Open source hardware, open source DNA, open source cars and now open source as the fix for global warming? How much can open source really do? Are we confusing open standards with open source?
In the last week or two I have read and blogged on some novel new uses for open source in some very non-traditional areas. Open source hardware, open source automobiles, even open source DNA fragments.( Reflecting on it, open source DNA seems closer to traditional open source code than some of the others.) Now topping them all is a call for open source to combat climate change!
“In order to transform our world fast enough to avert catastrophic climate disruption, we must use open standards and open source models because they alone will enable the rapid innovation required, and they alone will drive the broad and rapid adoption of these innovations. There are four critical domains where we need these open approaches:”
Some readers have objected to labeling these ideas as open source. I have responded that it is really open source methods that are being referred to in these new style open source projects. But to me the idea of using open source to speed up evolution in fighting global warming stretches it beyond the breaking point.
I think Mr Burkhardt, CEO of Ingress in the linked article, starts off with faulty facts, so is it any wonder he ends up in the wrong place. According to Burkhardt it was open source which has spurred the rapid evolution of the Internet. Bill Gates is probably spinning at his foundation’s desk right now. I don’t think open source is what has made the Internet what it is. It has played a part with some great open source projects and tools. But it is not what is responsible for the Internet anymore than Al Gore is.
What I think is getting mixed up here is open standards versus open source. Open standards that allow devices to communicate are great. Open standards that allow different manufacturers to build product that work together, use a common energy source or common parts are a huge help. That does not make them open source though!
Let’s think about some examples. In the case of computer hardware, all x86 computers can run a common instruction set. Windows will run on all of them. Does that mean it is open source? Tell that to Intel. You can plug a phone into a jack and talk. Does that mean that phone design is open source? No. You can have a cell phone and it will work on your carrier’s network. Oh forget it, that will never work, open source or not our cell phone system is just too messed up. But you get my point. Just because the standards are open, does not make it open source. If I could take that Panasonic or AT&T phone and get the blueprints to build it and was free to do so as long as I said it was based on the original design and I contributed that design back to the community. Now that is open source.
So while I like to turn a good marketing phrase as much as the next guy, lets draw the line on using open source. Use open standards, people will understand what you mean. But if you say open source, you better be including some design, code and open licensing with that!
