Category: Uncategorized

Oh yeah.. we’re Web 2.0, baby. We’re lean, mean, and we like to validate. Or something… Does any get this Web 2.0 thing, aside from the people trying to sell you something Web 2.0 related?
You can make your own logo here.

[via Micro Persuasion]

GPU, an open-source project that allows the formation of P2P grids, added a “no military use” clause to their GPL-based software license. The license says that

“the program and its derivative work will neither be modified or executed to harm any human being nor through inaction permit any human being to be harmed.”

Which is cute and all in that Disney-esque picture of the world that the developers apparently have. But, it’s the sort of hypocritical stance that sullies the name of open-source development. Open-source is just that, open. It’s also, frankly, highly unlikely to be enforceable as there just in no precedent for excluding a specific user community based on intent.

The developer who inserted the clause cites ham radio operators as an inspiration, stating that a rule that says the technology can’t be used commercially is “respected by almost every ham operator”. Which, I suppose, is good enough, if we ignore those few who don’t respect it. I fail to see a supporting argument in citing a closely-tied community respecting a rule to not use out-moded technology for commercial gain. Oh, and the military routinely used ham radios. Was that poof of smoke an argument?

Even Richard Stallman has his reservations, saying that even he doesn’t support restricting the use of the software. Nevermind that grid computing might be used to say, oh, I don’t know, simulate a scenario that leads to not attacking someone.

This is a self-serving addition by developers who obviously think a great deal about themselves. I hope the pats they’ve given themselves is sufficient comfort as many of us laugh at their gesture and watch a little bit of the open-source community’s credibility drift away.

Via Patrick Austin’s photo stream, who takes some of the coolest photos of A2.

Want to know why yesterday’s foiled terrorist plot actually worked? Watch the show with zefrank – 08-10-06 and you’ll understand. To wit:

Today the President said, “This nation is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom to hurt our nation.” Generalized statements like this which instill nebulous fear without specific information are exactly in line with the goals of terrorism.

Indeed.

Why are developers always, always at loggerheads with residents? What is it about open land, rows of modest houses, and quiet neighborhoods that just screams “Build condos on me!!!”?

In many ways the Lower Ninth Ward incorporated all of the components of a lively, sustainable, engaging Smart Growth neighborhood. Residents understand the authentic connectivity that made their neighborhood work, the kind of physical, social and economic co-mingling that so many Americans desire, but which actually existed in the Lower Ninth.

It’s easy, even in the wreckage left by the hurricanes, to understand how the Lower Ninth Ward represents the idea of “neighborhood” and “community” — not as developers build them, or planners map them, or architects design them or politicians campaign in them. [source]

Hmm, that sounds downright lovely. With my developer hat firmly in place, I must recommend bulldozing the entire Ward and find my company’s Johnny Mallseed to skip through town to sprinkle the area with Quik-E-Marts, 7-11s, and a Taco Bell. Then, when I have my “business district” in place, I can start plunking down boxy, 3-story, walk-ups, modestly landscaped and selling for three times the local market value. That’ll price out all those undesirables.

So, in my continuing immersion (descent?) into all thing New Orleans, I have one nagging question at the fringes of my mind: How, exactly, does a Michigan resident (native and current) actually go about involving himself in, well, all things New Orleans? I can’t go there with any regularity or, for that matter, at all, at the moment. I can’t attend meetings or talk to citizens or any of that.

Or can I?

Excuse me while I wax poetic, but I can do much of this from the relative comfort of my home and/or office via the mystical experience of the Internet. From Blogometer to NorthWest Carollton, Think New Orleans to Gentilly Girl, Ray in New Orleans to Your Right Hand Thief, I can virtually participate. I can hear podcasts of meetings, collaborate on Wikis, comment on blogs. I can, for intents and purposes all my own, become part of a larger community, one that only exists because of technology. Granted, many of these blogs and the people behind them can interact in ways I cannot, but that’s part of the community as well.

Which leads us full circle to the burning question: How, exactly, does this Michigan resident (native and current) involve himself in all things New Orleans? As I look, I see a list already exists for me at the New Orleans Wiki in the form of the To Do Today list.

Since Karen has clued me in to the BNOB documents as a starting point, it seems logical that I would start by populating the Architects and Non-profit Organizations databases at the Wiki. Alan mentioned that a whole lot of you are doing research; where would you like me to start?

So, I’ve been drawn into New Orleans politics, mostly because a) they matter and b) people around Ann Arbor think their politics are as important, which they are not. What got my hackles up was a “vote” conducted by Concordia Architecture and Planning (which I talked about over here). I’m still coming up to speed on a large backstory, but the current issue is basically this: planners are being chosen to rebuild the city after Katrina. Yeah, by the way, you should read some blogs from New Orleans; it’s not all puppies and song-birds down there yet.
Think New Orleans exposed a process for receiving input from New Orleans citizens as a sham; many citizens groups considered the process a vote and their one opportunity to influence or outright choose the planners. Concordia, after the fact, is saying that it wasn’t, and that the process was, in fact, a “consultation”.

It should be noted that this “consultation” took the form of an easily-manipulated and impossible-to-verify online form, akin to, as Alan Gutierrez called it, a guestbook. Now Concordia is attempting to manage the damage, insisting that it wasn’t a vote. I bit, jumping into the conversation.

As one of those who bit hard on calling that process a vote, I’m as guilty as anyone for propagating what, apparently, was a myth. But, that said, you can’t call it a vote (and, let’s be clear, it was called that on UNOP’s site — and still is (Google cache) — and then change the marketing of that voting event in mid-stream because you don’t like people latching onto that word.

But, really, the only questions left fall into the “what now” category. Concordia, the ball is in your court. Since you have carried out an unbelievably flawed “consultation”, not utilized the only means to identify voters (their codes), and failed to even consider how to include over 75% of the population of the city, how do you prove (not state, but convince) those watching this democratic process that the flavor of this process isn’t as rotten as it smells?

Your own model states: “Concordia has been developing tools to promote the comprehensive planning and design of facilities in the context of the total community.” The total community. I think, measured against your own model, you have missed the voice of the total community and, out of principal, should want to do it again, correctly.

Concordia seems to be managing this democratic process. They are also the ones fighting for buy-in, the whole while promising this was the important moment. Well Concordia, the challenge is, for you, this: your words have created importance around an event your now wish to downplay. The proverbial genie is out of the bottle. The responsibility now lies in your hands to legitimize the event, because right now, it’s looking pretty discredited. And, as action goes, so follows reputation.

This was, for anyone without a vested interest in it not being so, an election. Hell, you have the Mayor calling it “democracy in action”. It’s time to drop the smoke, mirrors, and pretense and ‘fess up. How, precisely, will this democratic process work? How, precisely, will you collect legitimate “consultations” from the citizens of New Orleans? And how, precisely, are the citizens of New Orleans being made, not made to feel, vested in the activities that will will rebuild their city?

Think New Orleans » For the Record, This Is Not An Election

AOL recently released the search records of thousands of “anonymized” users. Except, user 4417749 was pretty easy to track down. She’s a 62-year old from Georgia and the New York Times tracked her down and interviewed her.

AOL’s response? “There is not a whole lot we can do.” Stunning. Thanks, AOL, for proving once again that you don’t get it. Of course there’s nothing you can do because you should have done anything in the first place. Why, in the name of all that’s holy, did you post that information in the first place?

As some in the article point out, now we can talk about the long-term aspects of the breaching someone privacy like this and the boundaries of where our data can and can’t go.  It’s a long overdue converstation. Too bad we had to drag the search habits of a grandmother into the street in order for us to talk about it.
New York Times article