Open Source Unleashed

Broadening Trust Horizons in the Information Age

A recent trip through the blogosphere has brought me to the conclusion that, in today's information age there is a call to begin to shed the [hard-earned] burdens of assumed credibility in order to begin to accept the fact that useful, factual and powerful information can come from a number of sources, not just those that are stamped and sealed for delivery to mass audiences. Of course, coming from an obvious 'little guy' at a relatively obscure technology industry analyst firm (Entiva) this sounds biased. However, the intended point is that there are an increasing number of tools and technologies available which are providing a platform for more and more voices that have quite a bit of merit. Just as the Internet has sped the growth of the global open source software community which has given birth to products and services that are changing the game within the software industry.

In a similar fashion to what is taking place currently, where technology users and buyers are beginning to fully adjust to the relatively new paradigm of open source, information purveyors must also do the same with this new crop of voices that are being broadcast across the world. For example, it would have been deemed pure lunacy to think about Red Hat as an $800 million plus company 5 years ago, or to think that JBoss would fetch the price tag that it eventually did, back when the project was in its early stages. Such is the nature of the evolution of ecosystems, you'll never know how much they're really worth [monetarily] until everything is said and done.

Likewise with the emergence of this new age of independent, self-censored information sources the time is ripe to begin to accept that value is going to start exploding from all corners of the web/world. As I like to think 'Somewhere, someone is highly qualified in the subject area about which I am thinking/writing/researching right now...And they're probably blogging about it.' With this intensely open environment will come the responsibility to recognize how outdated it has become to only take advantage of traditional channels of information exchange. It is no longer intelligent to depend solely on 'brand names,' because some of the best content is going to come from the edge.

The Web vanguard (Google, Yahoo!, etc.) realize this and seem to be dead set on acquiring and integrating technologies that enable them to extend their reach to the very fringes of the Internet and back. It's not just a game of who can index the web the best/fastest, but has become one of who can establish the most attractive platform on top of which others want to build. In the same way, individuals have to re-focus their perspective and begin to find ways to broaden their trust horizons in order to fully leverage this paradigm shift. How well a person can gauge the value of any given entity without relying too heavily on perceived qualifications is going to determine how much he/she takes from what's out there and uses it.

Technorati Tags: JBoss |  open source | Red Hat |  Google | Yahoo | Web of Trust |

 

Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes!!

On Thursday of last week I changed the description of my blog from 'All Bets Off' to 'Open Source Unleased' and despite the fact that the name of the folder in which the blog is available is the same (all_bets_off) I began receiving noticeably less trackbacks from random gambling sites, mens enlargement pill ads, and online casino sites. It never dawned on me before that the reason I was getting those in the first place was that the title and description of the blog was causing it to show up quite a bit on the search engines that are used to locate the sites that would be a good match to bombard with trackback laced advertisements. I don't know how long it would have taken me to put two and two together and figure out that out on my own.  It's amazing what a small change can do for you and your perspective...

What's in a name?

I decided to change the name of this blog from "All Bets Off" to "Open Source Unleashed." The latter is a bit more fitting for the subject matter within the blog...we'll see how it works out. Plus the new name is synchronized with the name of my other blog (same posts) over at ITToolbox.

Seneca Progress: Week IV

The end of this week will be the fourth week of detailing progress for Seneca here on my blog. I must admit that I have been indeed humbled by the experience of attempting to apply the open source development model to research and analysis. It has been a truly challenging and interesting experiment (not that it is by any means over). I did not start doing this with any expectations nor time windows for when I thought event A or event B should happen. So in terms of my progress I am simply satisfied to have accomplished the little bit that I have so far.

I have been surprised at how long it has taken me to get members to join the project. I figured I would be able to at least attract somewhere in the low teens by one month in, but I guess I was off the mark. Most of the responses have been along the lines of "great idea...tell me how it turns out." Which is cool, but not exactly what I wanted to hear. As I'm finding out its one thing to release a paper under an open license and its another to corral folks together and get them to contribute to writing a paper collectively.

However, my struggles and have got me thinking about a new avenue that I can explore using the experiences that I am absorbing during this process. Despite the fact that I haven't finished the project (I've barely started it), I am beginning to become convinced that organic, open team building is the wave of the future. It may sound too "grassroots" or "hippy" but I am becoming convinced that by making a concerted effort to create an open community based process from the onset of a project is the most natural way to maximize potential and available resources.

By this I mean, open processes have their application even for projects that are not shared outside the boundaries of an organization. It may sound premature to make such a statement, as the project is still in a launch stage, but I have noticed the effect of seeking to involve as many other knowledgeable individuals coupled with the freedom of knowing there isn't anything to hide because everything is going to be seen by anyone who wants to see it.

Right now I think it is important to continue to concentrate on how we can get the word out about the project so as to increase the number of people in general who know about it. I have signed up for an account at SourceForge.net so I can set up a place holder page there that forwards to the original java.net project. I may even consider duplicating the project contents at the SourceForge.net site just so I can have two point of references. I think what might be hurting the project is lack of general appeal. I mean there are quite a few individuals who understand Service Oriented Architectures, but only a small percentage actually are willing and/or interested in contributing to an open paper for the sake of doing so.

Plus, this is a relatively new concept so I am thinking that there are even fewer people who understand the benefits of exploring an idea like this. It takes persons who have a solid grasp of open source community development and the desire to volunteer. Although I never predicted/wanted any fame or fortune from doing this, I did intend that more people would just sign up out of curiosity and start banging away. Oh well, I still think there is potential for a good sized community to grow around Seneca and I'm going to continue to do my part to bring that potentiality into reality...

Seneca Progress: Week III

Progress has slowed a bit with Seneca due to the pull of my other duties at Entiva. I plan to dedicate more time over the course of the coming week as we have been unable to garner any active participation from outside of our company walls. This is to be expected as the project is barely three weeks old, plus it is quite unconventional even if it isn't a totally novel idea. The subject line for the paper also isn't the most common either. While SOA's are hot JXTA has yet to get front page coverage and at the moment is still viewed as a under the radar P2P framework. However, these facts of life were some of the main motivations for choosing to create and sponsor this project.

We wanted to do something that wasn't being done [research and analysis using open source methods] on a topic [JXTA within SOA's]. We felt that if we wrote and released another paper under the Creative Commons we would be doing very little to distinguish ourselves. What I envision for the Open Analyst View program specifically and for Entiva Group as a company is strident innovation. One of the reasons I try to post on this blog for all 2.72 readers per day :-) about the subjects I do is that I want to bring something different to the table. I see Seneca pushing the envelop and expanding the definition of not only open source projects but also research & analysis.

In the process I expect that there will be quite a few naysayers but I also expect that the experiment will benefit not only Entiva Group but the entire open source community. At the current moment Seneca is at the point where I am the only contributor however, and as much as I would desperately like to magically create a thriving pool of contributors I realize only time and diligence will enable that to happen. So basically we are at the point where we are reaching out to anyone who might be remotely interested in joining and contributing. Most of these invitations go ignored but some are soliciting responses.

Hopefully by continually adding to the paper and improving the project vision more and more will feel encouraged to jump right in and dig away. Where the more the merrier...

Seneca Progress: Week II

Seneca was highlighted on Java.net today (02/27/2006) as one of the community projects. I'm assuming that the community spotlight changes everyday so if you read this entry and its not on the front page...its probably been replaced. Anyway, I think this is a good step forward for the project in the sense that it gives us some more exposure. Seeing how Seneca is a project whose success will be gaged by how many different individuals were able to come together and contribute to the creation of the paper, the more people we can reach the better.

So far the most difficult aspect of this project has been the challenge of getting the word out about it. In an open source landscape that is slowly becoming chock full of projects, people have begun to filter out some of the noise surround it. So as a new project hosted on the Java  specific Java.net I have experienced quite a few barriers on my way to drumming interest up.

One way or the other we plan to continue to work on the project with more updates to the rough draft and other project documents. While I in no way expected an overnight sensation, I do realize that the more people outside of Entiva who are contributing and taking an active interest in the direction of the project, the better. It will be quite the challenge spreading the word about an open source project that doesn't involve writing code but I think the idea has enough merits to make it an acceptable option.

When we decided to offer our Open Analyst View program we did so out of genuine belief in the strength of open models. It would be very hard to convince me that by integrating an open approach to a whole host of activities that equivalent and even better results than those achieved using a closed model. To me the benefits of a fully closed model do not fully justify its place as the defacto model for a great many activities. As a matter of fact I think that the dynamics of closed models are actually harmful to an extent.

I am convinced that the collective mind of many capable individuals can beat a limited number of "experts". With the line between "expert" and "layman" blurring with the explosion of availability of information over the world wide web, it is more than plausible to say that a group of relatively qualified individuals can produce quality on the level of those who have traditional experience/credentials. Open source software has proven this true beyond a shadow of a doubt. It has also proven that the participants in community oriented projects are oftentimes the very professionals who are paid to work for organizations who don't employ open approaches to their work.

What this means for Seneca is that there is a chance to attract individuals who are just as/more qualified than those outside of the community. It also means that the quality of output from our efforts will be up to standard. I also think it will be easier to find individuals who are capable of contributing to the core aspects of the project, due to the fact that there are far more people who are qualified to work with research and written analytical works than there are those who can program a language, like Java.

This does not imply that it will be as simple as casting our net and waiting.  However, it does mean that the potential pool of participants is already significantly higher than a typical open source software project. Another fact which favors Seneca's success is that we are doing something that very few others are doing: namely applying an open source development model to a non-software endeavor. Hopefully, Seneca can capitalize on the novelty of the project by using it to draw people to join and contribute.

In my previous experience monitoring, observing and analyzing open source software projects I have noticed that there is always a period where the project experiences very slow growth and participation. This period normally occurs while the initial code base is being created and committed for the public. I like to refer to the period affectionately as the "ramp up" stage. While it might be a natural trend for open source software projects to all go through this period of time, it might be crippling for Seneca if the only ones actively contributing if me and another analyst at Entiva.

Seneca will automatically thrive if it can attract a vibrant community full of people with ideas who are willing to contribute in some small way. Without that the paper might as well be authored by Entiva Group. Making one of the major tasks to be completed for the beginning of next week is to begin to reach out to more persons who are capable and interested in contributing, not only to the project, but to the vision where business processes can be totally transparent without sacrificing quality and execution.

Seneca Progress Log: Week I

I plan to publish details of my weekly experiences leading an open source research and analysis project, called Seneca, every Sunday. Here is the first installment of that series.

Background: Some weeks back I was nominated to coordinate Entiva Group's first project under our Open Analyst View program. My first duty was to come up with a name for the project (I finally settled on Seneca, as in the Native American tribe) and to begin to set up a project structure. These two tasks weren't terribly difficult although I did stumble with some crazy names. I was then charged with gathering a list of people who were willing to commit to contributing to the project. This is where the crap hit the fan...

Back in October of last year my colleagues and I began to brainstorm about ways in which we could intensify our presence within the open source community not only as an analyst firm but also as a company who really grasps the dynamics of open source technologies. We bounced quite a few ideas off the wall and each other before we decided that the idea of doing an analysis paper using the open source model was worth a try.

If you listen to people who tend to be the most aware and honest about the analyst business you'll hear a common theme about the need for more transparent analyst activities. As a company we have decided to explore the dynamics involved in the creation of a fully open and transparent research and analysis paper.  The motivation for putting Entiva Group resources behind a project of this nature is to garner valuable experiential knowledge of how our business model might benefit from the open source model.

Instead of simply releasing the product of our internal work as a free offering as we did with a paper on the value of Apache Geronimo as an SOA framework. I envisioned pooling the collective knowledge of the members of the open source software community and directing it towards, bringing together of a research & analysis paper.

Everyone who participated in that brainstorming session felt that Open Analyst View was the best way to go about exploring an alternate model of creating industry analysis (we're a pretty open-minded group at Entiva). We also felt as if it was the way to broaden our horizons in terms of how we looked at our own analyst operations. As analysts, as with any other knowledge based job that requires a lot of expression through words, it is so easy to get caught in an "ivory white tower" of your own making. By that I mean its so easy to think because you are in a position to voice your knowledge about a given subject that you are "an expert". This tends to warp your perspective and it effectively prevents you from picking up new things very quickly. I am hoping that by devoting time and effort towards this project, I will have a better view of the things Entiva Group is doing good and others that we need to improve upon.

Another intended benefit of Seneca is to give all of the analysts at Entiva Group a better look at the dynamics of community development. Even if we aren't developing software like the projects, companies, and individuals who we cover. The more knowledge about open community based development will result in a better understanding of open source software in general, rendering better analysis, services and insight for our clients.

Of course all things are practical in theory with time set as the prover of all things. So only time will tell the story of Seneca and its effect on Entiva and the open source community, in the meantime I'll keep adding to this progress log each week publishing it every Sunday.