Getting it Right: Gov.uk | TechPresident
Dave Eaves's short article points to what works well --- provided that the government site actually wants to work well, and on behalf of its users (citizens, residents, any inquirer). There are some clear user experience elements to consider, and there are also the backend components: those which anticipate that any service oriented architecture (SOA) like this will very likely grow and evolve in accord to what its users need and want. But again, it depends on whether the government in question takes seriously its role as a government for questions and also answers.
2012-11-02
Abacus adds up to number joy in Japan | Alex Bellos | Science | guardian.co.uk
Abacus adds up to number joy in Japan | Alex Bellos | Science | guardian.co.uk
My interest here is in the model: community enabled, promoted by a logic/logistics of gaming, where there are rewards, teams, cheers, and the prevailing sense of fun and games, even as something (or somethings) probably useful and practical are taught. Isn't that the point of games, at least those we play as a child? (You know, you learn teamwork, gamesmanship, and how to push or pull yourself. And perhaps what it means to consider that somethings are games and some things are not.)
My interest here is in the model: community enabled, promoted by a logic/logistics of gaming, where there are rewards, teams, cheers, and the prevailing sense of fun and games, even as something (or somethings) probably useful and practical are taught. Isn't that the point of games, at least those we play as a child? (You know, you learn teamwork, gamesmanship, and how to push or pull yourself. And perhaps what it means to consider that somethings are games and some things are not.)
2012-11-01
Read: Cabinet Office UK on Open Standards
It's a position to be praised but also to make us wonder: What's so difficult about moving toward open standards? To accountable government? To establishing a level market place, unchasmed, unrifted by monopoly or cronyism? And I suppose I answered my own question.
2012-10-26
Apache OpenOffice
Apache OpenOffice
That is the link to the AOO homepage, and it's nice, clean and efficient. I rather like it. It also departs from the prior OpenOffice homepage--and the differences are worth going over.
The old page, at http://www.openoffice.org/, ultimately had shifted to focus more on the user, less on the developer. The new AOO page actually resembles the initial pages of OpenOffice, and not coincidentally. OpenOffice was squeezed into CollabNet's original template for collaborative projects, and that template was designed, at least in part, by the same people who ended up designing Apache's. (CollabNet was co-founded by Brian Behlendorf, who was instrumental in founding the Apache project. I joined CollabNet in 2000, to work on OOo, among other projects.)
Despite my likes or dislikes--they're pretty irrelevant, I hope--I'm also interested in promoting (and that means, "creating," too) the associated ecosystem. I'm frankly indifferent if that ecosystem works with other ODF implementations, or no ODF implementation but tools that nevertheless support OpenOffice technology. Elemental to that promotion is ensuring that users of all abilities, experiences, languages, expectations are able to negotiate the site, get what they want, and also--important!--contribute as they can and as they may.
But does that page we have now provide for that set of desires?
That is the link to the AOO homepage, and it's nice, clean and efficient. I rather like it. It also departs from the prior OpenOffice homepage--and the differences are worth going over.
The old page, at http://www.openoffice.org/, ultimately had shifted to focus more on the user, less on the developer. The new AOO page actually resembles the initial pages of OpenOffice, and not coincidentally. OpenOffice was squeezed into CollabNet's original template for collaborative projects, and that template was designed, at least in part, by the same people who ended up designing Apache's. (CollabNet was co-founded by Brian Behlendorf, who was instrumental in founding the Apache project. I joined CollabNet in 2000, to work on OOo, among other projects.)
Despite my likes or dislikes--they're pretty irrelevant, I hope--I'm also interested in promoting (and that means, "creating," too) the associated ecosystem. I'm frankly indifferent if that ecosystem works with other ODF implementations, or no ODF implementation but tools that nevertheless support OpenOffice technology. Elemental to that promotion is ensuring that users of all abilities, experiences, languages, expectations are able to negotiate the site, get what they want, and also--important!--contribute as they can and as they may.
But does that page we have now provide for that set of desires?
2012-10-24
El software libre ahorró a Brasil 225 millones de dólares en el 2010
El software libre ahorró a Brasil 225 millones de dólares en el 2010
Personally, I think that the number cited is incorrect. A lot more was not only saved but implicitly invested. Free software is not, in my estimation, about saving money; it's not cheap software or "free" software, as in licensed no-fee software that's given away as a kind of loss-leader.
Rather, free and open source software (Foss) is a strategic investment that is aimed at not only providing the applications people want so as to continue with their habits but also to provide them with the tools that allow them to go beyond those habits and create something new--and valuable. That is, locally, regionally valuable, not just sentimentally or affectionately valuable but something of value that can be exchanged in the recognized market for money. You know, commodities, things.
I mean to say: it's not about cheap alternatives. It's not about altruism. It's about creating new markets where new things are bought and sold; and it's about emerging economies gaining a foothold on grounds other than natural resources or indentured servitude (extracted materials, cheap labour). Foss is crucial because it enables regions to optimize local education and other intellectual resources in making valuable commodities.
Personally, I think that the number cited is incorrect. A lot more was not only saved but implicitly invested. Free software is not, in my estimation, about saving money; it's not cheap software or "free" software, as in licensed no-fee software that's given away as a kind of loss-leader.
Rather, free and open source software (Foss) is a strategic investment that is aimed at not only providing the applications people want so as to continue with their habits but also to provide them with the tools that allow them to go beyond those habits and create something new--and valuable. That is, locally, regionally valuable, not just sentimentally or affectionately valuable but something of value that can be exchanged in the recognized market for money. You know, commodities, things.
I mean to say: it's not about cheap alternatives. It's not about altruism. It's about creating new markets where new things are bought and sold; and it's about emerging economies gaining a foothold on grounds other than natural resources or indentured servitude (extracted materials, cheap labour). Foss is crucial because it enables regions to optimize local education and other intellectual resources in making valuable commodities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)