This is a log from irc://irc.freenode.net/oscom on 2003-05-29.
More: Links to further coverage.
| <AaronSw> | Dave Winer - Keynote |
| let's not build walls. closed, proprietary -- terrible things to say about someone | |
| no longer an active software developer | |
| i did open source and commercial (use that term) software | |
| i released most of the source code for commercial software | |
| just had no redistribution right | |
| <sandro> | (hi, Aaron, sorry I kept missing your yesterday.) |
| <AaronSw> | most people didn't care about having the source code |
| (hi) | |
| it's not microsoft v. you, lots in between | |
| * sandro | wishes he were there. :-/ |
| <bitsko> | somebody musta found a hotspot, or a landline ;) |
| <AaronSw> | our customers were being told that we were stealing from them. that's not nice! |
| we dont want ot be friends with folks who say that | |
| open source's philosophy is based in the bubble | |
| everyone's doing a mixture now | |
| (we had both before but they were mac-address blocked) | |
| interrupt, feel free. if you don't, i'll bore you | |
| Joseph Reagle: proprietary was a good word; open source turned it evil | |
| Dave: have you produced proprietary software? | |
| reagle: no | |
| Dave: people need the 40 people shrinkwrap company, and that's gone now. you can't get that from open source | |
| [paul everitt keeps nodding] | |
| * bitsko | keeps going "so what?" |
| <AaronSw> | it's relatively easy to write unix. it's ease of use that's hard |
| * bitsko | notes that he's not formulating any questions for the session and his mutterings shouldn't be taken as such ;) |
| <AaronSw> | Halley Suitt: What does Linux look like? Where's the marketing? |
| [someone shows her linux] | |
| DW: plugs linux advocacy howto | |
| my software sucks. i'm trying to make it better. | |
| * bitsko | hates that meme, since he knows how easy it is to write quality software. Quality *is* free. |
| <AaronSw> | (I don't think it's free. It's hard work, but not imposisble.) |
| xml-rpc. darling of the open source world. microsoft helped invent it. philosophy: i'll do whatever you ask | |
| <sandro> | which meme? that software is inherently buggy? |
| <AaronSw> | "can i have X?" yes, unless there's a reason |
| people didn't suggest complex things because they knew it would be accepted | |
| <bitsko> | (writing quality software often improves individual and team performance. it's a habit. as a habit, it may be hard to "get into", but once you're into it, it most assuredly is free forever) |
| <AaronSw> | they argued against their own ideas because everyone else would accept them |
| <bitsko> | (sandro: yes, that software is inherently buggy) |
| * bitsko | notes xml-rpc was nothing of the sort, but oh well |
| <AaronSw> | Tony Berne, CMSWatch: there are successful 40-person shrinkwrap server software firms int he CMS market. they seal open source |
| (what sort? simple?) | |
| <sandro> | I'm really curious about your data, bitsko. Do you agree or disagree with books like "XP Explained" and "Agile Software Development" ? |
| <AaronSw> | DW: the key is to be a user. make stuff you want to use |
| <bitsko> | I agree with XP Explained and Agile Software Development, unless we're crossed here, I think they support what I'm saying |
| <sandro> | I'm just trying to understand what you're saying. :-) Agreeing with those help me narrow down the possible interpretations. |
| <AaronSw> | DW: people say they want open source. you don't actually want the source -- what do you really want? |
| i think it's something else you can't articulate | |
| freedom? no-lockin? choice? creativity? | |
| <bitsko> | control. |
| which probably falls in the bucket of "freedom" | |
| <sandro> | control (freedom, no-lockin) |
| * bitsko | nods |
| <AaronSw> | Larry Rosen: create derivative works |
| <sandro> | creativity and a sense that the creators are "my kind of people" comes too, but some proprietary/commercial systems get that too. |
| true ownership -- not feeling like I'll lose part of my computer when they go out of business. | |
| <AaronSw> | someone else?: i want to be able to fix the software or hire someone too |
| DW: but you can just export the data and import it to a new app | |
| <besfred> | (stupid argument) |
| <sandro> | In many cases you can't just export & re-import. XML & RDF are hoping to change that. Also, I get used to the user interface & quirks. |
| <bitsko> | yes, an *open source* app, so we'll never have *that* problem again. |
| <AaronSw> | aaron: add features, fix bugs |
| someone: source code escrow would be good | |
| sam ruby: don't want to be stranded | |
| sam: my weblog doesn't look good in IE; want to fix that | |
| DW: I agree. if MS had code in escrow, kick it out now | |
| DW: they should give up IE as a penalty for antitrust | |
| DW: it's like keeping the gun you used to commit a murder | |
| <bitsko> | that's why I don't think source code escrow is practical, because no way would IE be out |
| <AaronSw> | Bruce Tchaikovsky: i can build a good API into open source software |
| DW: real software products aren't things of beauty. APIs go on the outside | |
| Paul Everitt, Zope: +1 on usability. need a motivator, more than helps me and geek cred | |
| DW: another reason is job security. don't want to lose consilting revenue | |
| Paul: geeks don't think that far ahead | |
| Paul: need to put users first, work together | |
| Paul: everyone needs to create a TLA for memetic self-preservation | |
| DW: we stand on the toes of giants | |
| <bitsko> | not sure where the job security comment comes from. I usually equate "job security" thinking with intentional complexity. I've found myself continually employed just by saying that my software is as readable and understandable as possible. |
| <AaronSw> | ?x: why should we use proprietary software? |
| DW: you shouldn't. (beat) use software based on features, not religion | |
| <bitsko> | aha! something I agree with |
| <AaronSw> | DW: tool, not religion. lots of churches, they do a much better job IMO |
| Bill Airn(ph): democracies need a right to vote. do we need a reason to vote? have a free market? | |
| ... free markets can't allow monopolies | |
| <bitsko> | even monopolies of free software (Apache, Linux) are a bad thing in the long term |
| <AaronSw> | DW: open source seems like communism, not freem market |
| (i think he might have meant monopoly in the copyright sense) | |
| <bitsko> | yes, of which there isn't any in the open source world, so one can only presume in the marketshare sense |
| <AaronSw> | DW: will anyone actually fix the bugs? no one's fixing the bugs on all those source forge bugs |
| Sam Ruby: that's why i use apache. someone in this audience will fix it | |
| ... it's going to be around for a while | |
| <bitsko> | there's negative association with "communism", and "free market" implies money, even when we're not discussing money (or are we?) |
| hello? when do commercial companies empty out their bug trackers? | |
| <AaronSw> | DW: yeah! software should last 30 years. let's not reinvent the wheel |
| <sandro> | Every quarter, they drop it on the floor. :-) |
| * bitsko | would laugh, but he's seen it done. |
| <AaronSw> | Larry Rosen: non-tech people see open source as MS's only competitor |
| <bitsko> | does "post scarcity" have negative association? |
| <AaronSw> | DW: yep |
| DW: if i solve a problem, admit it. use it, clone it | |
| DW: I honored Apache when building Manila, but the Apache people just ignore Manila cuz it's not open source. that makes me angry! | |
| DW: take my ideas! i'm not patenting them | |
| Mark Blonder(ph), IMB: I think Manila didn't make it because of Radio userland | |
| DW: wha!??!? Manila made it! | |
| Mark: You've got a support and documentation issue. b-logger has the same thing | |
| DW: there's no money in software!!! | |
| <bitsko> | hmmm... |
| <AaronSw> | DW: can't wish it into existence! $39.95 doesn't answer a lot of questions!! |
| DW: it's not whether you like stallman or gates. i don't like either, neither take baths | |
| DW: (that's the soundbite) | |
| ?z: what about RSS? | |
| DW: RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication. Agree or Disagree? Subset of RDF or straight XML? | |
| DW: if 5-10 people read all the archives and read the history, we'd go back before the 1.0 fork | |
| DW: let's get the world rational again | |
| <bitsko> | yes... |
| <AaronSw> | ... gradually upgrade |
| ... had that happened, no RSS 2.0 today | |
| <bitsko> | and no namespace either. |
| <AaronSw> | DW: Joi Ito wanted to know content:encoded or description or what |
| <bitsko> | s/namespace/namespaces/ |
| <AaronSw> | ... man, I don't know. |
| ... that's a disastert | |
| ... we have one final shot at getting this right. MS and AOL are coming! | |
| ... W3C members that love to argue and fight and throw money at each other | |
| ... we need to be solid before we deal with them | |
| <bitsko> | no, it's not. it's a discussion that's close to winding up, but most believe it needs to be done in the open. |
| <AaronSw> | ... follow the blazed trail |
| Sam: been with IBM 21 years. hear "one shot" constantly; it's never one shot. it's a rallying cry, life goes on | |
| ... RSS is best-supported. let's do it incrementally | |
| DW: our ethos is "if you do it first, i'll follow you" we shoulda done that with rss | |
| ... so do what UL did, we did it first | |
| ... you wouldn't like it, evan (if you were evan) if we changed the blogger api w/o taalking to you | |
| <bitsko> | if anyone cares to look back before the 1.0 fork, they would clearly see the EXACT SAME THING people are asking for today: open standards, a level playing field |
| <AaronSw> | ... i implemented trackback to. the. spec. |
| <bitsko> | aha, here we get to the "Userland did RSS, we own it" |
| <AaronSw> | DW: need to get back on track. blogger + MT + userland is pretty powwerful |
| Sam: aggregators need a vote | |
| <bitsko> | I don't see "users" in that equation. |
| <AaronSw> | DW: no votes. no standard bodies |
| Sam: Joe(?) has a point too | |
| DW: once we three get compat. then we can do Joe's thing from there | |
| Bill Kearney, Syndic8.com: | |
| DW: oh, you're Bill Kearney. my god | |
| <bitsko> | (w00t!) |
| <AaronSw> | Bill: saber-rattling. platitudes. democracy. benevolent dictatorship. guise. |
| DW: stop. | |
| <Mutiny> | haha |
| <AaronSw> | DW: had i known you were in the audience i would have said this |
| <Mutiny> | damn i wish i was there. |
| <AaronSw> | DW: I want to say this face-to-face: i don't like where you're going, i don't want to hear those thoughts |
| <sandro> | damn i wish i was there. :-) |
| <AaronSw> | DW: say them on your weblog. i don't want to go there |
| <Mutiny> | this is getting juicy ahaha |
| <AaronSw> | Charlie Nesson: that seems like total bs |
| <sandro> | now I want to know what Bill Kearny says. |
| <AaronSw> | Bill Kearney: thank you. now everyone's see this |
| <Mutiny> | if this comes to blows i'm getting on the T and comming down. |
| <AaronSw> | Bill kearney: we want to collaborate |
| DW: are you finished | |
| Charlie Nesson: explain the obvious enmity. what is the dispute | |
| [applause] | |
| DW: i don't even know where to begin | |
| <bitsko> | (what was the applause to?) |
| <AaronSw> | Kearney: it's not productive |
| DW: stop! i was just pausing to think | |
| (to charlie) | |
| DW: this is why mailing lists don't work | |
| ... the things he's said are the most appauling personal things | |
| Kearney: name them | |
| DW: get the microphoen away | |
| ... i didn't interrupt you | |
| <bitsko> | it doesn't work in person either, apparently |
| <AaronSw> | audience: yes you did! |
| DW: but i let him speak | |
| audience: it is your keynote | |
| DW: Sam has once made a personal comment. it's ok! i forgive you. ok, maybe twice | |
| ... i love working with sam | |
| * sandro | is so greatful to Aaron for channeling this. |
| <Morbus> | sandro: got a backlog? |
| <AaronSw> | ... he takes the high road, he's intelligent. i care what other people think |
| <Mutiny> | me too. |
| * bitsko | thanks aaron too! |
| <Mutiny> | morbus stand by |
| <AaronSw> | ... i told people to interrupt me, in my defense |
| <Morbus> | mutiny: thanks |
| <AaronSw> | ... whatever you think about me, i've made a lot of contributions |
| &; | (it's being taped, apparently) |
| <sandro> | Want my to mail it to you Morbus? |
| <AaronSw> | ... i didn't ask bill kearney to do this |
| * AaronSw | mails to morbus |
| <AaronSw> | DW: almost out of time |
| <Morbus> | someone, anyone, yes ;) |
| <Mutiny> | i KNEW this was going to turn into a fuckfest. that's why i wanted to go. ;) |
| <Morbus> | got it from aaron. thanks. |
| <AaronSw> | Gregor: need to build cultural interop |
| <Morbus> | if someone can get me an mp3 of that tape, it'd be great. |
| <AaronSw> | ... we meet in pub and drink beer |
| DW: that ain't gonna happen | |
| [laughs] | |
| DW: this guy | |
| [laughs] | |
| DW: this guy went further. i have heart disease. i had bypass, long recovery, lot of pain | |
| ... trying to get back by posting | |
| ... and _this asshole_ wished me dead | |
| Kearney: COMPLETELY UNTRUE | |
| ... THE MORE YOU REPEAT THE MORE THEY BELIEVE | |
| DW: absolutely true. don't want to deal with it. he's got a problem and he projects it | |
| * bitsko | sees a Burton Event occuring |
| <AaronSw> | Larry Rosen: one of the frustrations I have is people hate each other in open source |
| DW: thaat's what we're talkign about here | |
| <bitsko> | (sigh. no it's not.) |
| <AaronSw> | Larry: unfortunarte. can law professors give us clues on how to litigate against someone and represent the client to the utmost but shake the hand of your opponent afterwords |
| ... good battle, more later | |
| DW: we haven't gotten there in software yet | |
| Nesson: needs a moderator who's not self-interested | |
| Nesson: you can't moderate this | |
| DW: moderate what? | |
| Nesson: let's move sideways and structure something | |
| DW: won't do it | |
| Nesson: neither the moderator, both speak | |
| ... that's the law school approach | |
| [much applause] | |
| DW: do whatever you want charlie | |
| ?x: I finally understand why Jerry Sringer was invented in the US | |
| [much laughs] | |
| DW: i'm sorry, we were doing really well before | |
| purploe shirt: look at academia. to get credit, you need to publish it and provide a wy to repeat it | |
| ... not only do the procedure, but give away the materials | |
| ... software equivalent: give away the source | |
| ... credit goes to the academic side | |
| &nsbp; | DW: sorry, a few minutes ago i would have been all over that |
| * bitsko | notes to the online crowd that Bill Kearney did NOT, in fact, make any death threats to Dave Winer. |
| <AaronSw> | DW: time to end |
| [applause] | |
| <Morbus> | bitsko: did I? |
| <bitsko> | nor you, that I recall |
| <sandro> | "death threats" is not the same as "wished me dead". (but I take no stand on the fact, knowing nothing of this before today.) |
| <AaronSw> | audience: that's a great argument for letting machines write code |
| * AaronSw | wondes what to do next |
| <sandro> | machines can't write code, not in an useful sense. |
| <Mutiny> | see the discussion where every time dwiner is criticized he brings up his heart problem |
| <sandro> | what they can write, we don't call ("source") code. |
| <Mutiny> | is it just me or does DW -hate- aggregrators? |
| <Morbus> | DW doesn't know what one is. |
| if its not modeled after RU, its not an aggregator. | |
| see his "What is an Aggregator" piece a while back | |
| <bitsko> | more specifically, Bill Kearney did not "wish him dead" |
| <Mutiny> | anybody here want to scan an OSCOM conference badge? |
| <Morbus> | technically, AmphetaDesk is not an aggregator. |
| per his definitions. | |
| <Mutiny> | yeah i mean between you, kearney and burtonator he seems to have some serious issues. |
| <Morbus> | yup. |