Luke Dorny on which apps to try

Luke DornyI have noticed that more beta-y and more independent software developers are more likely to put newer services and features than larger developers though. Like integrating audioscrobbler into an itunes controller, etc. These days the first thing i do is try to weigh how grassroots and forward-thinking a developer is when weighing a decision to download and try.

Much like Todos was a few weeks ago.

Termie flying the coop

Cubicle Surfing
Photo by Jesse Andrews.

Man, should I even bother mentioning that Andy “Termie” Smith and my ex-roommate is leaving Flock when he makes fun of me in his parting post?

Well, whatever… if I can’t get over my self-aggrandizement, I guess I never will. Fooey on my self-importance.

Welcome to the pool of sumblimators, Termie, and here’s to beating me out at the top of the Google pile of search results announcing the termination of our prior employment.

Hyperscope and the future of the past

The mother of all demos
Photo by John Lester.

I can’t quite tell how significant this is, but I know that it’s been a long time coming and that, only over time, will we begin to understand what this system will really mean for information systems.

In classic understated flair, Doug, Eugene and Brad will be releasing the Web 2.0 version of Doug Engelbart’s Hyperscope to the world tonight.

It’s hard for to describe succinctly, but basically it’s taking hypertext and adding the “hyper” to it (today’s web linking is kind of like the Model-T compared to Engelbart’s space age original 1968 vision). You’ve really got to try it for yourself to see what I mean; what at first seems like a big outline (it’s cleverly built on top of OPML) quickly becomes an immersive experience that other system pale in depth and flexibility to.

In some respects, this kind of learnable system is what I was talking about in my post on learning from game design. The only presumption, or goal, of the Hyperscope system is that you’re interested in working with knowledge and information — how you go about finding, linking to, appending or operating on that information is up to you.

All that and it’s built on Alex Russell’s Dojo Toolkit is an achievement in open source cross pollination that should be also be duly recognized.

Congrats guys.

Patents: the tar pits of modernity

Labrea Tar pits
Photo © copyright Adam Loeffler.
I don’t understand why someone hasn’t patented the patent process and shut down the whole racket. There’s nothing that inspires more fear, has created more anger and resentment and held back innovation in the POMO world (thanks Dave!) more than the US Intellectual Property system — and most notoriously copyright and patents.

Now, I’m not an intellectual property communist — far from it. In fact, I’m very much about people getting credit for their work, for their inventions, their ideas and in due time, compensation — both economic and social.

But the system is effed. And as there are alternatives to copyright and trademark, there similarly needs to be an open source alternative to patents, that allows the creative and ingenious to receive credit and kudos without creating a chilling effect on future and subsequent derivative innovation — innovation that has historically been built on borrowed and hacked ideas. Innovation necessary for human progress to continue at the pace it’s at today.

It’s bad enough that sentient creatures will look back centuries — if not decades — from now and laugh at how us humans smogged ourselves to death. Oh no, they’ll also barrel over in hysterics at how we held back our creatives by denying them the freedom to dabble freely and openly without the both fear of being blatantly ripped off as well as slapped with a law suit for violating someone else’s property rights. “What a bunch of cheap trust they had back then”, they’ll quip. “it’s a wonder that the little guys continued to play along even after the whole balance had shifted away from protecting them to protecting the overbloated incumbents!”

I mean, how else can you explain this quote from Christopher Lunt, formerly Friendster’s senior director of engineering (recently made refamous for their social networking patent)?

“My approach was defensive,” he said. “We were not looking to stifle creativity by competitors, nor to make money by licensing. We were making sure that things material to our business were protected, so someone else couldn’t claim the idea.”

“I dislike the current patent process,” Lunt added. “I feel it’s a little too permissive in terms of what is granted as a patent. But that doesn’t mean I can ignore it.”

Gah!! What a waste! Of money! Of talent! Of time! To have to register defensive patents is bullshit. The answer, quite simply, is something more proactive… more positive… duh! It’s open patent licensing! And why our legal system hasn’t codified this yet, well, that’s because you don’t make money off of open systems — you make money because of openness. And that’s something that our legal system, at least the purveyors of the modern legal system, could give a rat’s patootie about. It’s far too subtle. Kind of like that boiling frog in Al’s movie… or the dinosaurs paying no heed as the weather was getting colder… before the Ice Age. Or as the black ground started rising above their shins… drowning in the refuse of their own ancestor’s remains.

Web 2.0 Trademark Closure

So in case you missed it, Tim O’Reilly has posted a follow-up about the Web2.0 Trademark spat that engulfed the blogerati a few months back. I put in my own two cents pertaining to the relevance of the debate to my Community Mark initiative.

The outcome seems that Tim has asked CMP to take a more narrow view of their trademark: It will only seek to protect the Web 2.0 trademark if another other Web 2.0-related event has a name that is confusingly similar to the names of the actual events co-produced by CMP and O’Reilly, such as our events “The Web 2.0 Conference” and “The Web 2.0 Expo.”

So while I can appreciate Tom’s initial Irish-blooded reaction (309 comments!?!), I think this is a fair compromise in the end. I can also see why people confused “O’Reilly” with “CMP”; Tim, take this with a grain of salt, but I think more than anything, this is a common misconception that is wholly yours to clear up, which, with this post, I think you have done.

Now that that’s behind us, maybe we should start talking about what’s next for digital rights online?

Open source OCR in the wild

About as sexy as an eye exam, but damn, this technology is difficult to get right. So yesterday Google announced the open sourcing of Tesseract OCR, character/text-recognition software it developed back in the 80’s that it claims is better than most of the open source alternatives (I’d believe that) but not quite as good as some of the commercially available technologies (I’d buy that too).

But hmm, isn’t there a lot that could be done with this? Personally, can’t wait until we see this make it’s way into OpenOffice among other places.