dave.ofmassdestruction.com

When the idea of web-based apps first started to look more viable there was an interesting debate within the open source community. The debate came down to the question of whether it mattered if you had the source-code of web hosted software. For the most part I think it does – especially if the developer wants faster development and more eyes looking at bugs/holes.

Having said that, freedom for a web-app means something completely different when it comes to the users data. This could not be more evident than with the recent news of hapless Microsoft destroying all data on T-Mobile Sidekick phones. After this news broke the tech-blogs were awash with damnation of “the cloud”. How could we ever trust anyone to store our data elsewhere? What were we thinking?

Well, we were thinking that its nice to always have our apps and our data available no matter where we are or what device we are using. We thought, its nice to have someone else provide storage for our ever-growing bits. But they are right in questioning our reliance on others to always get it right when it comes to protecting that data from rookie mistakes, changes in the direction of the app, or becoming evil.

So for the cloud to work, user must always have access to their data. That doesn’t mean the user simply gets to see their data in the app, that means that the user is at all times able to retrieve their data, and in a format that is transferable to other applications. Period. End of story. Anything less than that is a failure due to the reasons the Microsoft case so aptly showcased. Of course this means that the user must also be proactive in retrieving their data from time to time if it is truly important to them, but that has always been the case.

Its important to note that the largest purveyor of apps “in the cloud”, Google, has had a somewhat quiet campaign to provide this type of data retrieval for a while now. Called “Data Liberation” (and tracked at the Data Liberation Blog) they have been slowly making sure all their apps have some way for users to retrieve their data. The newest tool comes to Google Dos which has just added the “Convert, Zip, and Download” feature which allows you to easily grab some or all of your documents as a zip file (converted to whichever available format you would like). This is the most powerful of Google’s data retrieval tools so far and I hope all of their apps make it this easy (including Gmail which can do better than simply offering POP downloads). Still, it is good to point out Google proactively “not being evil” when so many folks currently attempt to disprove their famous motto.

For almost two years now I have been working on a project we have been calling Open. This project started off as a dream to *really* introduce open source applications to African health systems. From its inception in which a few of us were sitting around a table in Open Eye cafe till now there have been many changes and many ideas on how big of a scale it should all be. Despite it all though, the dream to raise money to bring open source health apps to African health workers, while taking time to let African IT students join in on the development of those apps has remained. In addition we hope to take the ideals of open source and apply it to all areas of our work, from open information to gender equality – you name it, and we will be transparent about it.

How we are raising money makes my heart warm too – we have been generously been given a song by Youssou N’Dour (who has been wonderful to us) which is now being released under Creative Commons. We then asked a bunch of other stars to remix the song and we are releasing these remixes on every music distributor who said yes. Isn’t that excellent! The songs are free, but we do ask you for a donation to help our cause out. I think its a pretty fair trade.

So I’d like to officially let all you, my friends, know that today we are finally releasing IntraHealth’s Open.

Please do me a big favor and check out the songs, then donate whatever you can afford to to help us with this dream. If you would like a recommendation – I think the remix by Toubab Krewe is amazingly good and it features one of the original “Last Poets” – plus, their from Asheville, NC! who knew?

By the way, a few of you friends helped me out a great deal by either giving me advices, connecting me to others, or joining the Open Council. To you I am most grateful. Thankyou.

• OPEN website
• OPEN on Facebook Causes
• OPEN on MySpace
• YouTube channel
• Follow OPEN on Twitter

I noted with interest that Obama has tapped Cass Sunstein to be the head of Federal Regulation (head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs). This is interesting to me for a couple reasons which I didn’t realize until a couple months ago when my wife told me that this was the man who married Samantha Power (a person I have great respect for). It then dawned on me that Cass had once been a guest blogger on Lawrence Lessig’s blog and had also written a book about reintroducing to the U.S. FDR’s Second Bill of Rights.

The Second Bill of Rights is something I took interest in a few years ago when I first became aware of it (I am sometimes slow on the news of these things… by decades). Its a brilliant bit of words which has influenced many other countries but never took hold here due to many people’s misinterpretation of what “social” means (in other words, thinking that all social == communist). Here simply, are the guarantees the Second Bill of Rights would provide:

• A job with a living wage
• Freedom from unfair competition and monopolies
• Homeownership
• Medical care
• Education
• Recreation

FDR framed this list of rights as a failure of the original Bill of Rights to meet the “pursuit of happiness” mandate in the Constitution. This was not introduced as a change to the constitution but was to be worked out “politically” (what great hope!) To me that was a shrewd move that still allows it to have some measure of success.

I am under no illusion that Cass Sunstein can do much about the Second Bill of Rights as the head of Federal regulation, however, for those who don’t like all the former Clinton people coming into Obama’s fold I will hold him up as a great example of an attempt to change the way we run our country.

I should point out that the above list of rights is a brief version and not how FDR put it, but it is a version I like. Below is an excerpt from the transcript of FDR’s 1944 State of the Union Address in which he introduced the idea. I always found it amazing that he was working on these during one of the most active periods of WWII.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness. We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made. In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being. America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

Update: Here’s some more information on Sunstein’s appointment and why he fits into this particular job.

My friend Shannon has been making some great blog posts lately (unlike me) – but of particular interest is one she posted today in which she references an article which discusses “planning to share versus just sharing“. That article, and Shannon’s comments are quite interesting in my current employment context (same context as Shannon’s) but I also have the perspective of having worked at Red Hat where sharing was part of the culture… part of the business. At Red Hat it was second nature to just share – whatever it was – no questions asked. At other places I have worked, there was and is a real fear to sharing. That to me is the key – people are afraid to share. Afraid their ideas will be stolen, they will lose business, lose recognition.

But where does this fear come from? I am inclined to think that it is grown out of our society’s obsession with our brand of capitalism. We have 24 hour networks devoted to business and finance which talk endlessly about what people have to sell. We have commercials running day after day which use the word “proprietary” as a selling point. Still, that doesn’t explain why a non-profit would feel the same way until you factor in the academic setting into it as well. Our non-profit grew out of the University of North Carolina and in many ways it still runs like the University (I know, I worked there once too). There is a lot of talk about things such as getting into peer-reviewed journals not as a way of sharing information, but as a way of getting recognition and prestige (academic capital). I’m not putting down either capitalism or academic capital per se, but I do think we tend to forget to drop those mindsets when we need or want to share.

Being naive, I approached the non-profit world with a sense that they all shared… because… they are non-profit. I could not have been more wrong. Shannon is right to equate the article she found to non-profit work – the processes and planning that surround the idea of sharing generally kill the actual sharing. This is most evident to me in a couple of (unnamed) organizations designed to promote sharing of technology between non-profits. They like to use the phrase “open source” a great deal but in actuality they are organizations set up as large NDA’s who share conditionally and do not promote the continuation of that sharing. In reality, technology is now quite simple to share. Pick an open license which suits you and stick it on the web (preferably on a site designed for sharing) – see what happens. As Shannon says: “The key is not to plan to share; the key is to just start sharing and see what happens. The serendipity that occurs is something that cannot be planned.”

Over in the U.K. the big news just now is that the House of Lords are set to scrap Gordon Browns ‘42 day’ plan. If you are new to this one, this is a plan the Prime Minister has been pushing which simply raises the number of days from 28 to 42 as the maximum a person can be held in jail under suspicion of terrorism without charge.

I’m not bringing this up because I have a strong opinion on how many days the U.K. should hold such people – I bring it up because here in the U.S. we are still holding people in our territory in Cuba, without charge, from 2001. Crap, other countries debate over 28 or 42 days and we are living in the freakin’ dark ages here in the “superpower” country.

Its all so shameful.

So I made a statement on the Twitter the other day that I don’t fully disagree with Obama’s position on the FISA bill. Let me be clear that I think the bill is bogus and goes against the values and laws that made our country great. However, one of the things I have always loved about the Senate, and one thing I love about Obama is compromise. Democracy is compromise, and it must be. Otherwise it might as well be a dictatorship.

So here is how I see this. First of all, this does not provide full immunity to telecoms. Most importantly, it does not provide immunity from criminal activity. This bill is written to give immunity to the telecoms in civil actions. To what end, I still have not figured out.

The bigger issue here is that the President broke the law and got commercial enterprise to help. I cannot even imagine what it must have been like to sit in the HQ of some telecom company and hear that the President is now asking you to spy under the such and such Order or such and so Act. And I think most courts would dismiss immediately a case against a telecom upon hearing that the President did such a thing.

So this thing was going to pass. Obama knew that and was hoping that one of the three amendments that were attempted (one by a Republican) would pass to make it an easier bill to accept. That wasn’t a terrible idea actually and that’s the kind of thing the Senate is good at. At the same time, he thought that we in fact need a FISA bill. This is where I disagree with him – because I have never been giving any reason to believe that any intelligence gathering activity we have ever been engaged in has resulted in anything positive – and that’s the failing of a government that has no transparency. You can’t prove secrets.

The old Obama people fell in love with is still there – just read the last two paragraphs from his explanation of his vote:

I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I’m not exempt from that. I’m certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States — a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples’ business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our country’s destiny.

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That’s ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.

Yesterday was live-music day here in Carrboro. After a brief spot of work at Carrboro’s own “Open Eye Cafe” and a quick lunch at Carrboro’s own “Akai Hana” sushi restaurant, it was time to hear some tunes. First up was the Obama Early Voting Rally (I only vote on election day thankyou, I like ceremony) featuring Chapel Hill stalwarts Superchunk opening for Arcade Fire. The show was outside at the Carrboro’s own “Carrboro Town Commons” and was packed with people. The weather was beautiful and everyone had a great time. A bunch of us headed to my main man Fred’s (Carrboro’s own) house for grillin’ and chillin’ afterwards.

We left that a bit early to take care of the dog, sit for a moment, and then head out to watch The Pressure Boys play a show at Carrboro’s own “Cat’s Cradle”. The Pressure Boys owned Chapel Hill long before Superchunk ever did and were an integral part of my rock-n-roll education as I used to devour their shows in high-school and college. They were playing this reunion show to raise money for CF research too. It was a great show and once again, everyone had a great time.

However, all this “great time’in” in Carrboro has done wore me out. Crap, I’m actually sore from all that.

Above I share with you a shot from the Superchunk portion of the day – That’s Laura Balance on bass. If you’d like to see some more shots from the rally, look here.

Update: Fred makes the following note in his twitter: “Carrboro should do that every friday.” – Agreed.

This is exactly the type of thing that needs to happen more and more. Far too often these days we let folks get away with lies. Those lies are repeated and repeated until folks believe them. Good on Senator Feingold for calling out Adm. Mike McConnell for lying about a very serious matter.

The Senator’s letter:

The Honorable J.M. McConnell Director of National Intelligence Washington, D.C. 20511

Dear Director McConnell:

I have received a copy of your March 28, 2008, speech at Furman University. In it, you described Senate action on the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, stating:

“We had a bill go into the Senate. It was debated vigorously. There were some who said we shouldn’t have an Intelligence Community. Some have that point of view. Some say the President of the United States violated the process, spied on Americans, should be impeached and should go to jail. I mean, this is democracy, you can say anything you want to say. That was the argument made. The vote was 68 to 29.”

As you correctly noted, the bill was the subject of vigorous debate. Many members of the Senate expressed serious concerns about the lack of checks and balances included in the legislation and the potential impact of the new authorities on the privacy and civil liberties of Americans. Many Senators were also concerned that retroactive immunity for companies alleged to have cooperated with the President’s warrantless wiretapping program would undermine the rule of law.

However, I am not aware of any Senator saying or suggesting that “we shouldn’t have an Intelligence Community” or that President Bush “should be impeached and should go to jail.” I would therefore appreciate your providing a list of all statements made by Senators during the debate that you believe support these assertions. If there are no such examples, you should issue an immediate correction and an apology.

While all sides of this debate deserve to be heard, to falsely attribute statements to United States Senators serves only to mislead the American people. It also undermines your credibility and that of the position of Director of National Intelligence.

Sincerely,

Russell D. Feingold
U.S. Senator

Well I must say that I have had my share of criticism over the years – most of it in the old flame-wars that revolved around GNOME or other free software projects – but this one really cuts to the core. Its not really a criticism as much as it is a total rejection of my being.

In responding to the claim that software patents were adverse to innovation and discourage competition, a South African Microsoft manager actually claimed that I do not exist!!

But Paulo Ferreira, the platform strategy manager at Microsoft South Africa, said: “There is no such thing as free software. Nobody develops software for charity.”

(It hurts even more that one of Chelsea FCs left backs is named “Paolo Ferreira”)

Its interesting (or perhaps infuriating) to me that lately Microsoft has been going on and on about interoperability whenever open source is brought up. Using Linux in a mostly Microsoft-based office environment, I can assure anyone that interoperability is non existent with their products.

I finally watched Larry Lessig’s “20 minutes or so on why I am 4 Barrack Obama”. It has probably the best laid arguments I’ve heard so far on why Obama would make a better President than Hillary Clinton. The last few minutes are truly beautiful.

Kinda makes me hope the draft Lessig campaign works out.