Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Henrique Koehler

Hi Cameron,

 

your open arguments are correct but aren’t the whole truth: after many years of hard pioneer work, the Munich city administration has recently decided to abandone Limux – see Wikipedia - and return to MS.

 

This shows that - for some bosses - reliable standards could have a higher priority than open standards.

Another truth: because actual open location codes are either too simple or too academic, many corporations are adopting location codes based on 3 words (!?). Even universities promote such PROPRIETARY silliness. Until now, the open source dilemma impeded OsGEO etc. to even think about proposing an own simple answer to simple questions like “where is the cow?”, so the open evangelists continue to promote “here!”, lat/lon, square grids, post codes, names etc.

 

I’ve developed an orientation standard which also gives simple answers on indoor, urban and global levels. The app “volksnav” is available in all stores and considers 500 cities incl. indoor Oktoberfest. The app will always be free, including all educational tools. Other than today, children, students, average people etc. can discover (magic!) that it is possible to divide the horizon into 12 directions like the blind, soldiers, pilots, and boy scouts do.

 

If the source would be open, it automatically would generate hundreds of “better” standards, destroying the goal. The only solution is the forgotten method “symbolical fees” and I would be more than glad if you Cameron would dare to make the first step to demystify this method and help to consider it as almostOpen, compatible to the – also important – merit principle.

 

Henrique  

        

 

 


I tackled "The Open Source dilemma" at the recent QGIS conference here in Sydney, Australia. Hopefully it might have some slides which others might be able to use:

Looked at through the lens of traditional management, Open Source collaboration is time consuming, imprecise, unreliable, hard to manage, rarely addresses short term objectives, and hard to quantify in a business case.And yet, in a digital economy, collaborative communities regularly out-innovate and out-compete closed or centrally controlled initiatives.

http://cameronshorter.blogspot.com.au/2017/11/open-source-pitch-for-your-boss.html

-- 
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier, Learnosity
Open Technologies Consultant

M +61 (0) 419 142 254

_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall

Unbenannte Anlage 00004.txt (156 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

b.j.kobben
Dear Henrique,

On your site http://www.volksnav.de/ I find information about various kinds of licences, and mention that you hold patents for it, and that the licensee's responsibilities include "payment of the fees". And I cannot seem to find/use the code itself. So in what way are your apps "Open Source"...?

yours,


--
Barend Köbben
 

On 27/11/2017, 09:14, "GeoForAll on behalf of Munich Orientation Convention" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

    Hi Cameron,
     
    your open arguments are correct but aren’t the whole truth: after many years of hard pioneer work, the Munich city administration has recently decided to abandone
     Limux – see Wikipedia - and return to MS.
     
    This shows that - for some bosses - reliable standards could have a higher priority than open standards.
   
    Another truth: because actual open location codes are either too simple or too academic, many corporations are adopting location codes based on 3 words (!?). Even
     universities promote such PROPRIETARY silliness. Until now, the open source dilemma impeded OsGEO etc. to even think about proposing an own simple answer to simple questions like “where is the cow?”, so the open evangelists continue to promote “here!”, lat/lon,
     square grids, post codes, names etc.
     
    I’ve developed an orientation standard which also gives simple answers on indoor, urban and global levels. The app “volksnav” is available in all stores and considers
     500 cities incl. indoor Oktoberfest. The app will always be free, including all educational tools. Other than today, children, students, average people etc. can discover (magic!) that it is possible to divide the horizon into 12 directions like the blind,
     soldiers, pilots, and boy scouts do.
     
    If the source would be open, it automatically would generate hundreds of “better” standards, destroying the goal. The only solution is the forgotten method “symbolical
     fees” and I would be more than glad if you Cameron would dare to make the first step to demystify this method and help to consider it as almostOpen, compatible to the – also important – merit principle.
     
    Henrique  
           
     
     
   
   

_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Henrique Koehler
Hi Barend,

specially for you, I've included Enschede within the 500 cities of the
VolksNav app, so also your students could get StreetSmart. Geocaching is a
good method to discover the difference between smartness and w3w.

Always when I affirm that I don't understand why intelligent people promote
the single purpose w3w, I take the liberty to cite your home page
https://kartoweb.itc.nl/kobben/. Would you recommend words to answer the
question "where is the cow?".

In my case, even a cowboy in Uganda could understand the answer without
maps, without devices and without source codes. GeoForAll, also for cowboys.

The board members who take black or white decisions about openness seem to
have the following characteristics:  

- to be rich or have a good job
- to be too young to know anything about the proven method "symbolic fees"

- have no own intellectual properties. Remark: QGIS, Linux etc. aren't
inventions, just copies.

So the alternative quasiOpen in favor of the consumer AND the merit
principle has never been discussed yet.

I'd appreciate very much if you'd answer to the community the following
arising questions:

- why do you promote the proprietary w3w? Aren't you defender of open
souce?
- why do you try to impede discussions about the proposed quasiOpen?
- Do your students know that it is possible to divide the horizon into
12 directions?
- Do you motivate your students to be creative? With which arguments?
Nobel prize?

I'd be more than glad if you'd in favor of your students, the consumer and
inventors rethink your position about the dilemma. A start with logical room
numbers in www.volksnav.de/UniTwente would be an adequate way.

Thank you in advance,    
 
Henrique


Dear Henrique,

On your site http://www.volksnav.de/ I find information about various kinds of licences, and mention that you hold patents for it, and that the licensee's responsibilities include "payment of the fees". And I cannot seem to find/use the code itself. So in what way are your apps "Open Source"...?

yours,


--
Barend Köbben
 

On 27/11/2017, 09:14, "GeoForAll on behalf of Munich Orientation Convention" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

    Hi Cameron,
     
    your open arguments are correct but aren’t the whole truth: after many years of hard pioneer work, the Munich city administration has recently decided to abandone
     Limux – see Wikipedia - and return to MS.
     
    This shows that - for some bosses - reliable standards could have a higher priority than open standards.
   
    Another truth: because actual open location codes are either too simple or too academic, many corporations are adopting location codes based on 3 words (!?). Even
     universities promote such PROPRIETARY silliness. Until now, the open source dilemma impeded OsGEO etc. to even think about proposing an own simple answer to simple questions like “where is the cow?”, so the open evangelists continue to promote “here!”, lat/lon,
     square grids, post codes, names etc.
     
    I’ve developed an orientation standard which also gives simple answers on indoor, urban and global levels. The app “volksnav” is available in all stores and considers
     500 cities incl. indoor Oktoberfest. The app will always be free, including all educational tools. Other than today, children, students, average people etc. can discover (magic!) that it is possible to divide the horizon into 12 directions like the blind,
     soldiers, pilots, and boy scouts do.
     
    If the source would be open, it automatically would generate hundreds of “better” standards, destroying the goal. The only solution is the forgotten method “symbolical
     fees” and I would be more than glad if you Cameron would dare to make the first step to demystify this method and help to consider it as almostOpen, compatible to the – also important – merit principle.
     
    Henrique  
           
     
     
   
   


_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

b.j.kobben
Dear Henrique,

I do agree with you on one point: w3w is not the best example of an open system.

On the other parts of your message, I mostly disagree.

As to your slur on "board member characteristics", I do hope you do not think I am a board member of OSGEO (I most definitely am not), and I certainly do not fall into your characterization:
- I have a good job, but academics in the Netherlands (like everywhere) does not make one rich
- I am 53 and have worked on and with software of all kinds, including "symbolic fees" ones, fully commercial and Open Source and all in between
- I do own intellectual properties. I have written books and papers that are my intellectual property, and that were reviewed by my peers to assure they make sense.
- QGIS, Linux etc. might be "just copies", but then by that definition any software is. You Convention is too, as you explain yourself the method is based on one used "by soldiers, boy scouts, pilots, the blind etc. for more than 100 years."

You state that "quasiOpen in favor of the consumer AND the merit principle has never been discussed yet."
This is absolutely untrue.
Just watch for example the past few presentations given by Paul Ramsey (eg. http://blog.cleverelephant.ca/2017/08/foss4g-keynote.html and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUgiG6eaYtI); These were presented at conferences and these principles have been discussed at length in these gremia. Paul is a good example of someone combining commercial business principles with Open Source, successfully and with both feet on the ground.


Lastly, let me try to answer your questions:

- why do you promote the proprietary w3w? Aren't you defender of open souce?
=> I did not think I was promoting it, merely having a link to my location using their system.

- why do you try to impede discussions about the proposed quasiOpen?
=> please explain how I impede discussions? What did I do to impede, I thought I just disagreed with you when you attack "academics that promote such PROPRIETARY silliness", when your own system is also proprietary (and why is only their system silly?). I have nothing against proprietary, but have something against unfounded claims and false arguments.
As an aside, can you please explain what you mean by "the proposed quasiOpen"...?

- Do your students know that it is possible to divide the horizon into 12 directions?
=> Yes. As you said this was used "by soldiers, boy scouts, pilots, the blind etc. for more than 100 years.", and several of my students were in the first three of those categories (and one in the last).

- Do you motivate your students to be creative? With which arguments? Nobel prize?
=> Yes I do. The reason they do that is up to them, some do it to win a Nobel Prize, others to become rich. And we teach them to carefully read arguments and make up their minds weighing the pro's and con's of any solution, commercial or Open Source, expensive or free.  But most at our Institute do it actually to help their home countries (which are all over the world, see http://kartoweb.itc.nl/alumnimapper/index.html) with their newly acquired skills and knowledge.


yours,
 
--
Barend Köbben
 

On 28/11/2017, 09:37, "Munich Orientation Convention" <[hidden email]> wrote:

    Hi Barend,
   
    specially for you, I've included Enschede within the 500 cities of the
    VolksNav app, so also your students could get StreetSmart. Geocaching is a
    good method to discover the difference between smartness and w3w.
   
    Always when I affirm that I don't understand why intelligent people promote
    the single purpose w3w, I take the liberty to cite your home page
    https://kartoweb.itc.nl/kobben/. Would you recommend words to answer the
    question "where is the cow?".
   
    In my case, even a cowboy in Uganda could understand the answer without
    maps, without devices and without source codes. GeoForAll, also for cowboys.
   
    The board members who take black or white decisions about openness seem to
    have the following characteristics:  
   
    - to be rich or have a good job
    - to be too young to know anything about the proven method "symbolic fees"
   
    - have no own intellectual properties. Remark: QGIS, Linux etc. aren't
    inventions, just copies.
   
    So the alternative quasiOpen in favor of the consumer AND the merit
    principle has never been discussed yet.
   
    I'd appreciate very much if you'd answer to the community the following
    arising questions:
   
    - why do you promote the proprietary w3w? Aren't you defender of open
    souce?
    - why do you try to impede discussions about the proposed quasiOpen?
    - Do your students know that it is possible to divide the horizon into
    12 directions?
    - Do you motivate your students to be creative? With which arguments?
    Nobel prize?
   
    I'd be more than glad if you'd in favor of your students, the consumer and
    inventors rethink your position about the dilemma. A start with logical room
    numbers in www.volksnav.de/UniTwente would be an adequate way.
   
    Thank you in advance,    
     
    Henrique
   
   

_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Henrique Koehler
Excellent, Berend!
Now we made at least a quantum jump from zeroDialog to a quasiDialog where you decide which questions you answer.

I didn’t affirm that you’re a board member, I affirm that you’re using their uncomplete principles to block discussions about benefits. Imagine the board would expulse you from the paradise because you charge – symbolic? - fees for your books and promote w3w for a problem which simple doesn’t exist: lat/lon and “here” satisfy all their needs.

For a better communication, please let me enumerate the arising questions (or should I use words?).

1) Where is the cow?
I suppose, the community is still waiting for your recommendation for cowboys. Or all they died on the Marlboro disease ? Or does your silence prove that your university still didn’t discover the market gap? Love and Openmania can make blind.

2) w3w

2a)
I suppose, the community still would like to know  WHY do you promote w3w.
What does fascinate you?
If the “where ?” problem exists, why not OpenLocationCode, NAC, Xaddress, mapcode, smart location codes etc.?

2b)
If w3w is not silly: who should profit from your named address approved.steered.classed?
Does it belong to Enschede, to your building, to your room or to your chair? How can we recognize this?  

2c)
If w3w isn’t silly: what’s the distance and direction from your position to coffee.meeting.unclassed?

2d)
if w3w is not silly: does it have benefic influences on cartography? On signage? On geocaching/navigation devices? What's the benefit at all?

Besides: I’m in contact with the owner of w3w. He has been playing music everywhere in the world and did like me suffer under the where-problem. He’s the one – not me - who was very angry about the academic arrogance, so he decided to let convert lat/lon to a less academic expression. Who knows, maybe one day he’ll promote what3values: hours, minutes and radius for cowboys etc.

3) Paul Ramsey
I never got a chance like Paul got and I don’t have his elegance. I’m still on the phase where the comments are only destructive.    

4) Merit principle
Your bridge between GeoForAll and the merit principle is not clear for me.

5) source code
I’m not a programmer and my invention is not a software, so please don’t confuse the community.
I don’t understand why you comb through my general license model and only pick the expression “source code”. My license model is very simple: case-by-case. It is possible to hide and seek Easter eggs just with some lines on sand.  

What is what you want? A source code for names? A source code for pictograms? A source code for education methods? A source code for imaginary clocks? A source for the r100 radius www.volksnav.de/r100 ? A source code for Easter eggs? The source code of the apps? Why? I had to pay a lot for them.    

6) quasiOpen

Each solution changes the problem. Mobile phones solved a problem, now we fight against providers and   batteries.
If the community would wake up and discover that the “where” problem really exists but a solution with an open standard would destroy the standard, so the WIN-WIN-WIN way out is simply to find another name for “open”. My suggestion is: quasiOpen.  

Would it be terrible for you if for example the Tokyo Metro would prefer to pay for a whole concept www.volksnav.de/TokyoMetro in favor of those who can’t read Japanese (you?) than to adopt the actual open solutions? See example Limux.

The quasiOpen concept would accept symbolic fees to protect the standard AND to comply with the proven merit principle. Depending on the benefits, the fee can be from zero to …      

Let’s start with your university?

Henrique




Dear Henrique,

I do agree with you on one point: w3w is not the best example of an open system.

On the other parts of your message, I mostly disagree.

As to your slur on "board member characteristics", I do hope you do not think I am a board member of OSGEO (I most definitely am not), and I certainly do not fall into your characterization:
- I have a good job, but academics in the Netherlands (like everywhere) does not make one rich
- I am 53 and have worked on and with software of all kinds, including "symbolic fees" ones, fully commercial and Open Source and all in between
- I do own intellectual properties. I have written books and papers that are my intellectual property, and that were reviewed by my peers to assure they make sense.
- QGIS, Linux etc. might be "just copies", but then by that definition any software is. You Convention is too, as you explain yourself the method is based on one used "by soldiers, boy scouts, pilots, the blind etc. for more than 100 years."

You state that "quasiOpen in favor of the consumer AND the merit principle has never been discussed yet."
This is absolutely untrue.
Just watch for example the past few presentations given by Paul Ramsey (eg. http://blog.cleverelephant.ca/2017/08/foss4g-keynote.html and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUgiG6eaYtI); These were presented at conferences and these principles have been discussed at length in these gremia. Paul is a good example of someone combining commercial business principles with Open Source, successfully and with both feet on the ground.


Lastly, let me try to answer your questions:

- why do you promote the proprietary w3w? Aren't you defender of open souce?
=> I did not think I was promoting it, merely having a link to my location using their system.

- why do you try to impede discussions about the proposed quasiOpen?
=> please explain how I impede discussions? What did I do to impede, I thought I just disagreed with you when you attack "academics that promote such PROPRIETARY silliness", when your own system is also proprietary (and why is only their system silly?). I have nothing against proprietary, but have something against unfounded claims and false arguments.
As an aside, can you please explain what you mean by "the proposed quasiOpen"...?

- Do your students know that it is possible to divide the horizon into 12 directions?
=> Yes. As you said this was used "by soldiers, boy scouts, pilots, the blind etc. for more than 100 years.", and several of my students were in the first three of those categories (and one in the last).

- Do you motivate your students to be creative? With which arguments? Nobel prize?
=> Yes I do. The reason they do that is up to them, some do it to win a Nobel Prize, others to become rich. And we teach them to carefully read arguments and make up their minds weighing the pro's and con's of any solution, commercial or Open Source, expensive or free.  But most at our Institute do it actually to help their home countries (which are all over the world, see http://kartoweb.itc.nl/alumnimapper/index.html) with their newly acquired skills and knowledge.


yours,
 
--
Barend Köbben
 

On 28/11/2017, 09:37, "Munich Orientation Convention" <[hidden email]> wrote:

    Hi Barend,
   
    specially for you, I've included Enschede within the 500 cities of the
    VolksNav app, so also your students could get StreetSmart. Geocaching is a
    good method to discover the difference between smartness and w3w.
   
    Always when I affirm that I don't understand why intelligent people promote
    the single purpose w3w, I take the liberty to cite your home page
    https://kartoweb.itc.nl/kobben/. Would you recommend words to answer the
    question "where is the cow?".
   
    In my case, even a cowboy in Uganda could understand the answer without
    maps, without devices and without source codes. GeoForAll, also for cowboys.
   
    The board members who take black or white decisions about openness seem to
    have the following characteristics:  
   
    - to be rich or have a good job
    - to be too young to know anything about the proven method "symbolic fees"
   
    - have no own intellectual properties. Remark: QGIS, Linux etc. aren't
    inventions, just copies.
   
    So the alternative quasiOpen in favor of the consumer AND the merit
    principle has never been discussed yet.
   
    I'd appreciate very much if you'd answer to the community the following
    arising questions:
   
    - why do you promote the proprietary w3w? Aren't you defender of open
    souce?
    - why do you try to impede discussions about the proposed quasiOpen?
    - Do your students know that it is possible to divide the horizon into
    12 directions?
    - Do you motivate your students to be creative? With which arguments?
    Nobel prize?
   
    I'd be more than glad if you'd in favor of your students, the consumer and
    inventors rethink your position about the dilemma. A start with logical room
    numbers in www.volksnav.de/UniTwente would be an adequate way.
   
    Thank you in advance,    
     
    Henrique
   
   


_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Christian Willmes
Sehr gheehrter Herr Köhler,

da sie offensichtlich ein beachtliches Verständnisproblem zum Sinn und
Zweck von OSGeo und Geo4All haben, versuche ich es ihnen mal auf deutsch
zu erklären. Aufgrund der Namensgebung ihres Produktes und ihrer
deutschen Domain, nehme ich an, dass Sie diese Sprache möglicherweise
besser verstehen?

Jedenfalls ist OSGeo eine Organisation, die sich der Förderung von Open
Source Geospatial Software verpflichtet hat. Eine Grundbedingung um
etwas als "Open-Source" zu bezeichnen ist eine offene Lizenz.

Da ihr Produkt diese Grundbedingung offensichtlich nicht erfüllt
erübrigt sich jede weitere Diskussion.

Des Weiteren sind ihre ad hominem Übergriffe gegen Mitglieder der OSGeo
und Geo4All Community nicht nur sehr unhöflich, Sie disqualifizieren
sich dadurch für jeden weitern Dialog und ich würde sogar so weit gehen,
dass sie sich hier lächerlich machen und niemand Sie und ihr Anliegen
erst nehmen möchte.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Christian Willmes


Am 29.11.2017 um 15:07 schrieb Munich Orientation Convention:

> Excellent, Berend!
> Now we made at least a quantum jump from zeroDialog to a quasiDialog where you decide which questions you answer.
>
> I didn’t affirm that you’re a board member, I affirm that you’re using their uncomplete principles to block discussions about benefits. Imagine the board would expulse you from the paradise because you charge – symbolic? - fees for your books and promote w3w for a problem which simple doesn’t exist: lat/lon and “here” satisfy all their needs.
>
> For a better communication, please let me enumerate the arising questions (or should I use words?).
>
> 1) Where is the cow?
> I suppose, the community is still waiting for your recommendation for cowboys. Or all they died on the Marlboro disease ? Or does your silence prove that your university still didn’t discover the market gap? Love and Openmania can make blind.
>
> 2) w3w
>
> 2a)
> I suppose, the community still would like to know  WHY do you promote w3w.
> What does fascinate you?
> If the “where ?” problem exists, why not OpenLocationCode, NAC, Xaddress, mapcode, smart location codes etc.?
>
> 2b)
> If w3w is not silly: who should profit from your named address approved.steered.classed?
> Does it belong to Enschede, to your building, to your room or to your chair? How can we recognize this?  
>
> 2c)
> If w3w isn’t silly: what’s the distance and direction from your position to coffee.meeting.unclassed?
>
> 2d)
> if w3w is not silly: does it have benefic influences on cartography? On signage? On geocaching/navigation devices? What's the benefit at all?
>
> Besides: I’m in contact with the owner of w3w. He has been playing music everywhere in the world and did like me suffer under the where-problem. He’s the one – not me - who was very angry about the academic arrogance, so he decided to let convert lat/lon to a less academic expression. Who knows, maybe one day he’ll promote what3values: hours, minutes and radius for cowboys etc.
>
> 3) Paul Ramsey
> I never got a chance like Paul got and I don’t have his elegance. I’m still on the phase where the comments are only destructive.    
>
> 4) Merit principle
> Your bridge between GeoForAll and the merit principle is not clear for me.
>
> 5) source code
> I’m not a programmer and my invention is not a software, so please don’t confuse the community.
> I don’t understand why you comb through my general license model and only pick the expression “source code”. My license model is very simple: case-by-case. It is possible to hide and seek Easter eggs just with some lines on sand.  
>
> What is what you want? A source code for names? A source code for pictograms? A source code for education methods? A source code for imaginary clocks? A source for the r100 radius www.volksnav.de/r100 ? A source code for Easter eggs? The source code of the apps? Why? I had to pay a lot for them.    
>
> 6) quasiOpen
>
> Each solution changes the problem. Mobile phones solved a problem, now we fight against providers and   batteries.
> If the community would wake up and discover that the “where” problem really exists but a solution with an open standard would destroy the standard, so the WIN-WIN-WIN way out is simply to find another name for “open”. My suggestion is: quasiOpen.  
>
> Would it be terrible for you if for example the Tokyo Metro would prefer to pay for a whole concept www.volksnav.de/TokyoMetro in favor of those who can’t read Japanese (you?) than to adopt the actual open solutions? See example Limux.
>
> The quasiOpen concept would accept symbolic fees to protect the standard AND to comply with the proven merit principle. Depending on the benefits, the fee can be from zero to …      
>
> Let’s start with your university?
>
> Henrique
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GeoForAll mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall

--
Christian Willmes
AG GIS & Fernerkundung      | GIS & RS Group
Geographisches Institut     | Institute of Geography
Universität zu Köln         | University of Cologne
Tel.: +49 (0)221 470 6234
http://www.geographie.uni-koeln.de/14126.html
http://www.sfb806.de
http://crc806db.uni-koeln.de
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5566-6542

_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Sergio Acosta y Lara
+1

Sergio Acosta y Lara
Departamento de Geomática
Dirección Nacional de Topografía
Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Públicas
URUGUAY
(598)29157933 ints. 20329/20330
http://geoportal.mtop.gub.uy/

________________________________________
De: GeoForAll <[hidden email]> en nombre de Christian Willmes <[hidden email]>
Enviado: jueves, 30 de noviembre de 2017 6:46
Para: Munich Orientation Convention; [hidden email]
Asunto: Re: [Geo4All] [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Sehr gheehrter Herr Köhler,

da sie offensichtlich ein beachtliches Verständnisproblem zum Sinn und
Zweck von OSGeo und Geo4All haben, versuche ich es ihnen mal auf deutsch
zu erklären. Aufgrund der Namensgebung ihres Produktes und ihrer
deutschen Domain, nehme ich an, dass Sie diese Sprache möglicherweise
besser verstehen?

Jedenfalls ist OSGeo eine Organisation, die sich der Förderung von Open
Source Geospatial Software verpflichtet hat. Eine Grundbedingung um
etwas als "Open-Source" zu bezeichnen ist eine offene Lizenz.

Da ihr Produkt diese Grundbedingung offensichtlich nicht erfüllt
erübrigt sich jede weitere Diskussion.

Des Weiteren sind ihre ad hominem Übergriffe gegen Mitglieder der OSGeo
und Geo4All Community nicht nur sehr unhöflich, Sie disqualifizieren
sich dadurch für jeden weitern Dialog und ich würde sogar so weit gehen,
dass sie sich hier lächerlich machen und niemand Sie und ihr Anliegen
erst nehmen möchte.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Christian Willmes


Am 29.11.2017 um 15:07 schrieb Munich Orientation Convention:

> Excellent, Berend!
> Now we made at least a quantum jump from zeroDialog to a quasiDialog where you decide which questions you answer.
>
> I didn’t affirm that you’re a board member, I affirm that you’re using their uncomplete principles to block discussions about benefits. Imagine the board would expulse you from the paradise because you charge – symbolic? - fees for your books and promote w3w for a problem which simple doesn’t exist: lat/lon and “here” satisfy all their needs.
>
> For a better communication, please let me enumerate the arising questions (or should I use words?).
>
> 1) Where is the cow?
> I suppose, the community is still waiting for your recommendation for cowboys. Or all they died on the Marlboro disease ? Or does your silence prove that your university still didn’t discover the market gap? Love and Openmania can make blind.
>
> 2) w3w
>
> 2a)
> I suppose, the community still would like to know  WHY do you promote w3w.
> What does fascinate you?
> If the “where ?” problem exists, why not OpenLocationCode, NAC, Xaddress, mapcode, smart location codes etc.?
>
> 2b)
> If w3w is not silly: who should profit from your named address approved.steered.classed?
> Does it belong to Enschede, to your building, to your room or to your chair? How can we recognize this?
>
> 2c)
> If w3w isn’t silly: what’s the distance and direction from your position to coffee.meeting.unclassed?
>
> 2d)
> if w3w is not silly: does it have benefic influences on cartography? On signage? On geocaching/navigation devices? What's the benefit at all?
>
> Besides: I’m in contact with the owner of w3w. He has been playing music everywhere in the world and did like me suffer under the where-problem. He’s the one – not me - who was very angry about the academic arrogance, so he decided to let convert lat/lon to a less academic expression. Who knows, maybe one day he’ll promote what3values: hours, minutes and radius for cowboys etc.
>
> 3) Paul Ramsey
> I never got a chance like Paul got and I don’t have his elegance. I’m still on the phase where the comments are only destructive.
>
> 4) Merit principle
> Your bridge between GeoForAll and the merit principle is not clear for me.
>
> 5) source code
> I’m not a programmer and my invention is not a software, so please don’t confuse the community.
> I don’t understand why you comb through my general license model and only pick the expression “source code”. My license model is very simple: case-by-case. It is possible to hide and seek Easter eggs just with some lines on sand.
>
> What is what you want? A source code for names? A source code for pictograms? A source code for education methods? A source code for imaginary clocks? A source for the r100 radius www.volksnav.de/r100 ? A source code for Easter eggs? The source code of the apps? Why? I had to pay a lot for them.
>
> 6) quasiOpen
>
> Each solution changes the problem. Mobile phones solved a problem, now we fight against providers and   batteries.
> If the community would wake up and discover that the “where” problem really exists but a solution with an open standard would destroy the standard, so the WIN-WIN-WIN way out is simply to find another name for “open”. My suggestion is: quasiOpen.
>
> Would it be terrible for you if for example the Tokyo Metro would prefer to pay for a whole concept www.volksnav.de/TokyoMetro in favor of those who can’t read Japanese (you?) than to adopt the actual open solutions? See example Limux.
>
> The quasiOpen concept would accept symbolic fees to protect the standard AND to comply with the proven merit principle. Depending on the benefits, the fee can be from zero to …
>
> Let’s start with your university?
>
> Henrique
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GeoForAll mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall

--
Christian Willmes
AG GIS & Fernerkundung      | GIS & RS Group
Geographisches Institut     | Institute of Geography
Universität zu Köln         | University of Cologne
Tel.: +49 (0)221 470 6234
http://www.geographie.uni-koeln.de/14126.html
http://www.sfb806.de
http://crc806db.uni-koeln.de
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5566-6542

_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Henrique Koehler
In reply to this post by Christian Willmes
Hallo Christian,

Du gibst nicht auf, das gefällt mir.

Sei bitte versichert, ich habe Anhänger die mich bitten mich weiter für sie
einzusetzen. Die Kommentare zum aktuellen open-but-not-open-minded Stand
sind nicht nur von mir, sondern auch von Menschen die kreativ sind, keinen
guten Job haben und sich noch nicht trauen sich im Forum zu outen.

Im ersten Quartal 2018 werden mehrere schlaue Projekte die Fachwelt
verblüffen, z. B. was Evakuierungen betrifft www.volksnav.de/RZR17 . Mein
Lieblingsprojekt Cuba musste wegen Unwetter verschoben werden, aber
spätestens die Geomatica 2018 wird zeigen dass die Erde keine Scheibe ist.

Noch ist es nicht zu spät für ein gemeinsame Einführung von quasiOpen in
Havana, so dass ich jederzeit open  bin für sachliche Auseinandersetzungen.
Auch über ein Projekt in Köln würde ich mich freuen.

Erfinderfreundliche Grüsse,

Henrique  

Sehr gheehrter Herr Köhler,

da sie offensichtlich ein beachtliches Verständnisproblem zum Sinn und
Zweck von OSGeo und Geo4All haben, versuche ich es ihnen mal auf deutsch
zu erklären. Aufgrund der Namensgebung ihres Produktes und ihrer
deutschen Domain, nehme ich an, dass Sie diese Sprache möglicherweise
besser verstehen?

Jedenfalls ist OSGeo eine Organisation, die sich der Förderung von Open
Source Geospatial Software verpflichtet hat. Eine Grundbedingung um
etwas als "Open-Source" zu bezeichnen ist eine offene Lizenz.

Da ihr Produkt diese Grundbedingung offensichtlich nicht erfüllt
erübrigt sich jede weitere Diskussion.

Des Weiteren sind ihre ad hominem Übergriffe gegen Mitglieder der OSGeo
und Geo4All Community nicht nur sehr unhöflich, Sie disqualifizieren
sich dadurch für jeden weitern Dialog und ich würde sogar so weit gehen,
dass sie sich hier lächerlich machen und niemand Sie und ihr Anliegen
erst nehmen möchte.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Christian Willmes


Am 29.11.2017 um 15:07 schrieb Munich Orientation Convention:

> Excellent, Berend!
> Now we made at least a quantum jump from zeroDialog to a quasiDialog where you decide which questions you answer.
>
> I didn’t affirm that you’re a board member, I affirm that you’re using their uncomplete principles to block discussions about benefits. Imagine the board would expulse you from the paradise because you charge – symbolic? - fees for your books and promote w3w for a problem which simple doesn’t exist: lat/lon and “here” satisfy all their needs.
>
> For a better communication, please let me enumerate the arising questions (or should I use words?).
>
> 1) Where is the cow?
> I suppose, the community is still waiting for your recommendation for cowboys. Or all they died on the Marlboro disease ? Or does your silence prove that your university still didn’t discover the market gap? Love and Openmania can make blind.
>
> 2) w3w
>
> 2a)
> I suppose, the community still would like to know  WHY do you promote w3w.
> What does fascinate you?
> If the “where ?” problem exists, why not OpenLocationCode, NAC, Xaddress, mapcode, smart location codes etc.?
>
> 2b)
> If w3w is not silly: who should profit from your named address approved.steered.classed?
> Does it belong to Enschede, to your building, to your room or to your chair? How can we recognize this?  
>
> 2c)
> If w3w isn’t silly: what’s the distance and direction from your position to coffee.meeting.unclassed?
>
> 2d)
> if w3w is not silly: does it have benefic influences on cartography? On signage? On geocaching/navigation devices? What's the benefit at all?
>
> Besides: I’m in contact with the owner of w3w. He has been playing music everywhere in the world and did like me suffer under the where-problem. He’s the one – not me - who was very angry about the academic arrogance, so he decided to let convert lat/lon to a less academic expression. Who knows, maybe one day he’ll promote what3values: hours, minutes and radius for cowboys etc.
>
> 3) Paul Ramsey
> I never got a chance like Paul got and I don’t have his elegance. I’m still on the phase where the comments are only destructive.    
>
> 4) Merit principle
> Your bridge between GeoForAll and the merit principle is not clear for me.
>
> 5) source code
> I’m not a programmer and my invention is not a software, so please don’t confuse the community.
> I don’t understand why you comb through my general license model and only pick the expression “source code”. My license model is very simple: case-by-case. It is possible to hide and seek Easter eggs just with some lines on sand.  
>
> What is what you want? A source code for names? A source code for pictograms? A source code for education methods? A source code for imaginary clocks? A source for the r100 radius www.volksnav.de/r100 ? A source code for Easter eggs? The source code of the apps? Why? I had to pay a lot for them.    
>
> 6) quasiOpen
>
> Each solution changes the problem. Mobile phones solved a problem, now we fight against providers and   batteries.
> If the community would wake up and discover that the “where” problem really exists but a solution with an open standard would destroy the standard, so the WIN-WIN-WIN way out is simply to find another name for “open”. My suggestion is: quasiOpen.  
>
> Would it be terrible for you if for example the Tokyo Metro would prefer to pay for a whole concept www.volksnav.de/TokyoMetro in favor of those who can’t read Japanese (you?) than to adopt the actual open solutions? See example Limux.
>
> The quasiOpen concept would accept symbolic fees to protect the standard AND to comply with the proven merit principle. Depending on the benefits, the fee can be from zero to …      
>
> Let’s start with your university?
>
> Henrique
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GeoForAll mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
--
Christian Willmes
AG GIS & Fernerkundung      | GIS & RS Group
Geographisches Institut     | Institute of Geography
Universität zu Köln         | University of Cologne
Tel.: +49 (0)221 470 6234
http://www.geographie.uni-koeln.de/14126.html
http://www.sfb806.de
http://crc806db.uni-koeln.de
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5566-6542


_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

Christian Willmes
Henrique,

ehrlich gesagt weiß ich nicht was du mit "nicht aufgeben" meinst. Mit
Verlaub, deine unsachlichen Mails nerven mich einfach und ich wollte dir
das mal Verdeutlichen, dass es möglicherweise vielen in diesem Forum so
wie mir geht.

Es ist ja alles gut und schön, was du für Ideen hast und was du so
entwickelst. Ich denke kaum jemand hier hat irgendein Problem mit deinem
Projekt.

Es ist nur so, dass dein Projekt halt nicht Open-Source ist. Da kannst
du noch so viel Schreiben und Beschuldigen, solange du die Lizenz nicht
öffnest, findest du hier keinen fruchtbaren Boden für dein Anliegen.

Beste Grüße,
Christian


Am 01.12.2017 um 10:11 schrieb Munich Orientation Convention:

> Hallo Christian,
>
> Du gibst nicht auf, das gefällt mir.
>
> Sei bitte versichert, ich habe Anhänger die mich bitten mich weiter für sie
> einzusetzen. Die Kommentare zum aktuellen open-but-not-open-minded Stand
> sind nicht nur von mir, sondern auch von Menschen die kreativ sind, keinen
> guten Job haben und sich noch nicht trauen sich im Forum zu outen.
>
> Im ersten Quartal 2018 werden mehrere schlaue Projekte die Fachwelt
> verblüffen, z. B. was Evakuierungen betrifft www.volksnav.de/RZR17 . Mein
> Lieblingsprojekt Cuba musste wegen Unwetter verschoben werden, aber
> spätestens die Geomatica 2018 wird zeigen dass die Erde keine Scheibe ist.
>
> Noch ist es nicht zu spät für ein gemeinsame Einführung von quasiOpen in
> Havana, so dass ich jederzeit open  bin für sachliche Auseinandersetzungen.
> Auch über ein Projekt in Köln würde ich mich freuen.
>
> Erfinderfreundliche Grüsse,
>
> Henrique  

--
Christian Willmes
AG GIS & Fernerkundung      | GIS & RS Group
Geographisches Institut     | Institute of Geography
Universität zu Köln         | University of Cologne
Tel.: +49 (0)221 470 6234
http://www.geographie.uni-koeln.de/14126.html
http://www.sfb806.de
http://crc806db.uni-koeln.de
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5566-6542


_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall