19:08:30 -!- is is now known as as

My IRC nick-highlighting is such so that today, all messages directed toward a new person named imako on #ubuntu triggered my attention. While this is easy to fix, it made me consider how frustrating IRC with nick-highlighting must be if you have a nick that is also a common word in a language you communicate in.

I spent a few moments on Freenode today with nicks including the, and, is, it, to, an, as and a.

I was surprised that everyone of those nicks was registered with the nick server. I was not surprised that all were available at the time I tried and that all but the and and had been untouched for the better part of the year.

Let’s face it, if your nick was it, you wouldn’t enjoy IRC very much either.

Picture Break

There are at least two things funny about this (non-staged) desktop screenshot that a friend took a year or so ago:

/copyrighteous/images/heartburn_desktop-small.png

The background image is a picture of myself and my brother Nate. We were cold and less than completely comfortable and trying to convey this feeling through body language.

The first funny thing is the degree to which my friend has embraced the Windows folder naming conventions as illustrated by this closeup:

/copyrighteous/images/heartburn_desktop-folder.png

I’ll let you all speculate about what the funny things might be on your own.

Pledge To Killfile Andrew Suffield

I will killfile Andrew Suffield so I do not recieve Debian list email from him but only if 100 other people on Debian lists will too.

-— Benjamin Mako Hill

I have created a pledge over at PledgeBank with the title above and am looking for your support. Here’s the explanatory text:

If you read the Debian private email list, you understand my immediate motivation for starting this pledge. If you do not but interact with the Debian community in other ways, there’s a good chance you can come up with many other examples of why agreeing to pledge might be a good idea.

I think the Debian project would be a better place if people stopped responding to comments that, in effect and often in intent, are little more than provocations, put-downs, and trolls. Andrew Suffield’s emails to Debian lists fall in this category all to often.

However, since responses that quote unecessarily provocative messages are visible by folks who have ignored the sender, blocking email from a person (also known as killfiling) only works if done en-mass.

While Andrew is by no means the only person whose comments have a disruptive effect on Debian lists, he is a one example of a person whose negative effect outweighs his positive contributions in the minds of many. While those fulfilling this pledge would miss Andrew’s positive contributions on the lists, I believe it would be worth it.

The point of course, is not to pick on Andrew Suffield. It’s just that his behavior makes him a good example.

The point is to raise a little awareness about (and get a few names behind) the feeling that messages that are not intending to troll can have the identical effects — and that perhaps the best policy is to treat them accordingly. If the only outcome is that people understand this, it will have been a success.

You can sign up for the pledge at: http://www.pledgebank.com/killfileandrew

Talk: Broadly Defined Freedom: Radical Nondiscrimination in Free Software

I’ve been perplexed for quite a while by the fact that in a lot of areas (in academia in particular but may other places as well), people try to explain free software or open source and it’s freeness or openness in very reductionist or essential terms. The argument can start with some variation of one of these statements (or something similar in spirit):

  • "Free Software is inherently anti-capitalist."
  • "Open Source is an example of pure uninhibited capitalism."
  • "Free Software provides a model through which we can put limits on capitalism."

I touched on this issue in a talk I gave at LSM in 2003 called Lessons from Libre Software Political and Ethical Practice and then even managed to write it up in what became a published journal article with Biella Coleman.

Well the folks at Libroscope ran another track at LSM in Dijon this year and they managed to talk me into opening the theme with an attemp to give a practitioner’s view of freedom in free software and the important role it has played in the movement as a way of deflating the reductionist and essentialist analyses I alluded to above and explaining how they are neither completely wrong, nor completely correct.

You can get the talk slides and notes in the formats listed below.

Slides:

Talk Notes:

Black Hole Bulbs

Greg Pomerantz recently purchased a light bulb called a "black body bulb." When he told me this, I misheard him and thought he said he had purchased a "black hole bulb."

A small electrically-powered black hole that could be installed into a lamp is not only more technically challenging than building a light bulb. It is also, when you think about it, exactly what a light bulb isn’t.

To Fork Or Not To Fork: Lessons From Ubuntu and Debian

At LinuxTag, Libre Software Meeting and What The Hack, I gave different versions of a developer-oriented talk on the way that Ubuntu is developed and the reason folks from a wide range of different Free Software projects might be able to learn something from it. I will export and post the slides and notes for those talks in one big lump at some point in the next week.

However, the best way for those that missed the talks to get informed on the issue may be to read the article titled To Fork Or Not To Fork: Lessons From Ubuntu and Debian (the same as the talks) which was published in the LinuxTag conference proceedings.

In the essay I explore the experience of the Ubuntu project in building a distro on top of Debian. I argue that the scale of certain free software projects are forcing developers toward a new kind of forking using technologies like distributed version control and host of other technical and social tools and processes and look at some of the early successes and failures of Ubuntu in this regard. I also describes some of the techniques in question and argue for the techniques’ applicability and importance in a wide range of free software projects.

If others think it’s a good idea and if I can find somewhere appropriate, I may be interested in publishing a version this article in a magazine or journal. If you know of a place where this article might be welcomed, please contact me.

You can can currently pull the article down in the following formats:

You Call That A Scorpio?

Many people have probably followed the plight of the Russian sailors stranded 190 meters under water in a mini-sub. It was nice to see militaries around the world put aside their differences and come to the mariners’ aid.

But it’s worth pointing out this article lest anyone believe that the air of camaraderie in crises diminished the sense of machismo, competition, and old fashion "mine is bigger than yours" boosterism that is so central to our militaries. I quote:

Britain, responding to a request from the Russians, was sending a Scorpio remote-controlled underwater vehicle capable of descending 925 meters.

A U.S. Navy spokesman said a Super Scorpio, an unmanned deep diving submarine capable of reaching a depth of 1,515 meters, would be airlifted to the scene from San Diego naval base in California.

I’m glad to see that nobody was distracted from singing the praises of their expensive toys’ 900 meter plus diving capabilities by the fact that the stranded mini-sub in question was only 190 meters below the surface. It’s a shame that the British did not have time to arrange for an "Ultra-Scorpio." Something like that could have really saved the day.

Campaigning For an Inverted Interrobang in Unicode

After a 3-4 month break, I was catching up on mail in the Unicode email list and I noticed a number of threads about the interrobang (my favorite punctuation point and perhaps my favorite Unicode code point (U+203D)).

At Debconf5, I was talking with a number of the Spanish speaking developers about the lack of an inverted interrobang in Unicode which renders the glyph less useful in Spanish which normally prefixes questions or exclamations with inverted versions of the glyph at the end of the sentence. Why shouldn’t this carry over the interrobang as well‽ I was, quite seriously, thinking about writing up a proposal for the inclusion of an inverted interrobang myself when I found this message from Michael Everson on the Unicode email list:

N2935: Proposal to add INVERTED INTERROBANG to the UCS http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso10646/pdf/n2935-interrobang.pdf

This will be posted to the WG2 and L2 sites in due course.

After composing a message to Michael thanking him for his proposal, I realized (helped by the announcement to withdraw the entire Unicode Standard immediately after Michael’s proposal) that the proposal has been sent on April 1st and was, in all likelihood, a joke. How cruel is it to toy with my emotions like this‽

Sent about a month later, I found another message from Michael saying:

I suppose I should note that despite the date of its publication I am completely serious about: http://www.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2935.pdf

I have written Michael to confirm that he is serious. In any situation, I think it is important that all supporters of the interrobang (and it’s inverted cousin) make their voice heard in Unicode to ensure that the inverted interrobang gains a much-deserved spot of its own in the standard.

Update: Michael Everson has told me that the Unicode Technical Committee has asked him to first find Hispanic support for an inverted interrobang. If someone knows of this or of a list for Spanish typographers where we can ask, please let me know.

Wireless APs

Over the last few months, it’s been disconcerting to see the reported cases of people getting fined (or worse) for using open wireless access points without permission.

I travel frequently and the use of open APs is an important (if not always reliable) way that I get online. Every time my Internet connection at home goes down, I take advantage of one my neighbors APs. To balance things out, I make sure I always run an open AP for others out my home.

There are many smart reasons not to run an open AP but, for me, doing so is about being a good neighbor. I’ve found that even for the most cautious and conservative, most of the serious risks of running an AP can be mitigated by a measured combination of firewalling and monitoring.

The most ridiculous part of this crackdown is not how common and completely normal intentional "transgressive" wireless sharing is but how how often people do it completely unintentionally and without ever knowing.

Once I was in New York City with Micah and Biella and, knowing that we were technically proficient, a member of Biella’s extended family invited us over to help fix his printer which he was unable to print to over his wireless network. What eventually became clear was that his wireless AP was set of incorrectly and had never worked. His laptop couldn’t find the printer because the printer was on his home network and he had, without his knowledge, been using his neighbor’s wireless since he moved in. He had been paying for DSL which he had never actually used.

In densely populated places — New York in particular but any Western city probably falls into this category — this is incredibly common. Punishing people for doing what so many people do completely unintentionally — and almost entirely without negative consequences I might add — would be silly if what was at stake was not so serious.

Towards a Standard of Freedom: Creative Commons and the Free Software Movement

About a year and a half ago, I wrote an essay on Creative Commons that was critical of what I thought was a major difference between CC and the Free Software movement that many folks in the Free Software world didn’t seem to see. I showed it to a number of people and received a series of very mixed reactions. Some folks from iCommons Italy said they were reconsidering their role in CC. Cory Doctorow (who worked for CC at the time) compared me to a Troskyite. Others were conflicted.

Since I knew the article was potentially inflammatory and could easily be misunderstood, I’ve sat on it. In the last year, the things that bothered me about CC have continued or been aggravated and my article has continued to be passed around and revised. A growing number of people have been pushing me to publish. Under pressure — and kind words — from both Richard Stallman and a team of folks at Libroscope in France, (in addition to everyone who has been pushing me all along), I’ve finally decided to throw the article out there.

Many people seem to be criticizing CC lately and I don’t agree with all of them. As I say in the article, I think CC is doing a lot of good. My criticism is not with what CC has done but with the fact that they have failed to take a strong ethical position in the way that that has made Free Software successful.

Please feel free to pass the text around. The piece is short and I encourage anyone to read it and send me feedback. If you’re at What The Hack, just find me.

Finally, thank you to everyone who helped listen to this, read it, give me feedback, send me corrections. An incomplete list includes Alan Toner, Jamie King, Julien Tayon, Antoine Pitrou, Biella Coleman, Andreea Carnu, Richard Stallman, Holger Levsen, and WTH-DebCamp the Debconf5 sauna party.

You can read the whole article at its canonical(!) location on my homepage or upon on on Advogato. Source is also available.

Putting The Cute In…

What the Hack starts in a couple days and I’m already in the area. It promises to be a fantastic outdoor hacker summer camp.

Howver, I’m a little worried about one thing. It’s raining now. A lot. It’s basically rained every day in the last week. I feel like that many people, that much electrical power, and that much water is a bad combination.

My plan is to stick with with my friend Andreea. That way if the worst happens, at least we’ll be putting the cute in electrocute.

True Power

I’ve been somewhat disappointed with the lack of community participation in some of what I feel were my most fun and potentially contagious blog entries. For example, after spending almost two hours forming a list of packages useful in writing package name poetry, not a single person added to the body of work in the genre.

I think the problem may be lack of incentive and I’ve stepped up to remedy that. I have purchased 10 Dutch Bottle Scrapers (also known as flessenlikkers or flessenschrapers in the Netherlands) and I will be giving them away as prizes for small competitions I coordinate on my blog in the near future. While they are not expensive in the Netherlands, for the rest of world, these wonderful kitchen tools are absolutely priceless.

To learn more about flessenlikkers, read the Wikipedia article I wrote on the subject. While they may not look like much, I’ve been walking around with 10 flessenlikkers in my backpack over the few days and I often feel that I’ve found the true source of ultimate power.

My Eyebrows

A couple weeks ago, I realized that one of my eyebrow hairs was long. Like really long. Like 3cm plus. Other hairs were long too. What’s weird is that as far as I can tell this is the first time I’ve ever really looked at my eyebrows closely in my entire life.

I’m almost embarrassed to admit this since they are, after all, less than a centimeter from my eyes. Then again, this close proximity both makes it logistically difficult to scope them out and introduces a sense of assumed familiarity.

Then again, perhaps these are just rationalizations and I am just the sort of guy who wouldn’t notice a mustache if it were right under my nose.

Watch Out Whitey

I come from a pretty diverse family. I have a sister adopted from Korea and two sisters from Ethiopia.

Once I entered a Men Who Cook competition and the winner in the deserts category was someone who had brought a habanero and lime cheesecake. It was very tasty and I’ve made it several times since then. Since the cheese and the lime both tend to cancel out of the heat, the cake is usually just like a cheesecake that bites back a little bit.

Once though, it was really hot. It was tasty but there was a limit to how much one could eat. Since it wasn’t going fast, I suggested that my mother could serve pieces of the cake at her book club meeting. One of my Ethiopian sisters, apparently very worried, warned me, "You have to be careful! That cake could kill a white person."

If you don’t mind a little bit of heat, you can try the recipe for Habanero Lime Cheesecake That Can Kill White People yourself. Sorry for the Imperial measurements for those of you outside of the US.

The Debian New Maintainer Process

Dafydd Harries, Hanna Wallach, and Moray Allan gave an interesting Debconf talk on the Debian New Maintainer (NM) process and thought I would throw in my two cents. If this looks familiar, it’s because I made the second half of this argument on debian-newmaint a long time ago without much effect.

I see two major problems with NM as it stands right now:

  • The idea of "developership" in Debian collapses package maintainership and membership or citizenship into single quality.
  • Quite simply, NM focuses too little and too indirectly on the qualities that make good Debian developers.

At a certain point, the end result of each of these is the same: we create barriers to entry that block good developers. Some believe that the procedure also fails to block bad developers although I’m personally less concerned about that.

Developership and Citizenship

Being a Debian developer means that you have a key in the Debian keyring. This allows all developers to upload packages into Debian but also allows them to vote in General Resolutions and Project Leader elections. There is only one keyring for both of these things. Because all developers can upload packages, the process to become a developer tests packaging skills. While it is possible for non-technical folks (e.g., documentation or translations folks) to become developers, there is a understandable queasiness about adding keys to the keyring for folks who have not and do not intend to upload.

My favorite example was always Greg Pomerantz who is Debian’s lawyer. In terms of time, effort, and impact, Greg contributes to Debian more than most developers. However because he did not maintain packages and was not interested in doing so, he was not enfranchised within the Debian political system. Greg’s example is now less good because he’s started maintaining packages and jumped into the normal NM queue but I think his example highlights a serious shortcoming in the Debian system.

In Ubuntu, we have split "membership" from upload privileges. Members are people who have testimonials from trusted members of the project, who can demonstrate a history of substantial contributions, and who have agreed to our foundation documents. Membership conveys voting rights but — unlike Debian — expires with inactivity. While only members can upload, members cannot upload by default. They must first be checked off by a board of technical guardians who will look at their sponsored package history.

Now, I’m not convinced that Ubuntu’s model is the best way for Debian. However, if Debian really can’t separate uploaders from voters, I think that our NM process should test less on specifics and more for people that know their own limitations. Branden Robinson had an interesting idea I’ll let him propose on his own but I think might be a great retroactive fit for Debian.

Selecting For Quality Maintainers

On the second point, I am increasingly frustrated with the way that tasks and skills are handled in Debian. When I went through NM I was asked (and answered) exactly zero task and skills questions. I made packages, upgraded packages and fixed bugs. My work was vouched for by others and left to speak for itself.

What I ask to my NMs is similar to what was demanded of me. I ask few, if any, questions but look for, and require, active engagement with the Debian and free software communities. If people are doing good work and have great technical reviews from sponsors and are creating clean, well documented packages, and demonstrate that they know when and how to read a manual, this should be enough. I heard a talk from a famous biologist a couple years ago who told a story that went something like this:

A group of scientists bred mice so that they were really good at running through a maze. Many generations down the line the mice that made it through the rigorous breeding selection process were really good at running through the maze; but they were also partially deaf and partially blind. Partially blind and deaf mice are less distractable and are better at running through mazes. The mice were no smarter or better than other mice — just worse in a way that was helpful in the narrow case of the test.

I’m afraid the length and depth of the NM process is, in many cases, selecting for something other than competence, reliability, and knowledge of and adherence to our policy, philosophical, and quality standards. I half-jokingly believe our system is selecting for people who like researching and writing very long series of emails over people who enjoy going out and getting high quality programming work done in a consistent and reliable way.

Imagine the flame wars of the future.