*Playtesting another team's campaign. Write a review
I download the another team´s work and try to install it to Wesnooth 1.6.5 an 1.6.7. But it doesn't work on any of these versions. I also try it on another computer, but i was unsuccessful with same errors as on mine. So in fact, i can´t make a review of their game nor play testing it.
So i will write review of our open source team work.
I come to the team bit lately, but it shouldn´t be a problem in opnensource project. Finally we did good job, but in fact our team work wasn´t really open source. I wanted to participate on more fields than i participated, but i wasn´t really able to do it. I didn´t know, in which field can i participate, which part of the team work can i do, in which field is necessary my help. As a communication instrument we used skype - i guess it would be better use some type of discussion forum, with topics... with skype, it was quite blind. You can´t really read history of the chat, would be much easier to orientate oneself in environment with structure - discussion topics.
I also made few mistakes in openness. I made few maps and pictures. I should (but unfortunately i didn´t) upload on track beta versions of my work, different patterns, textures and backgrounds, which i created during my work on these pictures. So in fact anyone else can´t set effectively own work on mine.
But anyway it was great experience and i believe, that each of us will work more openly next time also thanks this mistakes.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Cory Doctorow
Study the case of Cory Doctorow (Cory Doctorow @ Wikipedia, personal website) and analyse the validity of his business model as a writer.
He started published his books under CC license in 2003 - first one was Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom (2003) - and last one which waspublished under this license is Makers (2009). Just the fact, that he still use the same nonrestrictive license mean, that he is satisfied with the validity of this business. His book Little Brother (2008) is even New York Times bestselling novel. And it's distributed under a CC Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, it's legally available to download pdf version... and despite all these facts - it was bestselling novel. Case of Cory Doctorow is the proof of validity and sustainability of this business.
He made clever step forward in the book production business - I wish this case would be fine example for the rest of IP right holders. Together with development of business with different types of e-books will grow book piracy. So he choose right strategy in right time - the other owners of book IP rights will be forced to do the same think in close future - cause gigapedia and similar projects.
He started published his books under CC license in 2003 - first one was Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom (2003) - and last one which waspublished under this license is Makers (2009). Just the fact, that he still use the same nonrestrictive license mean, that he is satisfied with the validity of this business. His book Little Brother (2008) is even New York Times bestselling novel. And it's distributed under a CC Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, it's legally available to download pdf version... and despite all these facts - it was bestselling novel. Case of Cory Doctorow is the proof of validity and sustainability of this business.
He made clever step forward in the book production business - I wish this case would be fine example for the rest of IP right holders. Together with development of business with different types of e-books will grow book piracy. So he choose right strategy in right time - the other owners of book IP rights will be forced to do the same think in close future - cause gigapedia and similar projects.
OpenSource Strategy in Business
* Write a case study about three IT companies using Open Source as a part of their business strategy (one of them could do it a its main business, e.g. Red Hat
I find potentially danger how to abuse open source strategy in the business. Till the time it is connected with ideals of free software its OK, but when it is used just as a methodology, as a strategy of distribution of work, i can't find difference between it and outsourcing, crowd sourcing... etc.
There are no written contracts, and in fact it could be quite similar with outsourcing work, shifting work from regular factories to independent contractors, to specific types of software Sweatshops.
Of course it's just hypothetical danger, but together with shifting the work, from western part of world to global south (in case of software to India...etc.) is becoming this danger more and more actual.
Ubuntu
product is free and for free, the company (canonical ltd.) make a profit by selling technical support and make some in-house modifications /language/etc.. mutations. and also selling the clothing and accessories
Mozilla Corporation
biggest percentage of revenue is derived from search engine royalties - exclusive contract with google - Google search box in the Firefox browser.
There is many different way how to make a profit from open source business - the latest version is offered commercially, selling of commercial technical support service, additional proprietary features, dual licensing - selling professional versions, advertising - like Mozilla with google.
I find potentially danger how to abuse open source strategy in the business. Till the time it is connected with ideals of free software its OK, but when it is used just as a methodology, as a strategy of distribution of work, i can't find difference between it and outsourcing, crowd sourcing... etc.
There are no written contracts, and in fact it could be quite similar with outsourcing work, shifting work from regular factories to independent contractors, to specific types of software Sweatshops.
Of course it's just hypothetical danger, but together with shifting the work, from western part of world to global south (in case of software to India...etc.) is becoming this danger more and more actual.
Ubuntu
product is free and for free, the company (canonical ltd.) make a profit by selling technical support and make some in-house modifications /language/etc.. mutations. and also selling the clothing and accessories
Mozilla Corporation
biggest percentage of revenue is derived from search engine royalties - exclusive contract with google - Google search box in the Firefox browser.
There is many different way how to make a profit from open source business - the latest version is offered commercially, selling of commercial technical support service, additional proprietary features, dual licensing - selling professional versions, advertising - like Mozilla with google.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Copyleft
*Study the principle of copyleft and write an analysis about its three variants (strong, weak, none) with real-life examples.
*Study the principle of copyleft and write an analysis about its three variants (strong, weak, none) with real-life examples.
The most restrictive variant of copyleft license is GNU General Public License, GNU GPL. In fact is as restrictive as a copyright - but in different way. The whole idea of the copyleft is based on the same presumption as copyright - the idea of intellectual property. Copyleft licenses are an attempt to use existing copyright laws to ensure a work remains freely available, so it´s in fact attempt to change restrictive system of protecting Intellectual property, to change status in which authors are using the law to prohibit others from using and sharing IP, to completely opposite - strong copyleft prohibit usage under more permissive licenses... and of course under copyright. This idea is to strict, that there is (was in the beginning) danger to earmark it self out of the usage, in the times ruled by copyright. It´s also the reason, why were published another licenses more permissive - GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), Mozilla Public License (MPL).
BSD licence are in the middle - between copyleft and copyright. In fact just this license refuse, or may be better say don´t use, ignore, idea of intellectual property.
Special case are Creative commons licenses - it´s simply all spectrum of left side of left conception of IP - from really restrictive Cc-sa Share Alike, CC-nd No Derivative Works, Cc-nc Noncommercial to Cc-by Attribution, which is almost as permissive as BSD license.
We can imagine it as a spectrum... copyleft is counterbalance of copyright.
Stalman criticize the pirate movement, that it subvert the attempt create free software because it threaten not just copyright, but also copyleft - cause it refuse whole idea of IP... the main point of this criticism is, that canceling of idea of IP doesn't offer any guarantee for free software to not be abused as a proprietary on - on the one hand it´s true, but on the another - the rejection of IP is just necessary next step. And of course is necessary to settle new rules somehow to be friendly for free software - I guess it will be main challenge for pirate parties in next few years.
"I support these changes, in general; but the specific combination chosen by the Swedish Pirate Party backfires ironically in the special case of free software. I'm sure that they did not intend to hurt free software, but that's what would happen."
*Study the principle of copyleft and write an analysis about its three variants (strong, weak, none) with real-life examples.
The most restrictive variant of copyleft license is GNU General Public License, GNU GPL. In fact is as restrictive as a copyright - but in different way. The whole idea of the copyleft is based on the same presumption as copyright - the idea of intellectual property. Copyleft licenses are an attempt to use existing copyright laws to ensure a work remains freely available, so it´s in fact attempt to change restrictive system of protecting Intellectual property, to change status in which authors are using the law to prohibit others from using and sharing IP, to completely opposite - strong copyleft prohibit usage under more permissive licenses... and of course under copyright. This idea is to strict, that there is (was in the beginning) danger to earmark it self out of the usage, in the times ruled by copyright. It´s also the reason, why were published another licenses more permissive - GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), Mozilla Public License (MPL).
BSD licence are in the middle - between copyleft and copyright. In fact just this license refuse, or may be better say don´t use, ignore, idea of intellectual property.
Special case are Creative commons licenses - it´s simply all spectrum of left side of left conception of IP - from really restrictive Cc-sa Share Alike, CC-nd No Derivative Works, Cc-nc Noncommercial to Cc-by Attribution, which is almost as permissive as BSD license.
We can imagine it as a spectrum... copyleft is counterbalance of copyright.
Stalman criticize the pirate movement, that it subvert the attempt create free software because it threaten not just copyright, but also copyleft - cause it refuse whole idea of IP... the main point of this criticism is, that canceling of idea of IP doesn't offer any guarantee for free software to not be abused as a proprietary on - on the one hand it´s true, but on the another - the rejection of IP is just necessary next step. And of course is necessary to settle new rules somehow to be friendly for free software - I guess it will be main challenge for pirate parties in next few years.
"I support these changes, in general; but the specific combination chosen by the Swedish Pirate Party backfires ironically in the special case of free software. I'm sure that they did not intend to hurt free software, but that's what would happen."
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Battle for Wesnoth - game review
*"Homework: installing and playing Wesnoth. Write a game review."
The Wesnoth is turn based strategy game with fantasy story and environment. It´s opensource game distributed under GNU/GPL license. It´s crooss platform.
It´s possible to play single player campaigns or online multiplayer matches. In the game are 14 campaigns but it´s also possible to install some campaigns made by users or even create own one.
Game it self
The game is based on changing of the day/night - in each time have advantage another type of units. Lawful units are stronger during the daytime, chaotic units are in opposite more powerful during night. Each units have different skills so it mean different strengths and weaknesses (there are almost 200 hundred different units).
Important aspect of the game is also terrain, which, according to the type of unit can help improve/debase the abilities to defend or attack. There is also different types of attacks with different types of weapons. In game is only one staple - gold, source of the gold is each village. So it´s important to settle the villages. For the gold you can recruit the new units in firs level (or in latest levels recall the old one with some experiences or in higher levels). Each unit differ in speed of moving, weapons which can use, type of attack, lawful/chaotic identity, and preferred terrain.
The Wesnoth is turn based strategy game with fantasy story and environment. It´s opensource game distributed under GNU/GPL license. It´s crooss platform.
It´s possible to play single player campaigns or online multiplayer matches. In the game are 14 campaigns but it´s also possible to install some campaigns made by users or even create own one.
Game it self
The game is based on changing of the day/night - in each time have advantage another type of units. Lawful units are stronger during the daytime, chaotic units are in opposite more powerful during night. Each units have different skills so it mean different strengths and weaknesses (there are almost 200 hundred different units).
Important aspect of the game is also terrain, which, according to the type of unit can help improve/debase the abilities to defend or attack. There is also different types of attacks with different types of weapons. In game is only one staple - gold, source of the gold is each village. So it´s important to settle the villages. For the gold you can recruit the new units in firs level (or in latest levels recall the old one with some experiences or in higher levels). Each unit differ in speed of moving, weapons which can use, type of attack, lawful/chaotic identity, and preferred terrain.
FSF versus OSI
The main page of the course "Open source management" is here.
First work should be comparison of Free software foundation and Open source initiative.
"Read the arguments of both schools (FSF and OSI) and write a comparison."
Free software movement is some type of "new social movement". And the Free software foundation is institutionalized part of this movement, which was established to enforce the ideas of the movement in the legal order. Free software (free in the meaning of freedom) is then some ethical ideal, which, according the FSF, shall motivates the people to produce, use and propagate free software. It is in some aspect moral value, categorical imperative. In fact the results of both groups are very similar - free software and it´s enlargement. But the motivations of both groups are different. It´s philosophical problem. The evaluation is based on the motivation´s of behaviour/acting (which differ) not on the results (which are almost the same).
So, the OSI is organization which want to enlarge the open source model of creating software (intellectual property...), it´s "development method" which put together advantage of "the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process". They stress many advantages of OSM - better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, or defence against vendor lock-in. At the end, open source product are also free. But it is the difference, they completely miss the moral aspect, it´s in the second place. So it mean, that many new users of OS, or it´s creators choose this way because of it´s advantages, not because of it´s moral value.
But in other hand the shift to the arguments, which stress objective/purpose rationality, attract much more people and helped to widespread this idea. Before it was just job of thin elite of hackers, but now it penetrate to wider population.
It´s in abbreviation the main controversy between OSI and FSF. How to influence wider population but still save own values.
First work should be comparison of Free software foundation and Open source initiative.
"Read the arguments of both schools (FSF and OSI) and write a comparison."
Free software movement is some type of "new social movement". And the Free software foundation is institutionalized part of this movement, which was established to enforce the ideas of the movement in the legal order. Free software (free in the meaning of freedom) is then some ethical ideal, which, according the FSF, shall motivates the people to produce, use and propagate free software. It is in some aspect moral value, categorical imperative. In fact the results of both groups are very similar - free software and it´s enlargement. But the motivations of both groups are different. It´s philosophical problem. The evaluation is based on the motivation´s of behaviour/acting (which differ) not on the results (which are almost the same).
So, the OSI is organization which want to enlarge the open source model of creating software (intellectual property...), it´s "development method" which put together advantage of "the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process". They stress many advantages of OSM - better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, or defence against vendor lock-in. At the end, open source product are also free. But it is the difference, they completely miss the moral aspect, it´s in the second place. So it mean, that many new users of OS, or it´s creators choose this way because of it´s advantages, not because of it´s moral value.
But in other hand the shift to the arguments, which stress objective/purpose rationality, attract much more people and helped to widespread this idea. Before it was just job of thin elite of hackers, but now it penetrate to wider population.
It´s in abbreviation the main controversy between OSI and FSF. How to influence wider population but still save own values.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Review Another Team´s Work
List of wiki team´s topics.
I will write this review like a comparison of two wiki team´s works.
1. The Networked Information Economy
First one and best structured is work focused on book Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks. It is good work, well structured looks almost like work of one man. In fact, it is summarizing of one book, It is main advantage - it give the team, whose created it clear structure. Finally each member can made just part of book. It´s not rebuke by me, i just want to underline, that make clear structure of team work, edit materials created by many members and give a final form of the team work is the most hard job in any team project. So this wiki work is really good, but it seems to me, that main part of this work did original editor of the book, on which is this team work based.
2. In opposite of the first one are "Social Media, Viral Marketing and Crowdsourcing"
This work is in fact also good, there is quite lot of information, well written texts, good quotes... But it´s not compact. It´s very visible, that each part made someone else. There is necessary next step, the final editing of the materials made by different members of the team by main editor. In this case, each member choose some aspect of the topic and create text. But social reality, or may be better say each reality except reality of natural science, is not possible to strictly divide into different parts. Of course it is possible, but finally the parts overlaps some of them a more, some of them less - but it is unavoidably - and in each work project is extreamly important role of final editor. I like the parallels with films - It´s almost the same - film editor make simillar thing. all film team create many shots and many minutes of film material - At the end director from huge amount of material creat the short film.... This wiki team miss the final editing... unfortunately in the same way as our team :(.
I will write this review like a comparison of two wiki team´s works.
1. The Networked Information Economy
First one and best structured is work focused on book Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks. It is good work, well structured looks almost like work of one man. In fact, it is summarizing of one book, It is main advantage - it give the team, whose created it clear structure. Finally each member can made just part of book. It´s not rebuke by me, i just want to underline, that make clear structure of team work, edit materials created by many members and give a final form of the team work is the most hard job in any team project. So this wiki work is really good, but it seems to me, that main part of this work did original editor of the book, on which is this team work based.
2. In opposite of the first one are "Social Media, Viral Marketing and Crowdsourcing"
This work is in fact also good, there is quite lot of information, well written texts, good quotes... But it´s not compact. It´s very visible, that each part made someone else. There is necessary next step, the final editing of the materials made by different members of the team by main editor. In this case, each member choose some aspect of the topic and create text. But social reality, or may be better say each reality except reality of natural science, is not possible to strictly divide into different parts. Of course it is possible, but finally the parts overlaps some of them a more, some of them less - but it is unavoidably - and in each work project is extreamly important role of final editor. I like the parallels with films - It´s almost the same - film editor make simillar thing. all film team create many shots and many minutes of film material - At the end director from huge amount of material creat the short film.... This wiki team miss the final editing... unfortunately in the same way as our team :(.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
