Take control...

Is really sad how it seems that there is a trend followed by many companies to take control away from the user. Each time a new version is announced, the company who makes takes away features that would allow the user to control less and less of what to decide what the software can do.

Which is bad, because that means that the user is left at the mercy of whatever the company want to do.

The user should be able to have complete control of what it's running on his computer, and how is it running. After all, who know better what the user needs that the user himself.

As users, we should do more that mindlessly consume whatever it's given to use. We should be aware of what is going on around us, so we can do more than react when things aren't going our way. If we give them that, the users give up being able to effectively fight back.

Walled gardens are not beneficial for user, since walled gardens only serves the interests of those who own the garden. And they limit the options of the user to whatever the owner of the garden sees fit to offer.

Each user should be the one who decides what to see, and what to use. Most importantly, the user has the exclusive right to choose what channels to use to get the software he needs. Also, the users should be able to deal with the provider without any interference.

The end user is the one who should decide what goes on his or her machines, not the companies.

Break bounderies...

One of the things that irks me the most on any piece of software, being the OS to any other program that I run on my computer, is when it takes from me control the ability to set it up to work as I want it to do and how it share the data I feed into it.

I want to have as much control as possible of whatever is going on my computer, and being able to set my privacy level as I see fit on every piece of software running.

There is no need for the developers telling me how I should use and set the software once it is on my computer, or to be protected from myself. If I need any protective tools, those are the tools that help me understand and protect my computer and data from outside threats.

And the most important tool of all, is information on the possible threats I'm facing. Clear and concise information that helps me understand how certain things might harm me is far more useful at the time of making decisions about what software I download, or what sites should I avoid.

I dislike the idea of being forced into a walled garden just because the developers don't want me changing their code, appearance of the program, to make it work the way I want it to work. Or what worse, to tell me what can I can consume on their platform.

We should be given as much control as possible on our computers and smartphones as possible. We shouldn't be locked out to make any changes to them. Yes, some changes might take your product on paths you didn't think about or wanted it to go. But, once it's out there all has the tendency to take a life of its own.

Why limit anything to the boundaries one person or group set?

By opening the possibilities of what your software can do, the sky becomes the ceiling of what it can be achieved. One doesn't achieve greatness by limiting ourselves to a narrow road.

The Cloud...

For all the hype about the cloud, I've a hard time embracing it for all my computing needs.

I find that for be, I want some of my files on the cloud while other I want them to be on my hard drive. I do believe that for most people needs, they are going to use a mix of cloud and local.

For most intends and purposes, most people needs are meet by a mix of cloud and local storage or processing. The cloud is mostly used for sharing files, music and photos, or for collaborative projects where multiple people need access to a file to work with.

If you don't need to do any of those things, you could use your computer and local drives to meet all of your needs. At the end, there is no need to have everything on the cloud or stored locally. You just need to find the right mix for you.

Most importantly, is important to use services that use open standards at least. This insures that if anything happens to the service, your files can be read by any other service. It would be even better if the service you use is open source, since gives an extra layer of security and flexibility.

The way I say...

I see no reason why any public or private entity should have any say on how I use my computer, smartphone, or any consumer electronic devise. Much less on what software should I install and use on my device that I own.

Whats more, I should have the legal right to check how the software I use on my devices work and make sure that it doesn't do any other function that goes against what I intend to use it. Also, I should be able to know if it gathers any of my information and if it share it. If it does gather information, I should be informed before hand and asked to give the permissions to do so.

More importantly, there should be an easy way to modify the parameters and to opt out if I choose to do so afterward.

Also, I should be able to modify the software on my devices to work as I see fit. This option should be on by default, and its deactivation should only happen if I choose to deactivate it.

It's important for me that the software I use give me sole power over it once I install it on my devices. I should be able to set its behaviors, and to be able to control the processes that go on. I don't like the idea of a third party to mess with what's going on my computer or smartphone. No one should be able to have access to any part of it unless I willingly give permissions to do so, which should be easy to revoke in the future if I want to.

And those permissions should be used as agreed to at the beginning, and if there are any changes those should be put forth clearly.

At the end, what goes on my devices and how they behave it's my problem.

Innovation a through collaboration...

Collaboration among the community as a whole is one of the virtues of the FOSS movement that makes it strong, vibrant and place where innovations are fairly common.

This is because people question the current models, and are continuously asking themselves how things could work better. By doing so, new ways to do things are dreamed up. While many fail, the few that work bring really great things to the table that benefit the community as a whole.

Not only this, everyone is aware that there isn't a single correct way to do things. All depends on what is the end result we are looking for, and with what are we going to work with. As the saying goes, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

The real question, is what tools work better for you. What works in a given set of circumstances, might not work with another set.

FOSS gives you the ability to find the set of tools that adapt better to your needs, giving the user the chance to focus on what needs to be done and not on the tool being used. If the tool gets in the way, then it's useless.

Proprietary software got in my way more often than not. Since I made the switch to FOSS, I've found changing the tool because I found something better or because I just liked the way it looked. FOSS has given me a level of freedom and flexibility that I never enjoyed before.

Not only that, it made more aware of the community behind the projects I use. And gave a motive to try to reach out and do my part. In other words, collaboration is no longer an option. Is something I must do to help to make things better not only on a personal level, but for the community at large.

Because when an innovation comes out from the project I use or help with, it makes things better for all of us.

Open standard...

Open standards are valuable not only because they allow people to share, but because they allow people to collaborate in a more effective and practical way.

In order to collaborate, open standards are an invaluable tool to be able to do so. Open standards allow people to concentrate on their work more readily, since their files can be distributed among their partners without having to worry about what platform everybody else is running.

And being the nature of open standards allow them to be implemented by any person, or group, on their platform with minimal trouble. This is especially good for the end user, since then he or she can pick the medium on which the file will run in accordance to their particular needs; opposed having to worry about if their files are going to be able to be used at all.

In the current state of things, where there is a way where people can come together to work together in ways that makes it a lot easier the importance of open standards can't be understated. Standards that are owned and managed by a single entity, or a small group, should be discouraged. Development of open standards that can be implemented as widely as possible should become the norm.

Open standards not only present the best way to build our future, but to preserve our past in a way in which we can all access and learn from it.

If we want to grow, and become closer as a society, open standards are our best bet. They give us a way on which we all can have a stake on the way we build our world.

Computer security...

Other of the advantages that FOSS(Free and Open Source Software), is that by its nature it tends to be more secure than proprietary software.

The reason for this, is that since all interested people can access and check the underpins of FOSS it's harder for malicious individuals, or groups, to put malicious code into the software. Also, vulnerabilities in the code can be found and fixed faster, because there are several people checking the code.

Also, the communities that works on FOSS projects are major factor on keeping the software they produce secure. By keeping each other accountable for the code they bring to the project, and keep it as secure as possible, is a big factor in keeping the software secure.

Since any contributor can fix the vulnerability he or she founds, or bring it to light so it can be fixed, the vulnerabilities on FOSS don't last as long as they do on proprietary software. The best part is that the process is a lot more transparent in FOSS projects, and individuals can actually have an easier time participating their time and expertise to fixing the source code of their favorite pieces of software.

In fact that you feel that you are welcomed to check how your software works, and then contribute to it to make it work better and more secure is a big plus. All this contributes to make the users have a deeper sense of ownership and pride that they are using a product from a community that take them into account and hears their voice.

Proprietary software tends to do things its own way, and pass it down to the users. It makes you do things they way they believe it has to be done, and you have to trust them completely that their software is as safe it can be.

This is a big factor that drives me to use FOSS, and not wanting to go back to use proprietary software as little as possible.

It's important to use software from projects that encourage working in a collaborative community. Our best work come from strong and integrated communities of people working together for the common good.

Information ownership...

As we use more information systems, computers and smartphones to interact with the rest of the world, shouldn't we have a say on how that informations is handled, stored and use by the companies we share our information with?

Every so often we hear about how a company gives uses, or shares, the information that was given to it by it's users in ways that weren't intended. In many occasions, it happens because there isn't a clear explanations on how the user information will be used. In other cases it happens because there is no easy way to opt out of uses that he doesn't want for his information.

At times is harder to cancel services, than it is to subscribe to them.

We, the users, should have a greater say on how our information is used and shared with third parties. There should be user friendly ways to make decisions on how we set our privacy levels on the places we put to our information, and if we want to it to be shared.

Our informations should be as private or public as we want it to be. Even, we should be able to choose which information we want to share, and with who we want it shared it with.

We should press to regain control over the information we share. It's our right to know how companies that request and have our personal information use it. Not only that, we should be able to have the list of the third parties they shared our information upon request.

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.