have experienced in other places and times, in a way no one else has though before. Or implement a particular solution in a field that had the need, but not the way to know about that particular implementation.

Technology, and knowledge itself, is build over that what came previously. Nothing really comes out from the vacuum, everything has received influences from whatever comes in contact with it. Even from before the idea was conceived.

So, let's stop worrying about who can use our ideas, or concepts. Let's use that energy to make those ideas and concepts work better. There is always a way to improve on anything, is just a matter of looking into it.

If we don't, is just a matter of time before someone else does.

Public forum...

For me, the Internet is the biggest public forum there is by far. That's why is important to keep the Internet free and open to everyone to use.

The Internet is a place where ideas can be shared with the widest amount of people, in the least amount of time possible. Also, it allows people who are in distant geographical point to be in contact and share information and ideas between them.

For many, is a valuable because is the only way they have to access knowhow and to communicate with people that they couldn't reach in any other way. The Internet really bring the world together by allowing many people communicate and get to know things and people that they wouldn't be able to do otherwise.

This exchange of ideas between those different people can do more to bring people together than any other effort, mainly because people come together in an spontaneous way. So, they build relationships build from this interactions that can become strong and help build a wider and clearer view of the world they live in.

With this in mind, the Internet may be more valuable that the sum of its parts.

It also help to build stronger communities, since it facilitates the interaction by individuals with a wider part of the community they live in. They can coordinate actions, and share information with almost everyone in the community in the matter of minutes or hours, facilitating the response to whatever might be happening in almost real time.

It truly empowers the grassroots movements, since it gives them access to a way to organize and keep in touch with it's members in ways that traditional media can't.

The Internet has the potential to give more power to the people than we imagine, if we work to keep it free and open. And, if we use it in a way that we can organize effectively to take the actions needed to achieve our goals.

Let's make the Internet the forum of the people. The place where we come to share ideas, plan,and build a better place for us and our children.

Digital privacy...

There is a valid concern about on-line privacy, and how our computers and cell phones might compromise it.

In closed sourced software there is a real danger that back doors, or any type of code used to spy on the user, could pass undetected for long lengths of time without being noticed. All because no one outside the creators of the code can check the code, so there is no chance that other people can notice that the code is there.

This makes it greatly convenient to any organization to use closed software to keep an eye on people, and even try to censor to what we can access.

Open source software is the antidote to keep our privacy, and keep those who would like to take it away at bay. Any information that we share, should be the one that we choose to share and only with those we want to share it with.

We can loose our privacy if we aren't vigilant, and let others control how we manage and share our information. Closed source software is a tool that gives the advantage to them, since they can control tightly how the software works and no one outside those who program it can really check on it.

Do we want to give up our privacy? If you don't, be careful how you manage your information.

ACTA getting shot down...

It seems that ACTA is going under. Which is good news, since the passing of such laws are in detriment of the people.

The good thing that is coming out of this, is that people are getting together to protect the right to have a free and open Internet. But the sad part is that the industry and politicians that propose this laws are not really going to stop trying to get them through.

At the end, it seems that many don't really understand that the way to go now is to truly innovate, or bring new things to the table. The time when anyone could come with a few innovative ideas from time to time are gone, and for good.

And a free and open Internet could be one of the best tools to help to bring innovation. It makes is easier to share ideas and information between individuals and organizations, thus making it easier to come with new ways to do things. Because you have access to a wealth of information, is easier to come to solutions that you hadn't though about yourself.

It also makes it easier to bring people together to collaborate to find solutions, or simply exchange ideas. People have an easier way to find others with similar problems, and collaborate to find the best solutions possible.

Crippling the Internet, means crippling one of the tools that can bring the best chances to truly bring the world together in our quest for a better life. The Internet is forum where we can be equal in ways that cannot be on the real world. It gives all access to a wealth of knowledge that can really help many people to empower themselves with the knowledge and networking that could prove crucial to have a better life.

I do believe that the Internet stop belonging to any particular entity or group, and have come to be of all the people. So, we all should have unrestricted access to it, and use it as it best fit out interests.

Any attempt to censor, or restrict, our activities on should be avoided at all costs. We should be the ones who police the Internet, not small groups or industries.

So, make lets make sure that all know that the Internet belongs to the people now.

Why Mac OS X s third for me...

Today I used a Mac for a while, just for the fun of it. And I must admit that the Mac OS X is third on my favorite OS's, after Ubuntu and Linux Mint.

I do like the looks and usability of the OS, and hardware is really well designed. Yet, I prefer Ubuntu as my day to day OS. Though I must admit I'd like to buy a Mac Pro and install Ubuntu on it, so I could have a really good looking piece of hardware with my favorite OS running on it.

But, what holds me from using an Apple product is the way it wants to control its software and hardware. It feels that Apple wants to take away as much control from the user as it can, so that no one can make the OS like he or she wants to do so.

And that is something that I can't really take. I want to be able to be free to customize my OS as I want to, without any limitations by anyone at all. After all, I own the computer I buy to use.

So, I should be able to customize the software to make it work as I like, or need. Not only that, I should be able to download and/or install any program or application by default. There shouldn't be any need to turn any thing off to be able to do so.

It's sad, because Apple does have a great piece of OS on their hands.

Ripe for new things...

One of the things I like the most about the open source, and free software communities is the level of collaboration that come with them. This makes it easy to find a project that suits what are you looking for, or starting a new one where there is the need.

For me, this makes these communities fields where innovations can come far more rapidly and more ease than when things are done with behind closed doors. Mainly because the information, and how the software works, flows easily. Anyone who has any interest to use, or see how it works can have a look.

And because of these, it's more likely that someone comes with an answer to a problem. Or, can find a new path to solve the problem that hasn't been implemented before.

Closing the doors on this type of collaboration would do more harm than good. It would most likely hinder knowledge than to do any good at all.

Keep vigilant...

This week Foxconn was audited to make sure it meets international standard conditions, after Apple faced some protests because of concerns about the conditions workers that produced its products face.

It was reported that so far, the working conditions are above average. I'm not satisfied since above average might as well that working conditions are bad, but not as bad as in other factories.

My main concern is that it seems that our demands for the consumer goods is driving the kind of conditions for worker that called for the audits. The more things are bought mindlessly, the more companies have to produce to meet that demand. This mindless consumerism is what sets the stage for people out for a profit, try to abuse of workers.

It is to be expected that employers to give good labor conditions to their employees. But, if we all we limit to do is to consume without paying attention under what conditions the goods we buy are produced, we share part of the blame of the any abuse toward the workers.

Yes, is naive to believe that all abuse can be stamped out. There always will be people trying to play the system, and get away with as much as they can. Yet, we can help to make those cases the exception and not the rule.

We need to remain vigilant to how the companies from which we buy goods or services treat their employees. After all, it's with the money they get from us how they remain in business. We can help to better working conditions by buying from those companies that give good working condition. Also by passing the voice around of which one are the ones who treat their employees, so other people can avoid supporting those companies.

We can make the difference, and help construct a better word. All we need, is to remain vigilant and act when there is a need to do so.

Locking in your options...

Even though the Mac OS X is great OS, really good looking and easy to use, I find it disturbing that with the 10.8 Mountain Lion release you can only install Apple signed software from the Apple store by default.

For what I've been reading, there is the option to turn the option of and restore user ability to install software other the one signed by Apple, or from outside their app store. Yet, I believe that this option should be a given and not object to be taking away from the user by Apple or any other company for that matter.

Once I buy any computer with any OS, I expect to be at least be able to install any program that I want or need to work with as I see fit.

After all, we should have the right to put in any software we need to work with on any computer we want to. And if there are limitations to do so, one of them shouldn't be the OS. The OS is only the platform for us to interact with the programs we choose to work with.

We should be able to make software to work on any particular OS we want to, and to share it with who we want to without interference of the vendor who made the OS we might be targeting for. The users should be the ones who decide which programs to run, and from where they get them.

As an Ubuntu user, I've always had the Mac OS X as a second option after Linux Mint. But, if Apple keeps going down this road I won't feel comfortable using their products since they restrict my freedom to use the software and hardware I bought as I want to.

For me, it's a big deal that any one tries to tell what can or can't do with the things I buy. Once I buy them, I expect to be able to use them as I see fit.

To be honest, I would like to see Apple users to make Apple stop building artificial walls around them that limit how they can use the computers and smart phones they bought.