OME numerous weeks ago, a film was released which was created using nothing but Open Source software. Whether its content (graphic objects) and source code were published under the GNU GPL, it is hard to tell, but it could raise intersting questions and lead to ideas. Apparently, it was the Creative Commons Licence. More details can be found in the official site of the film.

Why is it all so intersting and worthy of a mention? Think about downloading the source code, which was used to render the film. One can then tweak it, re-genrate the film, and release what becomes a quickly-built derivate. Open Source films and their high merit can be illustrated by looking at re-use made by Disney. Although this latter site is in Russian, the pictures are self-explanatory.

OMMERCIAL software advocates will often have you fooled. Industrial leaders (and their employees) will have you believe that “you always get what you paid for”. Poor products deliver bad results is the subtle implication. It is a fallacy, however, which keeps brainwashing the older generation more than anybody else. It ignores context, which in this case is software. It also relies on a gross generalisation of popular-yet-trite tidbits.

Many things are free nowadays. Even music is finally distributed for free, given generous bands that seek exposure and fame. “You get what you paid for”, you see, is an old proverbial saying, which treads back to an era that predates technology. It was conceived before software came into existence; before R&D investments were a principal factor of cost, let alone bandwidth or distribution through CD‘s.

Software is not physical. You need never manufacture 10 million ‘Apaches’ for all the different active Web sites. You need only make the code available for download, at which point it duplicates itself. This is why Unisys and Apache (among others like Oracle and IBM) falsify and shatter the long-term potential of commercial software. As a famous film once suggested (slanted quote), “when people have already built it, it will come”.

The Internet makes programs readily avaliable, which has lad to the gradual demise of shrink-wrapped software. Similarly, the Internet has had a negative/positive impact on journalism, depending on which side you are on. Small sites and independent ‘journalists’ (often bloggers) continue to obviate the need for the daily paper. Fear looms not only over Microsoft and The Wall Street Journal. Quieter, lower-profile vendors like Cisco are under threat too. Open Source communication protocols and routes, as well as VoIP and IPTV are in the making or already ‘in the wild’. In due time, they will expand and kill the industrial state-of-affair as we presently know it.

The notion of cost and independence from manufacturing extends further. Analogously, intellectual property has had value which was never truly physical. Software represents a different case altogether. When open, intellectual property or patents are out of the question (at least in the EU). Software can be duplicated and people realise that the prevalence of the Internet only gives a boost to a world-wide openness/freedom (freedom of choice, freedom to change, and free of charge): information-wise (let Wikipedia inspire you) and software-wise. Nobody can stop the customer’s demand, not even with DRM, which to many vendors was a last resort.

“You get what you paid for”, one says? Precisely so. For nothing at all you can get the world in our modern age.

The front page of Slashdot on April 1^st, 2006

Y title is probably misleading, but Slashdot have published some rumours as news, on several occasions in the past. Their editors improve in terms of how selective they are, yet I lost some interest in Slashdot due to a fine alternative. I find more of the latest on technology over at Digg. With Digg, content tends to be more succinct, more broad and more frequently updated (albeit frauds due to slow moderation have become commonplace). Subscription to the Digg feeds is something which I strongly recommend to those who can cope with more load and want to keep abreast of the latest.

VERY once in a while I pause and ponder. This time, I ponder financial issues, which rarely do I bother with. All I have is a wealth of files (about a quarter of a million of them), a wealth of free applications, and an excellent free operating system too. Wealth cannot be measured in physical terms alone or in numbers which correspond to bank accounts. We live in a less materialistic world nowadays.

I do not have state-of-the-art hardware. I regret this not. In fact, my hardware is clearly outdates, yet it’s sufficient for everything one does under Linux. I have never ever (in my entire life) had up-to-the-minute specs approached. Not in telephony; not in entertainment; not in computing. I was happy enough with yesterday’s technology, speed-wise, albeit not software-wise. Free software can make significant differences, whereas the engine it runs on, provided the system is not overtly greedy, will cope.

As I digress, I haven’t a great wealth of gadgets, either. I have what I seek for pragmatic needs, e.g. a backup unit and an old Palm handheld. As for anything else in life, I rarely ever buy anything luxurious, let alone buy something other than groceries. No pricey clothes and nothing whose value is temporary — something that erodes or dissolves through the years. Nothing that takes too much space seems necessary!

I seem to get my best of kicks from the health clubs and computers (Internet), admittedly so. Social stuff too, but I impose a limit on this. Overall, I convey a simple and trite message, which I wish to pass on: who said money and possession bring happiness? My living expenses are overall quite low. This enables me to pursue what I enjoy rather than worry about making ends or plan that ‘next expensive vacation’. I no longer enjoy vacations, as a matter of fact. I have no urge to escape from anything, ever. Life is about your passions; your hobbies. Worry less about finance and discover your mind’s vocation.

I choose Firefox primarily because of its
extensions. Some site continue to snub it.

ROWSER discrimination, as it is frequently referred to, is always a bad idea. Sadly, many sites still use deprecated JavaScript code to distinguish between Netscape and Internet Explorer. In reality, most of today’s Web sites can be rendered almost ‘pixel perfect’ by Camino, Safari, Mozilla, Opera, Netscape, Firefox, Internet Explorer and several more obscure Web browsers, even Konqueror.

Vis-a-vis Konqueror, functionality in Konqueror is being extended all the time and its renderer (KHTML) improves rather quickly too. It no longer plays catch-up, but the acceptance of new browser is hindered by vain user-agent sniffing, which in itself is a terrible practice. In the case where proxies are being used, the assumptions might be wrong. In other circumstances, this promotes agent forging/spoofing, which only adds noise to Web statistics, adds bloat the applications and makes an unhealthy industrial environment for all to compete in.

UITE recently, Xara Xtreme which is a popular (vector) drawing program, moved from being pricey proprietary software to the GPL. Xara may have been the victim or sufferer of bigger packages and vendors (e.g. CorelDraw, Photoshop). My guess is that, much like Netscape, they had the choice of either letting the code of that product accumulate mold or earn a large(er) audience — a large user base — to which they can then offer paid support and self-tailored extensions. Netscape achieved something similar by putting the code out there. Today we are seeing the impact of Firefox, which enjoys generous streams of revenue as well. Xara Xtreme will directly challenge Inkscape, a screenshot of which can be seen above.

In the near future, more and more companies will be facing a crossroad wherein they can either fall to oblivion or receive exposure by throwing themselves at the Open Source community. It would enough to have just a few ‘residual’ companies that fell victims to giants like Adobe, or Microsoft, or whoever. Sooner or later they can be ‘resurrected’ owing to the GPL, once they release the code and get absorbed by a crowd of Open Source advocates that contributes back. When the user base of Open Source platforms such GNU/Linux expands, this will become more financially viable and there will be an increasing incentive to go down that route.

Patents, copyrights and trademarks serve an important role. They prevent theft of one’s methods and reputations, which often require heavy investment (not necessarily financial). But what about intellectual property which is fuzzy and not concrete? I will use a case study to exemplify this.

Think about the case where Xerox patented the one-stroke Graffiti input, which Palm devices later used for stylus-based input. It is the method by which drawing on a screen is translated into discrete, atomic signals such as letters and numbers. Jotting a line from top to bottom to render a “1″ should not warrant anyone property of such an idea, right? Yet, that’s what Xerox achieved. They ‘invented’ the chalkboard interpretation language and took ownership. Ultimately, as to abstain from paying royalties perhaps, Palm invented “Graffiti 2″, which is a cumbersome method of achieving the very same thing. People’s habits were broken and input made slower just because Xerox ‘owned’ a more efficient input method that involved a single, unambiguous stroke. A common language was actually possessed by one master.

Let that teach us why patents in software are evil and are not accepted in Europe. The case would of course be different in fields like medicine and especially drug discovery.