Digging digg (dang!)

Marty thinks that Digg is pretty neat. And it is — a clever combination of del.icio.us-style social bookmarking plus wisdom-of-the-crowds style collaborative editing.

Marty correctly identifies the activist potential in this tool. But one thing is missing: it’s not open-source, and the Digg (the commercial website) seems to be focused only on technology news. (Shocking!)

Any takers for whipping up a distributed, federated easy-to-roll out version of this?

(Heck, maybe we should roll a Plone product like this here at ONE/Northwest!)

Nicely put, Alex

Alex Steffen deftly sums up why I hate Wired, and techno-utopianism in general. (Confession: I still subscribe to Wired, because at $12/year it’s a good deal for “airplane reading.”)

After my talk at Poptech, Wired editor Chris Anderson approached me and said he thought the talk was a good one, but that it’d be much better if I “took all that politics out of it.”

The idea that you can “take the politics” out of subjects like technology, development, trade regimes and intellectual property systems is, of course, patently absurd. There’s practically nothing but politics involved here — the technical issues, the innovation, are practically trivial in comparison to the politcal challenges involved in creating South-South science or fashioning the Brasilia Consensus. Our entire global system is a political construct, and Brazil is doing its best to hack that system to make it work better for the billions of people on this planet who don’t own Microsoft stock. Technology is only a means to an end in that fight.

Washington State opens digital archive of state records

Washington State opened the first-in-the-nation digital archive of state government records on Monday.

Collections include: Marriage Records, Naturalization Records, Census Records, Death Records, Birth Records, Military Records, Institution Records, Miscellaneous Historical Records.

Pretty cool resource for historical research, and hopefully a precedent for other states to follow.

Citizen Microsoft

My good friend Jeff Reifman has an incendiary new feature story in the Seattle Weekly titled Citizen Microsoft. It’s a long piece that picks up a number of major themes:

  • Microsoft’s increasing involvement in Washington State politics, promoting increased spending and tax breaks for corporations

  • Jeff estimates that Microsoft has (legally) dodged $105 million in taxes over the past two years by “domestically off-shoring” its profits to tax-free Nevada in order to shield them from Washington State taxes.

  • The rise of socially responsible business — even in the tech sector (think of Google’s “don’t be evil” pledge and Craigslist) and the corporate accountability movement.

Jeff’s conclusion is particularly solid:

Microsoft remains “committed to one straightforward goal, and that is ensuring that the world center for developing the best and most popular software in the world will remain Washington state.” Yet what makes Washington great for Microsoft isn’t necessarily what makes Washington a great place to live. And what if the most popular software in the world soon isn’t made by Microsoft?

The Legislature should meet our education and transportation needs, certainly, but not on Microsoft’s terms. It faces increased competition and, perhaps, slower local growth and even layoffs. And no amount of tax breaks for business or improved education and transportation is going to change that. Microsoft’s own decisions and behavior are responsible for its fate. We can’t change Microsoft’s behavior. But we can stop rewarding that behavior….

Herding free-range cats

Herding free-range cats from the just-added-to-my-blogroll Aldon Hynes is a nice look at the recent CivicSpace developer summit from someone with considerable experience at both software development and group dynamics.

There were a lot of talk about usability, the interface and the users’ experience of CivicSpace. There were discussions of architecture and long-term goals. There was a big of a split between the developers and user interface people, and questions about how functionality should be implemented led to long drawn out discussions. Another dynamic was between the need for immediate fixes and action items to come out in the first version, and longer-term goals….

Open source programmers are the feral free-range cats. Herding them is even more of a challenge….

One of the first things I’ve always tried to focus on with any group I’ve been part of is defining the primary task. I was somewhat frustrated by a lack of clarity in terms of a primary task or specific sets of apparent goals for the summit….

There wasn’t a clear understanding of how all the different people involved in CivicSpace interact, or how we would define success. Yet in many ways, this was highly appropriate. CivicSpace seems committed to a bottom-up, emergent approach to activism. People work on what is important to them, and from that a true vision emerges. In many ways, the summit exemplified this approach….

However, I did observe that I’ve worked with other groups with much clearer goals, and leaders with much stronger personalities that were not able to get nearly as much done as CivicSpace has been getting done. In spite of all the different personalities, goals, agendas, etc., CivicSpace is doing important work, not only in developing and distributing some important software, but also in modeling how progressive open source software groups can work together…..

The New York Model

The New York Model covers some of the interesting ways that RNC protest organizers used SMS (text messaging), VoIP-powered automated telephone information lines, and other leading-edge network technology to power their “counter-convention” efforts, and the independent media coverage of it.

Fun stuff, although I’m still trying to figure out how it’s relevant to campaigns that are playing out over longer periods of time in less intense circumstances.

The architecture of participation

Jon Udell writes:

Discussions about open source and innovation tend to cluster around two opposing memes. One says that open source can’t innovate; the other that only open source can innovate. Both are wrong. Sometimes large, well-funded R&D programs can achieve breakthroughs that lone geniuses can’t. And sometimes the reverse is true. Either way, the real innovation of the open source movement is the architecture of participation. It can help turn a good idea — wherever it came from — into a best-quality implementation. [Full story at InfoWorld.com]

The term ‘open source’ presumes that the essence of software is source code, and that participation means hacking it. And that’s true. But the emergence of the services model creates modes of participation that don’t require access to source. Back in 2000, Rael Dornfest introduced the term open services in order to make that distinction.

Of course, participation needn’t involve programming at all. Much of software’s value is created by the community that surrounds it. Such communities can flourish, or not, independently of whether source code is open or closed.

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! This is an eloquent phrasing of an incredibly important distinction. The “nonprofit open source” community should be focusing at least as much on developing open communities as it is on writing code. Both take resources, and open code cannot succeed without strong user communities.

Tim O’Reilly on “The Open Source Paradigm Shift”

The Open Source Paradigm Shift is a solid essay on why open-source software is a significant long-term trend:

I find it useful to see open source as an expression of three deep, long-term trends: * The commoditization of software * Network-enabled collaboration * Software customizability (software as a service) Long term trends like these “three Cs”, rather than the Free Software Manifesto or The Open Source Definition, should be the lens through which we understand the changes that are being unleashed.

Worthwhile read for anyone seeking to understand the importance of open-source.

Comments on NOSI’s “Open Source Primer for Nonprofits”

My colleagues over at NOSI (Nonprofit Open Source Initiative) just released their first big “think piece” called “Choosing and Using Open Source Software: A Primer for Nonprofits.”

This is an admirable effort on an important topic by some outstanding folks, but there are some critical points the authors overlook, as well as some factual errors that should be corrected. Continue reading

Experiences with a wifi laptop at home

A year ago, I was proud to call myself “the least wired technology consultant I know” because my home computer was a Pentium-200 box with a dialup modem. I could get online, but only if I had to. And mostly, I didn’t.

Since then, my sweetie Molly moved in. Because she was taking a GIS class, we got an up-to-date PC, DSL and a wireless base station. (Phone jack and office are not particularly near each other, and my 1938 house isn’t that conducive to wiring projects. Plus, I’m lazy.)

About a month ago, we got a gently used iBook from Molly’s brother. Although I’ve had laptops at work for a while, having one at home has really changed the way I relate to the Internet in my day-to-day life. Continue reading

Krugman on Diebold

I’ve written about Diebold’s notoriously insecure touch-screen voting machines before here. Now Paul Krugman takes up this issue in his recent column Hack the Vote.

He ends strong: “You don’t have to believe in a central conspiracy to worry that partisans will take advantage of an insecure, unverifiable voting system to manipulate election results. Why expose them to temptation?”

“I’ll discuss what to do in a future column. But let’s be clear: the credibility of U.S. democracy may be at stake. “

Strong stuff. Here’s hoping this issue will get the attention it deserves before the Republicans can steal another close election.