hpr-knowledge-base/hpr_transcripts/hpr1064.txt

Episode: 1064
Title: HPR1064: OGG Camp 11 Panel Discussion
Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr1064/hpr1064.mp3
Transcribed: 2025-10-17 18:15:46

---

The full circle podcast on Hacker Public Radio in this episode are Camp 11 Discussion
Panel
Hello world and welcome to the full circle podcast on Hacker Public Radio
This is the third of our highlights of last summer's
Uncomference Og Camp 11 held at the Farnham Malttings in the South of England
The full circle podcast is the companion to full circle magazine the independent magazine for the Ubuntu community
Find us at fullcirclemagazine.org forward slash podcast
Introducing the Og Camp 11 panel discussion
On the panel we have Dan Lynch of Linux Outlaws, Alachem
Karen Sandler of the Nome Foundation and X of the Freedom Software Law Centre
Simon Fipps of Forge Rock and the Open Software Initiative
Stuart Ack Langeridge from Canonicals Ubuntu One Team and X Log Radio presenter
and finally Fabian Shershel, presenter of Linux Outlaws
Like every good panel discussion this all begins with questions from the floor
Alright so I've done the ultimate lazy thing we've decided to try and get used to generating content which you know
We've got a fabulous panel of people here and I've got some ideas topics that we can discuss
But we really want you guys to ask questions you know how often you get a chance to ask these people questions and so on
and we can discuss them and all that kind of stuff
So let me introduce the panel so to my left here we have Kang Sandler, we've got a great talk earlier
She's the executive director of the Nome Foundation
and former lawyer, are you still a lawyer?
I'm still a lawyer, I'm still doing pro bono work with the Software Freedom Law Centre
and so for the Software Freedom Conservancy and I'm general counsel of question copyright and still
Wow okay so legal questions are current
No questions are always really important
You will have to say this is not legal advice, this is not constant legal advice
That's what you have to do in this country
Maybe not
Okay so obviously you probably all saw Simon's talk before so we've got Simon Fitch from MSI
and we've also got Mr Stewart Labyrinth from Canonical
He's believed you've worked on a buncy one and all that much
And some guy on the end who does a podcast or something
I don't know who he is but he seems to have worked his way up
But yeah, they've got far as well
So if anybody's got any questions as we go please do you feel because otherwise I'm just going to be sat here
So the first kind of topic that I wanted to discuss and I've asked the guys about this
because I knew it could be a bit controversial stuff but I should also find out
these people are representing themselves and not their companies and so on
So before Ash gets in trouble or anything else
Not that you need my help to get in trouble
But make that clear
But yeah, something I wanted to kind of talk about is the future of the desktop I suppose
I know it sounds like the old subject is up but the future of the Linux desktop is I see
So if you've got no 3 just come on and that's kind of developing it
Perhaps we're in the name of free share
Yeah, and we've got a well-key e4s that are going strong
We've got all these other options and stuff
But I want to try to get people's ideas
Opinions have been silent or tell you about making compromises and so on
And using the Mac and stuff
So I want to actually be a little bit about what you feel is back home
Maybe about the Mac interface and stuff like that
So I don't know, that's not actually relevant to the issue
That's a good way to say that I'm in trouble here
And it's not a lasso
I really go to the cowboy metaphor
Yeah, all right, so let's kick this off with I don't know
I'm going to pick on Karen, I apologize
But what do you think the future of the desktop is?
Obviously known 3
Yeah, I mean, well it's one of the, if you know 3 is one of the reasons why I decided to go over to know
So I've only been at the canome foundation for like a little bit over a month now
So it's all still pretty new for me
But one of the reasons why I found the job so appealing is that canome 3 is really a departure
And something new
And you know, I think that with a redesign like canome 3 has you know
We can really reach a lot more people
I mean, it's still early days
But you can sort of see going forward where this is going
And I think that that's really amazing
I mean, do you think in some ways that obviously known 3
As you say it's a big change
And we had all the kind of teeth and troubles
Okay, if you're, do you think that's happening a little bit more known 3 now?
You know, I think there will be any time that you do something differently
You make a departure which I simply knew you're going to, you can't make everybody happy all the time
And since canome 3 is new
It's going to take some time for people to get used to it
And some people are going to decide not to use it
I hope that more people do decide to use it
And you know, I think part of the point of the canome 3 redesign is to reach less technical users
Although I do know a lot of highly technical users have been happy with, you know, 3, 8
We were just talking, I was just talking about about this
I need to give you a piece of know for you
I hope you've done this like that I'm proud of you too
But now I know a bunch of hackers who are really using know for development
So I think that's pretty cool
But as I said, you know, some things are still new
They're still things to work out
And I think even with that being said
We're going to be in a similar situation where some, I mean, I think that
We need to know what really is fresh and what we need
So I think this is one of the things that we're just going to see
We're going to have to live with and hope that we can improve and learn from
Okay, so I mean that sounds to me like
It's one of the great things I think
It's kind of like a double-edged sword
We have a lot of choices but at the same time does that divide the development and the resources and stuff
I don't know, Simon, what's your favorite Linux desktop and what do you think about it?
At the moment I'm in love with my Honeycomb template
So I think the future of the Linux desktop is the tablet
I think you're going to start looking
It's interesting here
I think that the Linux has had its chance to be on the desktop
And it's done a damn good job of being on the desktop for a lot of people
But unfortunately, the desktop is going away
Linux may well become even more popular on the desktop
But by percentage, a lot of people using a desktop is going to go away down
And most people will be attracting Linux through some other interface
How much of an interactive panel do you want this to be?
Are you interviewing us?
As much as possible
I agree with you that the way that we're computing has changed
But I think that it's a great sensational to say that the desktop is going away
I think anyone who needs to generate content or any kind or wants to sit in for a really long amount of computer use
Where I think we'll want to sit in a comfortable seat with a big screen
And a comfortable keyboard or some other way of inputting
And I think that it's a little bit sensational to say that the desktop is changing
And the way that we arbitise and interact with each other
And maybe we're going for a modular thing
But I still think the desktop is an important and long term
Well, maybe we've already had a really exciting time where there's more choice than just
Things that are designed to be really complicated desktop systems
So we've got Chrome OS coming, where your desktop is going to be a browser
We've got Honeycomb, where your desktop is a haptic surface
We've got Katie in the room busy doing the traditional stuff
We've got Microsoft failing to innovate in the tool
We've got Apple on the verge of turning actively evil
All this new stuff happening on there
And I think that believing that the future of the desktop has got back to the history of the desktop
I think is the problem
Because I think there's going to be a lot of people whose only experience of a computer is going to be through a Chrome browser soon
And there's going to be a lot of people whose only experience of the computer is going to be through a haptic
The tablet screen is this big
And probably has got a keyboard you cannot hear it so terrible when you need it
And I think that all of these options and the thing that we're really excited about is so many of them have got free software
Underneath them and within them and the software for freedom is preserved
I think that is fantastic about what's going on
I'm conscious I don't want to leave the other guy at that one
So what's your feelings on the future of the days?
It's interesting what Simon says
The idea of software for freedom is
The best thing about it turning my computer into a dumb servant on having Google over all of my days
I think there's a lot of that
At least it's a funny thing that he isn't looking for
What a fervor
It's not me in the software for freedom is the defining characteristic of this thing
The other thing I think is interesting is
When you say Microsoft haven't innovated in any way
It means defending Microsoft
Yeah
I think
I'm
I have used Windows but might have been hyperbolic than none of you
Really?
The last day of that was right
It's
What's been the catcher?
I have used Windows 7 and I think it's quite good
Now I have my intention of using it on a phone
Because it requires the best of the Microsoft stack
Which I don't have
It requires me to have an exchange of software for it
On a bunch of whatever, not interesting
But what they've actually done which I thought was interesting
It's genuinely innovative and very much as I use it every day
And I think it's good and everything
It's hard to make the case that it's not a flank with the red cloth of rivals
Windows 7 is genuinely different
I think it's genuinely innovative
No one gives a sh**
But at least they've actually sat down and run a letter build
A ingrained phone system
No one's clean enough use it because they miss the phone
But Microsoft now in the position that we've always been
We can come up with innovations but nobody listens
What I think is interesting is
When we talk about the future of the free desktop or the future of the Linux desktop or whatever
The problem is not doing technical innovation
Because we're actually quite good at it
The problem is it's hard to get people to pay attention
And I think that's a critical question to ask
Because I think that I'm, you know, I interviewed the guys who were working on WebOS
But here at Paco, when I went over to Oscom, it was really good
And they've got some fantastic technology
It's more awesome, you know, HTML desktop
They're using Node.js for the system services
You can write system applications in JavaScript
The thing is awesome
But the problem they've got is that to get to market
They've got a leverage, some sort of ecosystem
And they've decided they're going to be able to get the only
So, goodbye WebOS
And this is the problem that I think we've got a face
When it comes to the software freedom dimension
Which is we've got all the people in this room that's weighted
We haven't got all the rest of their founders that's weighted
And we haven't worked out how we didn't do that yet
Sorry
I was going to give Fab a chance to talk about that
I'm just going to quickly read it and see if you got it
Well, I'm sure that won't last too long
Sorry, mate, I'll give you just a second
Andy wanted to make a point for us
So, if you've got the point, by the way, and you want to move things
You should be handled and someone will bring you a mic
Right, Julie?
Hello, I've got my fix
I think that's all
Can I make it wrong?
Anyway, so a couple of interesting things
I was just stunned by some of the things
And I was attempting to tweak them
There were some connected issues
So, Simon, to say that Microsoft isn't innovating at all
He's just bizarre when they're only a company with Connect
And Andy's Windows Phone 7 isn't a sign that says
I think they're bored, mate
They're bored with a company which was innovating
And now they have connect
Yes
So, there's some amazing things that could happen
But now to those kind of technologies
Stuart was mentioning Google and making the desktop a dumb terminal
Having everything in the cloud
Well, you know, OK, you can do personal clouds at home
And you come back to the web over there
So, that's exactly how we make HTML5 desktop
You still work stuff in the web
You know, all the cloud, even in the interweb somewhere
So, I'll just find some of the viewpoints that I'm hearing
Can't quite
I should be clear, I think storing stuff in the cloud is brilliant
I see
Well, I think it can happen in that
Actually, there's no doubt
Just to be clear about this, I think it's a great idea
I don't have a problem with it at all
I just find it interesting
To hear Simon talk about software freedom and story
Everything on someone else's servers in the same breath
So, we've got a calendar working on what software freedom means in the cloud, I think
And the great question is
How are we going to predict those principles in the cloud
I think the answer has got to have a lot to do with federated software
I don't think there's any problem with the cloud
Well, I have a problem with is all of my identity and data
Being under the control of somebody who's only a relationship with me as a terms of service
I don't have the time to read
And I think that I'm very keen to get off
I don't want to get off Google
What I want to do is I want to get onto something else with federated with Google
So that on the days they're evil
Or turn them Tuesdays
I can flick a switch on using my federated service instead of their centralized service
That's what I think
The sort of place I think we've got to go to
I think I'm really scared
And this is interesting because I love Android
I've been in Android for a long time
I'm really scared that if the desktop's dead
And Android is our future on computers
Android is barely free software
And in some cases, as in cases of Honeycomb
It's not even on source yet apparently
I don't know
That kind of really scares me
If the desktop is dead
We have lost because I think it's also to talk about yeah when federated cloud services
But the reality is all these companies
They have no interest in doing that
Google has no interest whatsoever in federated with anybody
Because they make their money from owning all of your data
But I think it's kind of comparable to the argument that DRM
That going without DRM was not any interest of any companies
But because music buyers and the public were choosing to go with services that didn't have DRM
Then Apple had the DRM
And it just had to shake away from it
That we as consumers really have a lot of sand that's if we act with our money
I don't think I think that Google wants to have real data
I think they just want to have hand in the month
Which is one of the data portability stuff
Yeah, I'll try to show you the data in an hour
I mean, I use Google for just about everything
And I'm very vocal on saying I'm not really scared about it
Because I don't think Google wants my data
It wants an aggregate of all our data
They don't want to sell me specifically
I mean, they're not like sending e-mails
Hey, if that, you like ads, do you want to buy this hand?
They're trying to get aggregate stuff
But that's just as long as they're doing that
I mean, at the point when they have my data
They could decide to follow on next Tuesday that they people
Yeah, okay, right, we've got a couple of points from the crowd
Here's a gentleman here
One of the things that I do worry a bit about is the kind of death by dog food
We're all using these kind of unused unity
They make use of a lot of metadata that we've put in
And it's getting history over time and making these little more relevant
Which is awesome for us
But when my girlfriend uses it for the first time
It doesn't have a history and everything is really hard to discover
I mean, how do we address that?
Because when GGO is going to start looking to see what apps are there
It's a really complicated process
It's going to be like the next day I'll be using it for you
You can see how things are going to go
Okay, so the question in there seems to be how to be addressed that
Which is a hell of a question
So who wants to try and tackle that one?
I'm going to pick on some of what you don't always do
I think we can do that
I think we can do that
The cloud is actually answered to that
At the point where we get the cloud
Where we can hide and control our data
We can put this data in the cloud
And then shell it out like if we get a new sheet
You know, and do that
I think it isn't
My concern isn't that we can make that happen
Because I think we can really do a really good job of solving that problem for you
Because they think walking your girlfriend for quite some time now
And they know what they're about
And they can move them in
The girlfriend
They know my wife pretty well as well
The problem is that the problem is
What you do when you don't want them to know what you're doing
All these old-fashioned technologies that aren't aware of people who are using them
They're going to go away
With only me using technologies that are aware of the context in real life for a week, very soon
And the question is who's going to provide that context on what terms
And I think that's the reason why Google wants to tackle your data
As it passes through their servers
They don't want to own it
They just want to have been loaned in for a few moments
And the real question is what are they going to do with that experience
And are you going to get to decide what they're using for
That's the real concern about all of the data
But that's exactly the point
You come back to the fact that
I want things to be personal to me
I don't want to use a system which is identical
But I want it to adapt to what I do
To work with what I think
To work exactly the way I want
And to be honest with you
I'm quite happy to outsource
Working all that stuff out to someone else
Because I can't be bothered
So, some people are not like that
Some people will absolutely think
No, no, no, no, no
I don't want any third party
I don't want any company
Making those decisions for me
I want to make it all myself
I'm prepared for it to be hard
For me I'm prepared for better being
Less customization, I'm prepared to have to do more setting up
I'm prepared to have to tweak things myself
And that's right, you're absolutely a liberty to do that
We want to avoid a situation where you are unable to make that choice
But I think we're doing a reasonable job of avoiding that
I don't, I mean, no one's obliged to use Google
And everyone chooses to, because it's good
I think you're right
I think you're right
I think you're right
But I think you're right
I think you're right
I think you're right
I think you're right
And I think we've started to talk about it more
And I know that this is one of the things that Missoula is trying to do
You know, track it
There have been government issues, you know, the states and elsewhere
About trying to raise, you know, where to expect this
But I, for me, the most important thing is to make these choices very clear, very active
As soon as you start using anything
And making it clear and ongoing
Because right now, you know, I don't see ads
So, you know, I don't really, but those people tell me that they want to see ads
And not really, they want to see ads
They want to see really target ads
To me, that's crazy
But they never think about the implication of society
They never think about the fact that, if we do facial recognition, for example, you know, in train our photos
In train Facebook, then, you know, you know, you're going to be able to publish a
A transfer of a protest, and have a government be able to identify everyone's there
You know, it's very easy to draw this connection
But it's not something we're thinking about and we don't have choices right from the beginning
It's all about building up a fabric of traps as well
So most of us have an experience of Google
That means that we've got a
So a fabric of trust means we don't think they're going to abuse the data they've got.
Whereas yesterday on Facebook I found that by agreeing to have its sync contacts, which
I thought meant, add my friend's phone numbers to my address book on my phone.
Facebook were actually sucking my entire contact list down on my phone and storing it on
Facebook for future use.
Now that means that I've got a very fragmented fabric of trust with Facebook, which is a whole
lot worse than it was before.
I think that overall the key here is the transparency by the service provider and the ability for
us to make conscious choices, the biggest threat is unconscious choices or choices that
are made for us.
And if it's exactly the same discussion that Karen had, we're having our friend at my
talk.
Okay.
I'm probably going to cut in because I haven't very good at bringing people in here.
So we've got a gentleman there with the microns to say something, and you can change the topic
as well, by the way.
So I'm going to have to keep discussing it here.
So this was from the earlier conversation.
If Clareaud is surely less of an issue for software freedom, more than issue for data
freedom, which we don't touch, not be made to portability, I don't want to go software
over my data for sticky, in terms of software, all my own, and don't we need principles
for data freedom as well as software freedom?
Well, if you have software freedom in the cloud, if you have an ADPL piece of software
that you can run yourself, I think the point is that you have to choice, and then to
run it yourself.
I think it comes with, as long as you have Google's data center, that doesn't buy you anything.
That's completely useless to you.
The fact that I used to say, okay, I can store my data and make a partnership between
you and me.
On Google.com.
Or I can run the software on my own server, still isn't the only one I've got data portability.
At all.
But at least you know what they do with data, because you don't want to get the software.
You know how free you are.
That's it.
Yeah.
That's it.
Okay.
I can pause the back one thing.
It's knowing that it's free to run.
But I disagree that that's actually not to be afraid of that.
Okay.
So we got a jump in the red shirt.
Yeah, I'm going to go back to a comment you've made earlier on.
I'm going to steer around for you.
And I think that's absolutely wrong.
That is where I'm going to go.
And open source.
Open source.
Game effects.
Right.
So we're going to have that.
Yeah.
And the whole free software.
One of the things is if we allow that to be done by the proprietary.
The end is going to have another.
Okay.
Okay.
So.
As I said, we know it's about anyone going to think someone there.
And just to the stats.
Sorry.
Sorry.
Sorry.
Yeah.
It's a little bit of a free tool.
Yeah.
So as I said, if you've got any other topics you want to discuss as well,
don't feel for anything.
It doesn't have to be free software related.
Okay.
Here we go.
So if the desktop is dying, we're all going to tablets.
How many of you reckon that Intel will be dead outside the server?
It is.
Hmm.
Interesting question.
Well, how many of you see it?
I've got tablets.
I mean, Simon's problem.
And Fab, you've gone on now.
I haven't gone on a call.
Have you got a tablet?
Have you got a tablet?
No.
So there you go.
I haven't seen the people on this stage who have not got a tablet.
I haven't seen it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
How many audience have got a tablet?
Keep them on.
These are two.
It's got two.
I can't follow that guy.
I don't know why not.
No, I didn't say that.
I don't think it's the answer.
I have a tablet.
And it's not the answer.
Unless they've met some kind of blast.
It's not affected by fingers much, is it?
The place where it's important is that the tablet does it mean you've probably got two devices
devices in your life, and you're no longer satisfied with your data only being on one
phone, because you probably, whichever device happens to be the one in front of you to
be the one that knows about you can help you.
And I think that's the right of a difference that having tablets makes, and this was the
huge difference that the iPad made for a lot of people, was they suddenly discovered that
the computer with the chair in front of it in the mouse wasn't the only place they could
do stuff.
And that was an awakening that just changed the way that things were going to work.
So I think that the isn't about doing everything on the tablets, about the ones you realize
that tablets are actually not just something for your kids to draw on your computer.
You discover a world where the desktop isn't the only thing you're going to use, and then
you begin to ask questions about what else could I do somewhere, I believe that chair,
you know, and that's the revolutionary pattern.
But the thing is, you don't have to use proprietary service to have, you know, a cloud storage.
I know they're not really able to speed it up in one, but there are things like Sparkles
Share that have got promised, but at the same time it seems to be about ten different
projects or competing to be the same thing, and I know I might have some people on this,
because you've kind of competing in the same field.
They're all trying to make an Android app, and they're all trying to make an iPhone app,
they're all trying to be everywhere and do everything, but I think I'm going to succeed
when you've got someone like Google who's already got all of this space, you've got Amazon
and a massive business space as well.
People know those names, really give someone else a try, I'm going to aim this to act
when they're in this field.
OK, I've got a little bit about the cloud stuff, but speaking of someone who works for
someone who's one is therefore necessary things, I mean, I think that's part of what's
got to be great.
What, why are you a more general point there?
It's precisely that there are ten in the same way that there are ten videos, and so
a bunch of people say, no, no, that's because it's about choices, it's important, but
equally, we'll end up with everything being out of the finish.
And this, to my mind, plays back into my work, Simon, used to earlier, which is trust.
One of the things I don't like, you're looking at things like, you know, three, shell,
launch.
You have a bunch of people complaining about how stuff has changed, and it wasn't right.
We had exactly the same thing with Unity.
And you get a lot of, it's about trusting, the kind of developers, it's about trusting
the Unity team to do things right, and we don't have that, we don't have that sense
of trust.
Everyone seems to think that no, no, they know better than the people who are actually
doing this.
And what it means is, we end up eating our own yarn, you know, we've got, there's the examples
of Johnathan Blah, I think his name is going to be Brad, so it's made me know.
Yeah.
It's a threshold game.
Right?
I decided to give you a poor break to levels.
And so I've played for the 90s website saying, I want to do this, but I've never used
this before.
So I need to know how to do a bunch of simple game things, like, how do I change the mouse
acceleration?
How do I trap the mouse in a box?
How do I play one sound, and then play another sound on top of it at the same time, and
it makes them up and down.
Just simple stuff, you need to write a game, and you'll 342 different answers.
From people say, you need to use OpenL, there you need to use ASS4, and everyone hates
you, everyone else, and then it creates all of the other answers.
And in the end, you say, you know, what the hell is this?
If you guys can't get it together, and come up with an answer, why the hell should we
pay attention?
And I think a lot of that's because we don't trust the people who are doing something,
they do it right, we don't got no matter, although it's a different one.
Yeah, but at the same time, that's the freedom we have in the end, and to do that, I mean,
the alternative is what everybody used to wrap that, or something like that.
No, it's the way we do it.
It's an alternative, it's an apple, where you have a lot of users that absolutely totally
trust Steve Jones.
Love everything he does, and just, you know, just love that, and I, you know, as somebody
who doesn't, I hate that.
Which is not the thing.
So, the question then becomes, is it possible, is it reasonable that this massive variety
of unfinished stuff, we have the choice to choose any of these unfinished things, is actually
going to get us the success that we like.
I think, I'm not sure about that, maybe not, but it's quite possible, I think, okay,
perhaps the future of Linux is us.
We're not going to get into the mind stream, because we think choice is more important.
Yeah.
I think I changed my mind on that, what, an overview of the years.
I think you're probably right.
I think Linux is probably not the future everybody, every user on the desktop, and I actually
think we shouldn't brace that, and we wouldn't be better in some ways, if we figured out that
we don't get anybody, we don't get all of the people to use it.
But I think, I mean, just going back to my talk from earlier, I think we as like a society
are going to be kind of screwed, we don't move towards free and open search software solutions
and free and open platforms, because this is all, like, life and society can go stuff.
It's not like, I mean, this is basically how we're living our lives and how we're doing
together.
So, while I think that, you know, it's right that, to some extent, we as technically
are worried that people are going to be going to drive this stuff forward.
I think it would be a mistake, if we just said we should embrace that and live it ourselves
and not look to the outside, not look to, I mean, that's one of the things that I'm
trying to do, is bring, you know, new Linux more to the everyday person, and I always
put that, but I would actually say that one of the ways that we can handle this trust
issue is to focus a lot on non-profit development, you know, help, I mean, I'm coming from
Venom, so I'm a little biased, but, I mean, I'm dedicated, I make considerably less money
now than I did in the brain sector, and it's well worth it, because I'm working as
a thing I care about it, and we all kind of work together, it's a way to bring just
for companies into one decision-making body, I think that's really valuable.
This is just a comment to the point where the discussion has reached right now, when
somebody who mentioned the word success, and they don't want me to, well, you do absolutely
want freedom of choice, or costs, or success, the two are not necessarily automatic and
all the time compatible, so you have to decide which way you're going, and I'm absolutely
compromised between those non-necessary always possible, so it depends what is your main
priority.
Convert to the cloud discussion earlier on, I have to say that I am seriously concerned
by the fact that a lot of oversource people and freedom, so advocates, seem to be embracing
the current cloud movement, and quite heartedly, without what I feel is enough questioning of
the openness of the entire concept.
There are some people seem to be asking, well, am I allowed to, and can I write an App
on a client application which will talk to such cloud services, well, no, because actually
they use most circumstances, a proprietary protocol, which we don't know about and we don't
understand, and they won't really let you write software, they're just close to the different
cloud services, so as far as I'm concerned, really, a protocol level, and a data format
level, there's a massive amount of incompatibility and closeness about it, which I think should
be really concerning.
So, this brings up a question in my mind, and I'm going to spring us a bit on that.
Can I write a client through Ubuntu 1, myself?
Yes.
And it's all asking about it.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
There are two extra Ubuntu 1 and data and files, the data staff is all couch-to-day, a batch
of projects, already exists, perfectly reasonable thing to do, the file staff, we use a binary
protocol to talk to our file server, just because it's difficult, basically, it's essentially
a compression, but it's all docking, and the client's all over the source.
We are.
We've got a client service, but the server end isn't, that was great.
So, sorry, I just wanted to kind of drive around a little bit.
So, I think I want to do it at the end of quite a while, so we need to kind of go for it.
So, if you've got any other topics, I thought it was right in the morning, so far away.
We'll just try to define the success for Linux and Open Source systems.
My definition of success is it works for me.
And I don't really mind too much how many other people use it as long as it works for me.
So, I think that's how we should define our success.
The other thing I wanted to bring up is this whole idea of how we get it onto more people's
standard every day in the sheet.
Is it just that we're being too nice about it?
Shouldn't we be getting a bit more in people's face about the ideas?
Okay.
And compute a liberator front.
We're here to liberate your computer.
How are we sort of people?
This is part of why I realized that I had to start talking about my per condition,
even though it's not something that I would have typically wanted to have said in a public place
that I had a perky back then.
But I think thinking about the fact that my life accounts on the software,
that it's not being reviewed, and that I can't even see the software that's in my body,
sort of takes these issues to an emotional place,
but also one of those critical places.
And I think that discussions like this,
why are we going to count on our software?
So that we can see it in those situations.
You know, when we had problems with the default voting machines,
you know, when you start to see how we count on our software,
you sort of understand why it needs to be safer and why it needs to be reviewed.
And software freedom is an essential component to that.
So I actually think there's a really real strong bit of advocacy here,
and everything in this room who's here,
because they care about these issues.
These things start talking about it.
And so I think we should get in people's faces,
but not necessarily in an aggressive negative way,
just in a, we want our software to be safe,
and we should start choosing solutions that are.
Okay, I think Popeye wants to do this.
Yeah, I want to come back to a point that was made earlier about
whether this is for us or for everybody,
for, you know, nerds or just the average person.
And it alarms me that the idea that the free software
should be just for the enlightened like us.
My four-year-old son uses free software,
he uses tux-paying.
He absolutely loves it.
He can print something,
he can use a boolean, can my printer,
very capable, using loads.
And I would not want him to be deprived
from having the opportunity to use free software.
And if we only went down the road of nerds,
only everyone else can pop it out.
Then I don't want to be a part of it.
Which is a dream.
It's happening all the time.
We may not have that.
Don't you want to know what your mum is?
No, no, no.
Mum.
And yeah, my dad's absolutely fine with it.
That's what the bed doesn't have a problem.
I don't want it to be just for us either.
But then that comes attacking back to the point that,
if the notion of freedom of choice being the all-trumping,
most important thing,
is limiting it to just us.
Then how much of that,
if any, are we dependent on sacrifice?
In order that my dad can use it.
Some people might say,
I won't be a sacrifice anything.
If that means that only nerds use Phillips,
I'm fine with that.
I don't think it's a nerd geek.
I don't think people would use it.
I think when I say it,
we have to figure out that we can't get everybody to use it.
What I mean is, for example,
my parents technical level are about the same
for both of them.
My father used Windows,
my mother used this Fedora actually.
And my father just doesn't use Linux,
because he doesn't care.
People have different things.
People care about different things.
There are people who don't care about freedom of choice.
And there are people who don't care about their database
and other people do it.
They don't necessarily have to be geeks.
There are just non geeks that care about it.
Pretty heavily correlated.
I don't really think so.
For example, my mother used this.
She's much like me.
If you give her a match,
it would drive her insane.
That you can't drag the bar
and the top somewhere else.
That she can't change stuff.
And she's not a geek.
She just wants to have control
over how she uses her computer.
OK, so we're going to look like an improvement.
Just to go back to the success of a failure question,
one of the things we mentioned earlier was
that the desktop may go away
and be replaced by an ice-pick screen
with a keyboard that you can pair up,
optionally,
and you can set it front of your pick screen.
Why will that work this time?
Because I've got a couple of Web TV boxes
sitting up on my loft.
It didn't work when everybody's applications were on the cloud.
I've got a press delobs
and it didn't work when everybody's applications
were going to be on the node 20 or 20 years ago.
Why is it going to be different this time?
Well, OK.
It was a tackle up one.
Why is it going to be different this time?
Go on then.
I don't think the...
the problem is that it didn't work last time.
We tend to swing
from centralizing everything for efficiency.
And then someone says,
now we should decentralize it because it's cool.
And then they would say,
there's a benefit to centralizing.
So you have,
you have,
you're friends,
which had nothing but down terminals.
And everyone,
I tell you what we actually want though.
We want people to run applications
on a computer, on their desk.
And then try moving everything back to the Web again.
So it's just,
every time you're in one of these positions,
you just decentralize it.
You can see the benefits of decentralization.
So,
we went through a stage of a lot of stuff being on the Web.
And now we're starting to see process
and getting pushed out to your browser.
This is what a lot of the stuff in HTML5 is about.
About allowing work to happen.
Out of the down terminal level.
And I'm sure 5 or 6 years from now,
someone will come up with some new dance centralized.
They know we'll all start flocking to that again.
It's,
it's just the way the industry works.
I don't think those things,
but,
until so much as,
they were overtaken by a new power.
You know, it's,
it's an exciting one.
So,
you're welcome.
You know, the press,
there's press del,
and there was Web TV.
So this is the third time.
Yeah.
You know, things succeed the third time, right?
Third time, right?
Not just being used to it.
Or the uniform.
There was a bunch of you that might move.
So, there was actually an interesting effect
that we discovered,
which is we,
once something has gone really wrong,
publicly a couple of times,
the people who are tempted the next time
learn from those mistakes.
And I think what we're going to see this time
is not so much a dedicated big screen,
whose only role in life is to sit there
being the place that the big eye looks at me from.
But rather,
one of your alternatives is going to be to
plug something or connect to something
so that the environment that you're using
is now shared with lots of people
or it's on a bigger screen.
I'm already kind of in that space.
I've got a really big screen on my desk.
I have a tiny little screen in the background here.
And I've got all the same stuff,
because I'm using free software
and because I'm using
Web hosted services to hold the data.
And I think that's the reason it's going to work this time
is that it isn't just about being the one big screen.
It's about being part of an environment
where there's shared data that's
a compromise between centralized and localized.
Yeah, that's a great success.
But yeah, I like my laptop.
I like my laptop.
I'm mini-tops.
Olc Camp is a joint venture
organized by those lovely podcasters
from the Linux Outlaws and Ubuntu UK podcasters.
With more highlights of Olc Camp
coming up on the full-circle podcast
very soon, including Andy Piper
and Laura Chikovsky.
For now, I'm Robin Kattling.
Thank you for listening and goodbye.
You have been listening to Hacker Public Radio
at Hacker Public Radio.
We are a community podcast network
that releases shows every weekday
Monday through Friday.
Today's show, like all our shows,
was contributed by a HPR listener by yourself.
If you ever consider recording a podcast,
then visit our website to find out how easy it really is.
Hacker Public Radio was founded
by the digital dot-pound
and the economical and computer cloud.
HPR is funded by the binary revolution
at binref.com
All binref projects are crowd-sponsored by linear pages.
From shared hosting to custom-private clouds,
go to lunarpages.com
for all your hosting needs.
Unless otherwise stasis,
today's show is released under
a creative comments,
attribution, share a like,
lead us our own license.