Tsikbal: from my perspective

I've been wondering for sometime now, how long will take for many companies to stop trying to keep people from tinkering with the software and hardware they produce. It would be most useful for them to harness the work of the tinkers that work on their products, and use that work to further the development of those products. They should be working more like the lead of a greater project, by doing so they can receive benefits that would be otherwise lost. Other benefits from embracing the work of tinkers, is that they'll be better salesmen for their products because they know them just as well as the engineers and designers who originally work on the project. And the tinkers are more trusted by the people around them, than a representative of the company would ever be. Not only that, tinkers can actually help to spot and fix any kind of problem that wasn't seen during the development process in a more effective and timely manner. Thus freeing in-house developers...

Linux, and FLOSS in general, have benefited a lot from people tinkering around the software they use to make it work as they want it to. From time to time, great things come from those changes. Some don't bring important things, but actually lead to other things that end up being great. The important thing is to actually tinker on the things you believe you can improve, or change to get to work in the way you think they should. The reality is that it's really hard to gauge the impact of any particular change, but we won't ever know if that change isn't made. And it's always better to know that the change doesn't work, than not knowing that it does. And who knows, it might not work as you thought it would and still be of great use. That's why it's important to try out the changes you think might work. It's also important to share and exchange ideas with others that work in the same area that you do, they might have ideas or technical ...

The most important part of the FLOSS movement are the communities that work on each of the projects that make FLOSS as a whole. Without them, FLOSS wouldn't be anywhere close to where it is today. The success that FLOSS has had over the years comes from the people that come together and form each of the communities that work on make their project work. While there have been failures, because they are part of the process of learning how to make projects move forward. That's why I take part of using and bringing other people attention to FLOSS, because of the sense of being part of something bigger that actually makes a difference. People working on FLOSS projects help to all move forward, by finding new or better ways to do things. With FLOSS, it's main assets are its communities and the people contributing in them. This is why I can't make sense of companies and governments keeping people to come together into communities to work any particular projects...

Another benefit of open standards, is that it's more secure that closed ones. Mainly because they can be reviewed by any particular individual or group. This makes it harder to put malicious code into the platforms that work with the standard, since there are many eyes making sure that there are no code that could harm, or hinder, the use safe use of the standard. Other reason is that any vulnerability can be found and patched a lot more rapidity. Since the one who found any given vulnerability can code the patch, it makes the process a lot faster. While making the whole system a lot safer. And since no particular interest controls the standard, it's a lot harder to put into it anything that could spy or remotely control the users machines that work with the standard. In the case it does slip through, the process to alert of the existence of such a code can be made known by the one who found it. It also can be removed a lot faster. The security of the open stan...

I've seen several times how open source is good for business, and while I do agree with them fully there is an aspect that there isn't much written about. It's the fact that open source is also great of the average user as well. The average user gets all the benefits that the businesses do when they switch to open source. They get a better software for a better price, on hardware the user will be able to use for far longer than with proprietary software. With the plus that that hardware will be able to keep using the latest version of whichever OS the user chooses, with all the benefits that comes with this. Also, the user gets to control what happens on their hardware. No longer the user has to blindly accept whatever the vendor of proprietary software chooses to give to her or him. If the current distro, or program, takes a turn that the user doesn't agree with or wants to take, the user can more readily jump to another distro o program that does what what th...

I've being thinking about how we came to have a system that tends to focus on locking-in users, instead of building open platforms that allow users to collaborate easily with each other. Instead of making technologies that bring people together, it seems that some are death set on keeping people reaching to others. This, of course, is unacceptable. If we want to move forward, it's better to do so with as many people as possible on board as possible. Doing so is beneficial to individuals, as much as it is to humanity as large. We need to have as many people working together to solve common problems, and to help each other to make things happen. We need the skills and knowledge that everyone can bring to the table. Locking in users is detrimental for people at both sides of the divide, since both are losing from not being able to reach for the expertise of the people on the other side with ease. This is why we need open standards to help us build a better place f...

It seems that many companies nowadays are busier suing each other, rather than actually coming up with new ideas. This atmosphere is really bad for innovation, because makes individuals and companies take precautions that they wouldn't take if the risk of being a target of a suit was lower. Coming with a new product is like walking through a mine field, there is a real chance that you could step on a patent and get blown out of business in an instant. At the end, the biggest losers of all this are the users. We are stuck with no exit at hand, just because the risks of coming with something new are too high for start ups and established companies are too comfortable at their position to try doing things differently. Something has to change to make innovation common place. There is too little innovation today, and it's hard to come by it. You need to have deep pockets to be able to risk to make an attempt to innovate, if not you risk to go bankrupt defending your ide...