Open Standards in Education

For those of you who are interested here is an article that I published over on the community blogs at the Linux Foundation about the use of open standards in education. 

Government incompetence + Corporate Greed = Your Loss

   The Internet is the most important invention of our day. This is nothing new, we already know that some of the biggest, most successful companies are built off of the Internet and a vast majority of citizens in developed countries connect to it and use it several times a day. The ubiquitous nature of the Internet is due to a single decision made early on in its development; the decision to keep it completely open for use by all. This means no single company could commercialize it, and no single force control it. Not only has this decision helped the Internet spread it has also helped and encouraged others to do the same. From Google's data treasury, to Amazon's online retail empire, to Kickstarter's non-profit funding powerhouse the Internet's “openness” has lead to new levels of innovation, business, and open information. Despite the obvious benefits of this openness, many have posited it is also a curse comparing the Internet to the “wild west” in need of being tamed.

  

    Many entities attempt this limiting in many forms and for many reasons. The government has attempted Internet censorship for the purpose of law enforcement namely reduction of online piracy. This has been done through mass surveillance and physically shutting down servers and data centers involved in illegal activities. Corporations, notably Internet Service Providers (ISPs), also attempt to limit

the Internet. The motivation for doing this is, as will always be the case, to make money. This is the purpose of corporations and will always be. Unfortunately, it also means they will attempt nearly anything to make more money. Corporations have done this firstly by limiting quantity of access and speed of access; these have been called quality-of-service limits and are somewhat necessary. They have also limited content to users. This tactic, however, was illegal according to the FCC. Nevertheless ISPs have still attempted to limit access to content.

   Incompetence on the part of FCC has recently lead to rulings disbanding these rules virtually giving any corporation a free ticket to limit users' access to certain websites or services . This destroys the foundation on which the internet was built on and what made it the success it is today. It will no longer be a place of exchange of information, media and ideas; your access of it will be based on the decision of corporations in pursuit of profit. Wal-mart doesn't want to match prices on Amazon? Simply pay money to AT&T or Verizon to limit speeds or take away access completely to Amazon. The government doesn't want certain ideas spread? Simply pay to have those sites blocked (this wouldn't be called censorship of course). Political candidates don't want scandal or opposing arguments spread? Simply pay to block those sites. 

   Net Neutrality should be enforced to the furthest extent possible. The Internet has contributed an inconceivable amount to humanity. Corporate or government interference would only hinder its ability. True, money is lost by online piracy and ISPs could make more money by enforcing restrictions. However, compared to the financial contributions and the broader contributions that a free Internet has made, this is a sacrifice I think is worthwhile.  Perhaps those "victims" should partake in the same spirit of innovation that built the Internet we have today and find new ways to make money on the Internet. They certainly wouldn't be the first to do so. In the mean time we must boycott those companies that insist on destroying the internet. Most companies support something we don't agree with but we can still get along and buy their product. This is different because it effects us all and is in the best interest of no one except stockholders. Hopefully, through the free market we can show companies that we don't want that kind of internet.

A Fun Experiment

Here's a fun experiment for you guys:

1. Go to your favorite social network and navigate to a Linux community or go your favorite Linux forum.
2. Now, post the easiest question you can think of (for best results be sure to mention Ubuntu or Linux Mint and talk about how you don't know why you have to use this "Terminal" thing or that you don't get what the big deal is about this "root" thing).
3. Sit back and enjoy the community tear itself to shreds.

The forum idea and how it has found itself into our social networks is a good idea. Here is a place all users can interact to sharpen their skills and help their fellow community members.

Unfortunately, people had to invade this Internet utopia and turn it into a mad house where unsuspecting "noobs" get their cyber butt kicked through every data center on this planet. (Uhgg...people...)

So, to prevent this, here are some tips to use when "helping" a new user online.

No Stupid Questions

   This is passé but forgotten nonetheless. Everyone is at a different stage    in their journey through the Linux underworld. If we are to gain new users and keep those users we have to recognize them for where they are at and help them gain a better understanding of their operating system. New users are a good thing, the more users we get the more support we get from hardware and software companies. By taking a step out of their comfort zone into a new, unknown OS that isn't known for its comfort and compatibility the new user is doing you, the seasoned user, a favor. Yeah thats it, treat the new user as if he or she is doing you a favor; as if he or she is the customer.

Keep your Distribution/DE/Display Server/Whatever Argument on Slashdot

   Really guys, some guy is just looking for a little help to get his graphics card up and working. If you don't use Ubuntu but use Arch instead don't comment saying "Ubuntu sucks I use Arch". That is not at all reassuring to the new user. Often times the user just installed an operating system for the first time and is unsure what they just did and how to undo it. By telling them that they may have installed the wrong operating system it frustrates and confuses them even more. Don't use that distribution so you don't know the answer? Move along, someone else will help. 

Save the language for when you're in your own basement trying to solve your own problems.

By constantly expanding the readers' dictionaries you are neither advancing your argument nor helping the user. This isn't a show of manliness or some clever way to show why your favorite distribution is the best; this is trying to help a new user get into a free and open computing experience. Let's try to be nice and welcoming so we don't scare off all the new users.


So there you have it: How not to scare off new users. Try to put yourself in their shoes. Try to remember back when when you were new, mention the things that helped you. Feel free to move along. There are plenty of other people on the Internet I'm sure someone get the job done. If it insults the user, the distribution in question or the program the user is using, or could be offensive to the user it probably doesn't need to be said.

Funny but Misleading.

Bug #1 has been marked resolved. For those of you unaware Bug #1 for Canonical's Ubuntu "Microsoft has a majority market share" was marked resolved by founder Mark Shuttleworth, above is a picture of him conjured up by +Fabian Scherschel. Plenty of people have written about this so you can learn more elsewhere (you know Google and stuff).

Many people such as Mr. Scherschel have joked about this but it is a rather important event. The desktop market is only a minority of the computing market the mobile market now dominates the consumer scene. Much of this market is not controlled by Microsoft or even Apple. By many estimates Android dominates the global consumer computing market. This opens the gates and does away with the near monopoly that Microsoft had.

The above picture makes it seem as if Shuttleworth is claiming the credit for this change. This has been the opinion of many. Don't worry I'm here to set you straight :). Mr. Shuttleworth does anything but claim credit. In his closing comment on the bug:

Even though we have only played a small part in that shift, I think it's important for us to recognize that the shift has taken place. So from Ubuntu's perspective, this bug is now closed. 

If I may paraphrase the man:

Ubuntu set out to accomplish this goal and we didn't. Instead, other people got there first. Either way it was accomplished so it's all good.

This really exemplifies the true spirit of opensource. The collaborative spirit which doesn't care who does it as long as it get done.

I'm excited to see what happens with Ubuntu's mobile offerings because I think they have something really unique to offer. With a guy like +Mark Shuttleworth as founder and one of the most influential people in the project I'm confident in Ubuntu's future as an opensource project.  

 

 

"True Linux"/Introduction

            

There is a common misconception in the Linux community that a certain project or distribution is the very definition of Linux or "True Linux". This isn't only false it is also very dangerous, for our favorite kernel, the community, and for the individual perpetrating this misnomer.

Linux is kernel, a free and opensource kernel, that provides the underlying structure for building various systems on top of it. Most commonly we associate operating systems with this kernel and in a sense that is what it is for but it goes far beyond the traditional desktop to much more fields. Linux can often be passed off by the casual, uninformed observer as irrelevant beyond the nerd world but the fact is that if everything Linux was taken out of the world it would effect everyone. Linux powers servers, it power has been used to power most of the largest startups, Google, Facebook, Ebay, and Amazon to name just a few of the largest; it's provided a platform for innovation in the software arena. Linux goes beyond even servers. The awesome guys over at +Jupiter Broadcasting have a weekly show named the Linux Action Show. Among their various assorted segments they have one dubbed “runs Linux”  which showcases different  the systems we interact with everyday that run Linux. This segment has always surprised me and caused me to do more research of my own. Linux runs Mcdonalds signs, hydroelectric plants, and cars to name just a few. The beauty of Linux is that it isn't just one thing it's whatever you want it to do. True Linux does not exist; nothing fully realizes the potential of Linux, that's the point of opensource.

All that to say that's why I'm writing here. The Linux community tends towards misplaced project patriotism. Project patriotism can lead to building a good piece of software or distribution but it can also quench the spirit of sharing, freedom and collaboration so integral to the opensource community. So, basically this blog is a place for me to vent my irritation with the way some people act in the community. When I get tired of ranting I may cover news and do reviews or I may discuss music...or maybe I'll just rant about the world in general ;). If you have any ideas or would like to point out the error in my ways feel free to do so in the comments.