Very good essay on why we shouldn't look down on the Luddite. They had plenty of their questioning right and it's actually pervasive now. We use the term as libel only because back then they lost...

Finally out of Google Docs it seems. Better version for sharing around. Still an interesting list of case studies and opinions around SAFe. I learned a few things, I didn't realize it's creation was so disconnected from the pre-existing agile community. It all seems to confirm my opinion that it's better to stay away from it though. The few organizations I know of which use it are clearly very much in a command and control mode. This is going backwards.

This feels odd to be hosted on a Google Doc, but this is an interesting list of case studies and opinions around SAFe. I learned a few things, I didn't realize it's creation was so disconnected from the pre-existing agile community. It all seems to confirm my opinion that it's better to stay away from it though. The few organizations I know of which use it are clearly very much in a command and control mode. This is going backwards.

Interesting research explained. Apparently it's more than time to put the catharsis hypothesis to rest.

Very interesting FOSDEM talk which I see as part of the debate about "Open Source as just licenses"/"Post Open Source". This shows very well how the OSD is very narrow and that their should be a better alignment between what is labelled FOSS and the actual customs. This is something which licenses alone can't capture.

EN: This is a bit of a less rigorous counterpoint of the paper from Nathan Schneider "the tyranny of openness". I think it's interesting to see that despite a few strawmen it reaches a somewhat similar conclusion: it's not just about licenses, it's also about customs".

FR: Un contrepoint moins rigoureux au papier de Nathan Schneider "the tyranny of openness". Je trouve intéressant de voir que malgré quelques "hommes de paille" il arrive à une conclusion un peu similaire: ce n'est pas simplement a propos des licences, c'est aussi à propos des mœurs.

This is a great paper. Truly mind bending in my opinion. In my case it helped me pinpoint things in the FOSS movement which I felt were there while being unable to clearly explain them. This is a clear enabler and explains why we need to move beyond the "licensing and only licensing" position the FOSS movement is in, it's the only chance to finally encompass ethics and economics which are both very much needed. It's the only chance to converge toward proper commons without the faked meritocracy distortion.

I could go on much longer... but it's not the point here. Go read it!

And if you're still wondering "why not more women in the FOSS movement?" or "why are women mostly in community stewardship roles?", well there are answers for that too.

I'll close with two quotes which I found really important in that paper:

"Ehmke stresses that information ethics and social ethics need not be mutually exclusive but that they should coexist. She frequently celebrates what Open Source has achieved through information freedoms and hopes for more through the addition of social ethics. [...] Yet this evolution means being open in new ways and more closed in others."

""The frame of social provisioning reveals how the unrest in Open Source emerges from a cluster of basic concerns that peer production communities have taught themselves to treat as invisible or inadmissible. It remains to be seen whether Open Source can stretch to incorporate more of its participants’ humanity."

Interesting take on why the Open Source movement is a zombie movement and why Free Software failed at the political level. This explains why we see a rise in the "Post-Open Source" term. This leads to potential ways out. It's a bit too much on the heavy marxist reading to my taste but otherwise it contains good criticism