Women in science and technology...

It bothers me than more often than not, women are either under or miss represented in science and technology. The same thing could be argued on the geek culture at large.

There is the perception that women that have a keen on interest on science and technology aren't all that feminine at all. Like if femininity and these fields are mutually excluded. Almost always women that have a strong interest, or good, on these fields are portrayed as socially awkward or not even remotely feminine.

To make things works, the ones who are feminine or attractive are there there to take advantage of the geeky men that have no defense from their charms. At times woman are totally dependent on the technical abilities, or knowledge, of a man to save the day.

We need to change this perception, since it's costing society to lose a large number of women that have the interest to be on working on science and technology that get deterred because of that those aren't places for women.

Femininity needs to stop being a factor that makes people think that a woman isn't capable of working on technology, or being a brilliant scientist. All comes down to her brain, and skill sets she has to bring to the table. To judge her just on how she looks is demeaning and insulting.

I find smart woman, that know about science and technology, to be the more appealing. It really thicks me of when they feel that they have to water down that aspect of themselves to appear more interesting, or accepted, by others.

That needs to change as soon as possible, if we ever want to be a better society as a whole.

A social media that brings a better world, not a more violent one...

It's sad to see social media used to attack and insult opponents, widening divides while making anger make any mutually beneficial resolution less likely.

Now more than ever, we need to take social media not only as a tool to share what we think and what we care with those we care or agree with. Social media is also a tool that needs to be used to engage in true debate with those who oppose, or not share, our views. Only by doing both, communicating with those that agree and with those who disagree with us, can social media can become the powerful tool needed to build a better world.

Social media isn't here to end disagreements, or to widen the divides that already exist. Social media is here so that we can actually work together to take the common goals we all have, so that we can build a better world where all our views are represented. In many ways, social media is a way to give people a way to make their views and opinions known.

With the help of social media, individuals can really see the big picture more clearly, and arm with this vision there is a real chance that a better understanding of other points of view. Armed with this understanding, there is a real chance that people can actually come to mutually beneficial conclutions.

There is a real need to engage the opposition in a debate, where all get what they want or need. Violence is never the answer, since violence only serve the purpose of widening the divide between people.

We need to start using social media to close divides and build bridges, not making things worse. Only by truly talking to the people on the other side we will build a better world, and we are all responsible to building it.

I hope that social media becomes an important tool in the peaceful transformation of our world, not a tool of violence against my fellow human.

Truly inclusive technology...

There is a need to make technology more inclusive, not only to be used, but also in its creation, development and adaptation for different needs. If people can't have ample access to technology to do all of these things, no matter how useful or innovative at the beginning, it'll soon be obsolete or irrelevant.

If any technology is made so as much people can do more than just work with it, chances are the technology will reach its full potential. And it's more than likely than that potential is far beyond anyone can foresee. To take technology there, it needs to let everyone in and let them modify it or add to it openly. Closing it to the general public is the best way to ensure a short life for it.

Inclusive technology is the best way to make out present, while at the same time ensuring our future. Technology gives us the best tools to do both, and the best way to do so is to have technology that is work on and developed in an open and transparent manner.

People have a way of making all the technology they need, or use, their own one way or another. So, it's in the best interest of everyone involved to make sure that people can do so from the very moment a technology is available for them to make the best use of it, even if it means its modification. Any limitation, or guidelines, should be ethical at most.

Technology needs people, as much as people needs technology.

FLOSS is the option to follow...

Another of the reasons that I love FLOSS is the way it works, and the culture that surrounds it, is the fact it allows people work and form communities around it as they would normally do. The best software that come out from FLOSS is one where people can claim as their own, and work on it as they can.

In many ways, FLOSS represents people working together in order to produce what they need in they way that best suits them. It really it's the software of the people, for the people and by the people. This is the way software needs to be made, and worked on in order to make it the best possible for use it's intended.

People should be able to come together to work on the software they need, to develop it and share it with others freely. Others should also be able to take the source code of any software to be used and modified to suit their needs, with the only condition that they give credit to the original developers and share those modifications back to the community so they can be used by other in the same way they used the original code.

We need to make FLOSS the norm, so that people can truly benefit from the full potential that software can have to benefit people's lives.

People have the need to share what they find and do with others, and FLOSS gives people the best option to do in the most beneficial way to everyone involved. It's a model where developers and users stand to receive the benefits from their work in a more equal fashion.

The model that FLOSS brings to the table is one that makes people and their needs the focal point, not the originator of the software. That's the way it needs to be, since technology needs to be at our service.

Free and open technology...

All and every technology should be open sourced, free to be modified by users to better suit their needs and redistributed. What's more, those new modifications need to be easily redistributed to others that find it appealing to their needs.

The need to have technology behave this way, is because we need to have the benefits of it to be as widespread as possible. There are far too many cases where the technology to save lives, or communities, existed but couldn't be used to do so because it was to expensive or there was no way to put it to work because it wasn't in the interest of who owned the technology.

Technology can't be captive by the interests of the few, and it's more powerful to improve people lives when it's freely available to be worked and redistributed without barriers that impede users to do so in an artificial way do to vested interest in avoiding it.

We could be progressing a lot faster if all technology was open to all to study and work on it, thus coming with improvements or specialized versions to be applied a lot faster where there are needed. And those versions could be made by those who need it, without having to depend on the original creator of a certain technology to take an interest to do so.

Those improvements should be allowed to be shared with any other person, or group, that needs it. Most importantly, it needs to be made available back to the originator.

What can be closed to other, are the processes on how a product is made. The technology is to be open, yet the process can have the option not be shared as long is not vital for society at large. It's important to make the distinction between the technology used to create something, and the processes used.

People naturally want to do things together, making all technology open to all to work on and share it means that it can advance even faster in ways that'll benefit more people. What we are set to win is offsets the possible downfalls of making technology open.

FLOSS and open standards are not a luxury...

As with the Internet, software running on your computer should be made in a transparent way and its source code should be available to studied and modified as needed. Not only that, the author of the modifications made to the source code should be able to distribute those modifications freely, along with the source code for it.

Also, you should have the freedom to redistribute the software you have freely or share it with others. Just as we share books, and other media, with our friends and family, we should be able to share the software we have with others that might find it useful. And if you find that the software you have needs to be modified to better suit your needs, you should be able to do so independently and be able to share those modifications.

FLOSS offers everyone these things, along with communities that share the same goals that you have.

Not only that, FLOSS gives people a common framework to work around so that all work around a single standard. This way users and developers are insured that they have a reference point to work around, so they know that what changes it's the way they interact with the standard.

What needs to be stable for all to work with are the standards, not the software used to work with them. Both standards and software need to be free and open source, so that all can contribute to the them and be free to use them without fear of lawsuits or losing their data because one or the other are no longer supported.

As computers, and thus software, is becoming more prevalent in our lives there is a bigger need for them to be free and open. Also the standards that are used to interact with them need to be free and open, otherwise there is the real danger that a single person or company to be too powerful or our data be lost simply because of choices made by third parties.

FLOSS, and open standards, are not a luxury. They need to be that way, so that we the people don't lose our freedoms.

Another attempt to take control over the Internet away from us...

It's sad to see that now the UN is on the road to try to take control over the Internet. Instead to let the Internet to grow organically, in an open and transparent way in every aspect, it seem that there are special interests groups that want to take Internet behind closed doors.

The Internet belongs to the people, all development that affects its inner workings is to be made on the open. Those working on the Internet, whether on its inner workings or developing its standards, should work on a transparent way so that we all know what they are doing and how their contributions work.

Not a single part of how the Internet works, or how it's developed, should ever be behind closed door. All activity should be on the open, so that any interested party on a certain aspect of the Internet, can have full access to it and the rest of us to know what that party is doing.

Any attempt to take the Internet's control behind closed door, should be opposed by everyone as a question of principle. After all, the Internet is ours. So, we must have a world on how it works and its development.

In many ways, the Internet is an extension of the real world. We live part of our lives on it, as such we must have the same freedoms on it as we have on the real world. So, we should be able to have our freedoms respected as they are on the real world.

In peace, science and technology should move faster...

It's sad to see that technology advances faster on times of war, than it does in times of peace. There is a urgent need to change it so the reverse becomes the norm, so that peace time becomes where science and technology advances faster.

Not only that, we need to have the benefits from new scientific discoveries, and the technologies that develop from them, get to a larger part of society faster.

There must be a way to make peace the norm, by making war at any level undesirable. All conflicts need to be resolved without relying to violence, and people's needs are to be meet as they come.

We need to make it so that conflicts that drive the advancement of science and technology, don't result on violence that ends in bloodshed. Science and technology need to be instruments of peace and understanding, not those of war and violence. If wars and violence are common place, it many ways society at large has failed to do what's needed to keep peace.

Science, and technology, are two of the most important instruments that we have to help keep peace. That's we need to make it so that in peace time it's when their advancement is the greatest and beneficial for society at large.

If we are able to do so, we could be able to turn the world we all want into a reality.

Science and technology bringing the world together...

I would like to see science research and technology development being something that brings the world together.

Instead of being done in secret, by single individuals, corporations, or countries, they should be conducted in collaboration by anyone interested in the subject. Not only that, it should be done in the open in full view of the world.

The education to be able to conduct science research, or technology development, should be given as a priority at any stage of life. Most importantly, people should graduate from basic education with the ability to at least understand the basis science and how it's applied on the technology we use everyday.

Even if end goal of an individual isn't getting a degree on a science or engineering area in college, they should have a functional understanding of science. The same goes the other way around, every part of the human knowledge important.

In the science and technology areas, it's becoming ever more important not only to give the average people a working knowledge in those areas. It's imperative that what happens on those areas is open to the public in every way possible. People should not only know whats going on, but also should be able to participate if there is a desire to do so.

Science and technology are the foundations of the modern societies, and they also be bringing those societies together.

I'm all about Linux and FLOSS...

The more I use Ubuntu, the less likely I'm to switch back to Windows or even make the move to Apple. If I ever change my OS, it would be to another Linux distro that's Debian based as Ubuntu.

I simply have found that Ubuntu works for me far better than Windows ever did, and I don't agree how Apple manages it's software. Also because as a matter of principle, FLOSS strikes a core with what I believe in. Mainly that software should be free in the sense that anyone should be able to see it's source core, modify it, and to redistribute any improvement made to the code.

The freedoms that come with FLOSS gives the users the control over the software they install on their machines. Not only in the way it works and its configuration, but in order to make customizations to the software independently of the source. This makes FLOSS a lot more flexible to the end user, while it benefits the community of users as a whole since those modifications can be shared back.

In the personal level, I feel confident that if Canonical takes Ubuntu on a path that I disagree upon I can change to another Linux distro and have access to the same software I use now. And even if there aren't I can't use a particular one, there will be another that works for me.

In many ways, FLOSS is about people not about the software itself.

Diversity and open standards...

Even though I believe that the diversity on ways to do your work, or have your fun, is one of the strengths of FOSS it means nothing if they aren't built on common ground in order to achieve interoperability.

That interoperability should be made through open standards, so that everyone who want to work with them knows that they can so so without fear of being locked into using software from a single vendor. Closed standards are to be avoided at all costs, since they mean that the future of that standard is tied to the whatever happens to whoever holds it or unilateral choices by the vendor.

Standards should be considered a common good, and as such they should be keep open for to use or contribute to it with freedom. No single entity should have a position to totally control any standard, all standards should be in the hands of a governing body made up by all those who have a stake on the future of those standard.

Not only that, that governing body should work openly and with transparency. Anyone that has an interest on how that body work, or how it reach a decision should be able to do so.

At the end, standards are the foundations on which all technology are built upon. As such, is in our best interest for them open so we all know that there will be always be available for everyone. Not only that, any improvement made to any standard will be beneficial to as many users as possible in the least amount of time.

The building blocks of out society, and our future, should belong to all of us.