Rationale for Open Publishing - Revision history

Marcin at 06:30, 17 April 2013

2013-04-17T06:30:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:30, 17 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. This position is foreign to many people who are used to operating in older business structures based on proprietary competitition, so here is an explanation of OSE's position.		We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. This position is foreign to many people who are used to operating in older business structures based on proprietary competitition, so here is an explanation of OSE's position.

	For OSE - as an open organization - there is a practical reason for open publishing - which is based on development efficiency. Efficiency is one of the core values of OSE. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that the material is 'out there' we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, possibly editing things out, and then sending the information. When we have a distributed team, with some dedicated and many more ~~possibly~~ loosely-affiliated contributors - it is important that everyone gains access, becomes involved, and is enabled to contribute to the project. Open publishing is the only way to achieve this when working with a large, distributed team.		For OSE - as an open organization - there is a practical reason for open publishing - which is based on development efficiency. Efficiency is one of the core values of OSE. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that the material is 'out there' - and we spend no energy on protecting that material. We can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, possibly editing things out, and then sending the information. When we have a distributed team, with some dedicated and many more loosely-affiliated contributors - it is important that everyone gains access, becomes involved, and is enabled to contribute to the project. Open publishing is the only way to achieve this when working with a large, distributed team.

	If one does not publish openly, that is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. ~~This~~ is a standard practice in much of industry and academia (prior to ~~publishing papers)~~. Such competitive waste is -to OSE - not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. Therefore, open publishing is the only way to go about development - in the presence of a large, globally-distributed team of collaborators.		When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain security - we establish a culture of open collaboration. If one does not publish openly, that is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. Such protectionism is a standard practice in much of industry - and academia prior to open publication. Such competitive waste is - to OSE - not constructive towards our goal of open innovation.

	A good example of ~~such~~ efficiency is Wikipedia. Imagine the contrary - if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any Wikipedia article - or even worse - if certain articles were private, for the 'eyes of the privileged' only. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. ~~It is~~ in ~~the~~ nature similar to ~~Wikipedia that we consider~~ the ~~value~~ of ~~openness~~ - as a powerful enabler of building upon open content. The benefit of ~~this~~ far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].		A good example of efficiency associated with openness is Wikipedia. Imagine the contrary - if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any Wikipedia article - or even worse - if certain articles were private, for the 'eyes of the privileged' only. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. OSE considers openness in a nature similar to the functioning of Wikipedia - as a powerful enabler of building upon open content. The benefit of building upon accessible information far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].

Marcin at 03:04, 16 April 2013

2013-04-16T03:04:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:04, 16 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. This position is foreign to many people who are used to operating in older business structures based on proprietary competitition, so here is an explanation of OSE's position.		We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. This position is foreign to many people who are used to operating in older business structures based on proprietary competitition, so here is an explanation of OSE's position.

	For OSE - as an open organization - there is a practical reason for open publishing - which is based on development efficiency. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, and then sending the information. When we have a distributed team, with some dedicated and many more possibly loosely-affiliated contributors - it is important that everyone gains access, becomes involved, and is enabled to contribute to the project. Open publishing is the only way to achieve this when working with a large, distributed team.		For OSE - as an open organization - there is a practical reason for open publishing - which is based on development efficiency. Efficiency is one of the core values of OSE. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that the material is 'out there' we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, possibly editing things out, and then sending the information. When we have a distributed team, with some dedicated and many more possibly loosely-affiliated contributors - it is important that everyone gains access, becomes involved, and is enabled to contribute to the project. Open publishing is the only way to achieve this when working with a large, distributed team.

	If one does not publish openly, that is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. This is a standard practice in much of industry and academia (prior to publishing papers). Such competitive waste is -to OSE - not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. Therefore, open publishing is the only way to go about development - in the presence of a large, globally-distributed team of collaborators.		If one does not publish openly, that is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. This is a standard practice in much of industry and academia (prior to publishing papers). Such competitive waste is -to OSE - not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. Therefore, open publishing is the only way to go about development - in the presence of a large, globally-distributed team of collaborators.

	A good example of such efficiency is Wikipedia. Imagine the contrary - if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any Wikipedia article - or even worse - if certain articles were private, for the 'eyes of the privileged' only. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. It is in the nature similar to Wikipedia that we consider the value of openness - as a powerful enabler of building upon open content. The benefit of this far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].		A good example of such efficiency is Wikipedia. Imagine the contrary - if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any Wikipedia article - or even worse - if certain articles were private, for the 'eyes of the privileged' only. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. It is in the nature similar to Wikipedia that we consider the value of openness - as a powerful enabler of building upon open content. The benefit of this far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].

Marcin at 03:01, 16 April 2013

2013-04-16T03:01:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:01, 16 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. ~~In general~~, there is a practical reason for open publishing based on development efficiency. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, and then sending the information. When we have a distributed team, with some dedicated and many more possibly loosely-affiliated contributors - it is important that everyone gains access, becomes involved, and is enabled to contribute to the project.		We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. This position is foreign to many people who are used to operating in older business structures based on proprietary competitition, so here is an explanation of OSE's position.

			For OSE - as an open organization - there is a practical reason for open publishing - which is based on development efficiency. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, and then sending the information. When we have a distributed team, with some dedicated and many more possibly loosely-affiliated contributors - it is important that everyone gains access, becomes involved, and is enabled to contribute to the project. Open publishing is the only way to achieve this when working with a large, distributed team.

	If one does not publish openly, that is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. This is a standard practice in much of industry and academia (prior to publishing papers). Such competitive waste is -to OSE - not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. Therefore, open publishing is the only way to go about development - in the presence of a large, globally-distributed team of collaborators.		If one does not publish openly, that is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. This is a standard practice in much of industry and academia (prior to publishing papers). Such competitive waste is -to OSE - not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. Therefore, open publishing is the only way to go about development - in the presence of a large, globally-distributed team of collaborators.

	A good example of such efficiency is Wikipedia. Imagine the contrary - if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any Wikipedia article - or even worse - if certain articles were private, for the 'eyes of the privileged' only. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. It is in the nature similar to Wikipedia that we consider the value of openness - as a powerful enabler of building upon open content. The benefit of this far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].		A good example of such efficiency is Wikipedia. Imagine the contrary - if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any Wikipedia article - or even worse - if certain articles were private, for the 'eyes of the privileged' only. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. It is in the nature similar to Wikipedia that we consider the value of openness - as a powerful enabler of building upon open content. The benefit of this far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].

Marcin at 02:58, 16 April 2013

2013-04-16T02:58:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:58, 16 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. In general, there is a practical reason for open publishing based on development efficiency. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, and then sending the information. ~~The latter case~~ is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. Such competitive waste is to us not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain ~~such~~ security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. A good example of ~~this~~ is Wikipedia - ~~imagine~~ if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any article. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. It is in ~~this~~ nature that we consider openness ~~in general~~ - as ~~the potential~~ of building upon open content far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].		We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. In general, there is a practical reason for open publishing based on development efficiency. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, and then sending the information. When we have a distributed team, with some dedicated and many more possibly loosely-affiliated contributors - it is important that everyone gains access, becomes involved, and is enabled to contribute to the project.

			If one does not publish openly, that is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. This is a standard practice in much of industry and academia (prior to publishing papers). Such competitive waste is -to OSE - not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. Therefore, open publishing is the only way to go about development - in the presence of a large, globally-distributed team of collaborators.

			A good example of such efficiency is Wikipedia. Imagine the contrary - if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any Wikipedia article - or even worse - if certain articles were private, for the 'eyes of the privileged' only. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. It is in the nature similar to Wikipedia that we consider the value of openness - as a powerful enabler of building upon open content. The benefit of this far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].

Marcin at 02:51, 16 April 2013

2013-04-16T02:51:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:51, 16 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly.		We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with or interacting with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly. We hold this position, unless we are discussing private or personal information that can compromise one's right to privacy. In general, there is a practical reason for open publishing based on development efficiency. When content is published openly, we publish it once, and it is free for everyone to see, learn from, or build upon - as in the nature of the [[Open Source Hardware Definition]]. This means that we can simply refer people to that material - instead of first determining what we can share or not, and then sending the information. The latter case is an example of competitive waste - in that it takes energy to protect one's IP. Such competitive waste is to us not constructive towards our goal of open innovation. When others can see our information openly - without us having to maintain such security - we save time - especially when we are working with a large distributed team - where the transaction costs of having to reveal information on a case by case basis are simply too high. A good example of this is Wikipedia - imagine if every reader had to obtain permission before reading any article. This barrier would make the utility of Wikipedia much lower. It is in this nature that we consider openness in general - as the potential of building upon open content far outweighs the benefit of profiting from information closure. This is our philosophical stand, and an essential component of [[OSE Culture]].

Marcin: Created page with "We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly."

2013-04-16T02:43:55Z

Created page with "We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly."

New page

We typically ask people, when they are getting involved with OSE, to publish their information, application, sample assignments, or proposals openly.