Some Thoughts on 9/11

Today marks the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, DC (and not to forgot the one foiled attempt that ended in Pennsylvania). The world changed that day.

I didn’t lose any friends that Tuesday, even though several lived near the attacks. One was at the airport at LAX heading to a meeting at the World Trade Center later that afternoon. His plane, of course, never left. But, I am thankful, that is about as close as it got.

The 9/11 anniversary is always an important milestone in my life, coming a day after my anniversary with OpenNMS. I didn’t know it at the time, but OpenNMS would also change my world, but in a much better way.

The goal of those involved in the 9/11 attacks was to inspire terror. Terror is an extreme form of fear, and I believe they met their goal of increasing fear. The 9/11 attacks led directly to things such as Guantanamo Bay, The Patriot Act, airport scanners and the seizure of electronics from citizens at the border. Not to mention the somewhat justifiable invasion of Afghanistan and the totally inappropriate invasion of Iraq.

As I write this, they are reading the names of the dead in New York. My guess is that they won’t be reading the names of the 6207 service men and women who died in those military operations.

Fear is the direct result of feeling powerless. The people who died in the Towers and who died in the Pentagon could have done little to save themselves. It appears that those people on Flight 93 turned that fear into action, and probably prevented the deaths of hundreds more people at the expense of their own.

I wish I could say that the actions of my country’s government were as brave.

Many years ago, my two year old cousin and his mother came to spend the summer with us, as his father was on an extended deployment with the Navy. I had not spent much time around children, so it was pretty cool to try and figure out what was going on in his fresh little mind.

I can remember one incredibly nice day, we had the windows open and there was a nice breeze coming through the house. As my cousin walked by a door, an especially strong breeze slammed it shut. It startled him and he reacted by smacking his hand against the door, as if to punish it for scaring him.

I classify a lot of the policies put in place after 9/11 as similar, and about as effective.

On one hand, government officials hate to appear powerless. Since it is nearly impossible to prevent other, similar attacks with threats of incarceration or bodily harm, we engage in security theatre. If you are inconvenienced at the airport (take off your shoes, put your liquids in a baggie) you get the impression that something is being done, and it is hoped that you don’t question its effectiveness.

On the other hand, there is serious money to be made in the terrorism business. Those airport scanners aren’t cheap, and what’s even better is that they are only used about 50% of the time in my experience. Thus the manufacturer still gets paid and they don’t have to maintain anything. Anyone remember those machines that would blow air around you and sniff for the chemical signatures of explosives? Yup, they are mothballed now but someone made a chunk of change when they were the hot, new anti-terrorist thing.

So, how does one combat fear? Not through current government policies, which seem to scream “Be Afraid and Buy Shit”. I believe one combats fear by transferring as much power to the individual as possible. When one feels in control of their own destiny, they are much less likely to throw their life away in a terrorist attack.

Thus, after several meandering paragraphs, we come to my tie-in between combating terrorism and open source software.

Open source is the ultimate expression of personal power, at least within the realm of computer software. If that seems a little limited, you can read Marc Andreessen’s essay on “Why Software Is Eating the World” or just look to how social networks (based on open source) were key to this year’s Arab Spring. People who feel empowered are less afraid, and when fear is lessened (if not removed) amazing things can happen.

I’ve been to both Syria and the United Arab Emirates. In both cases I was afraid for my life. My hosts were determined to entertain me to death. True Arab hospitality can be a frightening thing.

The only saddening part of my trip was that I saw a tremendous number of extremely poor people. For example, in Syria I can remember seeing a hut made out of stacked, corrugated steel sheets sitting in a field made of rocks. Under the desert heat it must have been unbearable, but it should have provided some protection from the cold desert nights.

Prior to that, my idea of an extremely poor person came from the peasant scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Even though they were knee deep in mud, they had trees and a thatched roof shack – making them kings to the poor in the desert (or at least an autonomous collective).

To truly prevent terrorism, we have to remove the sense of hopelessness that drive people to be willing to kill themselves. It seems to me that it would be hard to throw one’s life away if it was made worth living. Perhaps we can use open source to help pave the way.

With the advent of utility computing, in order to get someone online and coding should only take a small laptop, a network connection and some education. The horsepower can live elsewhere, and perhaps we could even use solar cells to power the laptop (and solar power is plentiful in the desert). In a perfect world, idle youth would spend their time building things instead of seeing destruction as their only option. Imagine how far we would have gotten toward this if we took the billion dollars we spent on airport scanners or the trillion dollars we spent on an unnecessary war and spent it on laptops and training?

I’m probably being silly and idealistic, but open source software changed my life for the better, and I can’t help but think it could change the lives of others as well.

Then maybe I won’t shed so many tears at the reading of names.

Google and Motorola

I was happy this week to read about Google’s acquisition of Motorola’s mobile phone business. As a long time Apple fanboy who is now trying to move away from their products, I still desire their high quality. Since Google is the driving force behind the only serious competitor to iOS, by owning a handset manufacturer they will be in a better position to make hardware specially tailored to Android.

This doesn’t mean I’ll end up with a Google phone. I think HTC makes some nice gear as well, but my guess is that there will now be more choice.

I’ve come under some criticism for my #noapple decision. I’ve spent nearly ten years working in free software and that tends to cause people to develop a prejudice that I’m somehow anti-business or a communist. When I complain that Apple is making too much money, that their margins are undeserved, I’m told that this is just the way capitalism works.

Wrong.

Capitalism depends on the proper functioning of markets. Properly functioning markets demand easy entry and exit. When there is excess profit in a market, competitors move in, produce more goods which drive down the price until profit disappears. If profit should ever go negative, companies will leave the market, reducing the number of goods and causing prices to rise.

Unfortunately, there are a great many industries that don’t have easy entry and exit. Take aircraft manufacture. There is a reason that there are only two main producers of commercial aircraft in the world – it takes a tremendous amount of money just to get started, and once invested, it is hard to leave. The deregulated banking industry in the US has created a small number of “super” banks that are “too big to fail” which causes its own entry/exit issues (if you want to get your bile up, check out Dan Ariely’s article on compensation of bank officers versus market cap).

As much as we’d love to think of the computer software industry as being a free market, software patents and proprietary hardware block easy entry and exit. Take the iPad. Apple designs a nifty little device that generates a tons of consumer demand. This creates excess profit, which causes Samsung to create a competing product in the Galaxy tablet. In a normally functioning market, this should both inspire innovation and lower prices. Thus the end users benefit.

However, in a world of software patents, Apple blocks the sale of the Samsung product in the courts. Consumers get no options, prices don’t change, and you either get to spend too much money on the Apple product or go without. This is in the best interest of Apple preserving its margins, but monopolies are the antithesis liberal market economies.

The Google/Motorola deal was north of US$12B, so I think it is safe to say that the mobile handset market is pretty hard to enter and exit. In a world of giant companies, only a Google can take on an Apple at this level. I don’t expect either of them to act in my own best interest, but Google has shown time and time again a willingness to err on the side of openness, whereas Apple is now working hard to consolidate and close its entire production stack (iOS, A4/A6 ARM processors, and the possible move to Sharp for displays, etc.).

I run The OpenNMS Group as a for-profit company. We focus on open source software not out of any zealotry, but because it makes the most sense for our clients. I’m all for making money, but I want to compete fairly in the marketplace. Luckily, the internet and commodity hardware make it possible for us to compete with products from much bigger companies. I don’t ever want to see that go away. I think Google’s move will better position itself against Apple (from both a product and patent perspective) and that will benefit everyone.

Apple: I break with thee, I break with thee, I break with thee

Apple my love, we’ve been together many years. You’ve brought a little magic back into my life and made me fall in love with design again, but with your new Lion dress on, I don’t recognize you any more. You are not the company I fell in love with.

It wasn’t love at first sight. When we were both young I was across the hall with my TRS-80 and you were over there with the Apple ][e. You had color, and a lid that just popped off so you could see the magic inside, while I was in drab black and white, with tamper evident screws to keep anyone from opening me without voiding the warranty.

But then we both grew older. In college I saw you again, this time as a Macintosh. What an amazing little machine, and I could put System 6, MacWrite, MacPaint and MacDraw on one 800K floppy disk with a little room left over for files. And that was good – because I couldn’t afford to buy you and needed to borrow you in the computer lab (although by this time, strangely, the PCs I did buy had color).

We parted ways for many years, but then at my local Linux Users Group you showed up again as a Powerbook. And you were running something called OS X. It was the Mac interface crossed with Unix, and what a lovely combination that made.

My business was doing well, so a bought a 12-inch Powerbook the day it was announced. I never looked back. OS X Jaguar was perfect – a great UI and UNIX under the covers. A wonderful marriage of proprietary and free. Through the fink project I could still play with all my old Linux friends but on a sweet piece of hardware. The upgrade to Panther was the easiest O/S upgrade I ever did.

Then you started to change. You brought out the iPod, which was amazing, but then your shifted your gaze away from computers and into mainstream consumer electronics and all the hype and fashion that entailed. Then came the iPhone – a revolution to be sure – but gone were the days when freedom and fashion could play together.

I stuck with you because you made things easy, but at what price? I found myself getting tied tighter and tighter to your world. I couldn’t replace the battery on my iPhone without a lot of hassle, but then you even made that more difficult by adding pentalobe screws. You had to double check and second guess everything. If I wanted to play outside of your sandbox I had to jailbreak my phone and potentially void my warranty. But I overlooked that since a phone is not a computer. I consume information on my phone – I create on my computer.

But you got too greedy. You moved the App Store onto OS X to position yourself to get a cut of every software sale for the platform. You want all music, movies, book and software to come through you, and only you, and you are even suing people for using the term “app store”. What, $76 billion isn’t enough? We all can see the writing on the wall. The lion is the king of the jungle – the top, the chief, the end. The next OS release for the Mac is going to look a whole lot more like iOS than OS X, because then your hegemony will be complete.

Don’t deny it – you’re even locking down the hardware by making it that much harder to do simple things like replace a disk drive. You are so focused on controlling the user experience that you’re stifling play, smothering wonder. Instead of a lust for learning you are replacing it with a lust for consuming. You use to be the outsider, the underdog, now people buy you just because you are cool and fashionable. They think that they can buy happiness, which is the worst part of consumerism.

Hey look – I know you have stockholders to please and if I was driven solely by money I’d be doing the same things you are. But that’s not the Apple I fell in love with. This isn’t the Apple that used to encourage people to look inside the box. You’re more beautiful than ever, but oh so cold.

I feel that if I don’t leave you now, I never will be able to – it’s hard enough already. I’ve grown used to things just working, and working well together, but if the price for that is my creative soul then it’s too high. Plus you have given those in free software a lofty target for which to aim, and several are coming close.

I don’t need you to share my memories. I don’t need you to read a good book. I don’t need you to enjoy a beautiful day outside. You forget that it’s our interactions with people that make memories, not our interactions with things. And you have forgotten that when you let people work together to make things, that’s where real magic happens.

So go play with the cool kids. I’m going in a different direction. I’ll always love you, but more for what you were than what you have become.

Oh, and here’s some dog poop for your shoes.

Groundwork Survey: "Possible Community Edition Revision"

Okay, I know beating a dead horse isn’t going to make it run any faster, but only 19 months after releasing their last “community edition” it looks like the company known as Groundwork Open Source is, at least considering, maybe, possibly, offering another community edition revision. On the table are considerations that it might not be free and it might not be open source (at least in how I read the survey questions) but I doubt they’ll let anything get in the way of “release early, release often”.

Oh, wait …

noemail

So, I am really digging the Google+ thing, but I am worried that it is going to become the time suck monster that Facebook became, and unfortunately, in just days of joining the service it seems I’ve offended my first person.

I live in North Carolina, and one of the people I’ve had the opportunity to interact with is Paul Jones. It’s a little late and I’m tired, so I’ll spare you his list of accomplishments, but let’s just say I’m a fan.

When I saw that he was on G+ (all us cool kids call it “G+” yo), I added him to my circles.

I’m a groovy, hip cat, Daddio.

Now many weeks ago he started an experiment to go entirely without e-mail. Note that he is a technologist and not some guy living off the grid in the hills, so this was a big deal. I wanted to contact him to ask about it, but my default form of contact is e-mail, so that wouldn’t work out so well. I thought about calling him, but I hate phone calls since they are so interrupt driven. Then I thought I could call him up and ask him out to lunch, but my schedule won’t allow it.

Anyway, I never had the chance to talk to him about it until today when I saw him post about it on G+. He was interviewed on a local television station and they posted a 45 second spot on his project. He commented “Kinda covers it” and so I watched it.

I didn’t think it covered it at all. Maybe a nice introduction, but it basically went on for 30 seconds about the fact that people get too much e-mail, and then it had 15 seconds of Paul saying he wasn’t going to use it anymore.

(Note: in looking for links for this post I was reminded of Paul’s opensource.com article and Q&A. I also found a post from Stormy Peters, another person in my circles, from 2004 on the subject.)

Anyway, with his G+ post, here was my chance to ask him about it. Yay! I wrote a several paragraph reply on how I couldn’t see replacing the workflow I’ve built with e-mail with any social technology, and I ended it with “I think any tool, including social media, can be useful. But I wouldn’t be so fast to dismiss e-mail simply because a lot of people don’t know how to use it.”

Note that all the other comments were Twitter-sized attaboys, which while nice to get for the writer, don’t necessarily move the debate forward. But I guess I should have known better than to try to have a thoughtful discussion via the Internet. Paul was obviously miffed, and his reply included the comment “Chill pill time?” which I’m not sure was warranted.

As I have said in the past, I am a huge fan of e-mail. But I spend a lot of time optimizing it. Lately I’ve been able to keep my inbox below 30 most of the time, but that is through a combination of bogofilter and heavy use of procmail rules. Plus I’m a big fan of Bill Jensen’s CLEAR methodology.

I just can’t see any other way that I can provide a better service to my customers using current resources than through e-mail. We support customers around the world in 24 countries (with people in 5 countries), and running their questions through an e-mail based ticketing system is the most cost effective solution. Yeah, I’d love to be like Rackspace and have the ability to answer every phone call within 3 rings, but to do that I’d need to at least double my prices. And we won’t hesitate to pick up the phone when conditions warrant.

In addition to e-mail we use XMPP for instant messaging, and Skype for company meetings like the daily scrum call. So we do use technologies to augment e-mail, but none are set to replace it.

My number one concern is the welfare of my clients. Even above my love of open source my clients come first. If there is a better way to help them I want to know about it.

I haven’t learned anything from noemail that is helpful. Paul did write “My point is that email is unnecessarily at the center of our current communications” to which I can’t disagree, but it’s a little light when it comes to options. He started off his reply with “Almost too much to address here” which is even more frustrating, since if I can’t discuss it on G+, where? Twitter?

I know a number of programmers who severely limit their e-mail use, which I think is cool. In my daily job, however, which can revolve around support, dealing with quotes and invoices, scanning and mailing documents to places like Egypt, e-mail is great and indispensable. Plus it beats the heck out of snail mail.

So, I reach out to you, my three readers, and ask for your opinions on noemail. Is e-mail the new snail mail, as the news program suggests, or is it just that people don’t know how to use it well? How does e-mail play in your daily lives?

And feel free to use more than 140 characters.

UPDATE: Okay, now the story starts to become clearer. Someone on the local WRAL television website posted a lot of rather asinine comments with the username “balog”. That ain’t me, but as I can say without tooting my own horn that I am probably the highest profile Balog in the tech sector around these parts, I can see why Paul would have a huge prejudice against anything I would say as he obviously thought we were one and the same.

Now I definitely owe him lunch and I’m pretty weirded out about this “balog” person.

Google+ – Once More Into the Fray

At the end of last year I closed my Facebook and Twitter accounts. There were a lot of reasons from this, but the two main ones were privacy and wasting time.

So I am not sure why I am so enamored of Google+. The circles feature is definitely cool as it makes it easier for me to group all of the different people with whom I interact (there are close friends, people I know from school, people I know from OpenNMS, etc.) It seems to combine the best of Twitter and Facebook, as people can opt to follow me without being “friends” and I can easily post things I want to be public versus those I want kept private. The only complaint I have is that it would be cool to be able to nest circles (an OpenNMS circle would fit inside an Open Source circle, for example). I know I can check multiple boxes, but conceptually I like the idea of “this appeals to open source people” etc.

Plus, warts and all, I think Google is a much better corporate citizen than Facebook. While I don’t expect them to look out for my privacy, for some reason I think they will be less likely to sell it out to the highest bidder. Google primarily just wants to serve me ads.

I think I can live with that.

New OpenNMS Book – in English!

As we start work on the English language OpenNMS book, which is turning into a rather large undertaking, imagine my surprise when I found out that one has already been written.

Yes! Amazingly, you can get an OpenNMS book for about US$0.50 a page containing content scraped from Wikipedia. While I’m not about to drop US$63 to see this for myself, I just wanted to warn everyone that the publishers of this “book” have absolutely no relationship with the OpenNMS Project and I, in no way, have endorsed it.

Betascript is a an imprint of VDM Publishing which is known for repackaging content from Wikipedia, and the latter reports that a Swiss newspaper “described VDM’s practices as controversial and bordering on deception”. This book will consist of the Wikipedia pages for OpenNMS, Network Monitoring, Network Management and FCAPS. Save yourself the money and just click and print them yourself.

At the moment, the only “real” OpenNMS book is in German. This English language book should be avoided. I am working with Amazon to see what our options are for getting it removed.

Anything You Want

My three readers know that I’m a fan of new and alternative ways of doing business, and of people and companies who change the status quo.

One person I follow is Derek Sivers, who founded the company CD Baby. By leveraging emerging technologies he helped change the way music is sold. Back in February of 2010 I blogged about both my experience with CD Baby and about a TED presentation Derek did that really reflected my experience with open source communities.

Well, he has a new book out called Anything You Want. I ordered mine this morning (I was one of the 100 people who got an autographed version). From the Amazon review:

Derek is the entrepreneur’s entrepreneur. Just as important, perhaps more so–he is a phenomenal teacher. Whether detailing the fascinating rise of CDBaby, explaining catastrophic (but common) founder mistakes, or teaching me about relational databases in two minutes using analogies, he makes the complex simple. Moreover, he makes it all actionable.

If you want a true manifesto, a guidebook with clear signposts, and a fun ride you’ll return to again and again, you have it here in this book. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did

I rarely recommend a book sight unseen, but my guess is Derek will not disappoint.