Is government open source code we can patch?
April 29th, 2008 by Doc Searls
That's the question raised by Britt Blaser in “Oh, if only government went in for an open source make-over…”. It's also one suggested indirectly by Phil Hughes in Our Internet.
Democracy is by nature "our government". The open source twist on that we put it together and can hack improvements to it. Think of elected officials as committers and maintainers and you start go get the idea.
The analogy isn't perfect, because by nature open source code is purely practical: it has to work. While government often does not. All government is buggy. In the worst cases it crashes outright and is replaced or supplemented by corrupt alternatives.
But government and governance are not the same things. A lot of governance takes place outside of government, in society. What Britt's suggesting is an open source model of governance, facilitated by code, that directly engages citizens in governance. What Phil's suggesting is building or rebuilding the Internet on the model Bob Frankston suggests in my Interview with him in the current issue of Linux Journal. That model is one not dependent on mainframe-like proprietary networks by phone and cable carriers that add the Internet as "a service", but instead depends on individuals and small groups connecting to each other, and then out to the world by any means available, which might or might not include those carriers.
I have long believed that there is far more business, especially for carriers, to be found in bets on abundance than in bets on scarcity. In other words, there are non-monopolistic advantages to incumbency that far exceed the monopolistic ones.
I bring this up for two reasons.
First, individual and community-built networks will eventually encounter big carriers that own backbones as well as "last mile" CFR (copper, fiber and radios). When that happens, we need to be able to show business as well as social advantages of wide-openness and ubiquitous connectivity.
Second, those carriers are part of what Bob calls the Regulatorium -- a combination of regulated enterprise and governance in which the latter tends to control the former. We can work around it up to a point. Or we can hack it.
We did it with code. Now let's do it with connections.
__________________________
Doc Searls is Senior Editor of Linux Journal
Special Magazine Offer -- Free Gift with Subscription
Receive a free digital copy of Linux Journal's System Administration Special Edition as well as instant online access to current and past issues. CLICK HERE for offer
Linux Journal: delivering readers the advice and inspiration they need to get the most out of their Linux systems since 1994.
Subscribe now!
The Latest
Newsletter
Tech Tip Videos
- Nov-19-09
- Nov-04-09
Recently Popular
From the Magazine
December 2009, #188
If last month's Infrastrucuture issue was too "big" for you then try on this month's Embedded issue. Find out how to use Player for programming mobile robots, build a humidity controller for your root cellar, find out how to reduce the boot time of your embedded system, and if you're new to embedded systems find out the basics that go into one. You can also read about the Beagle Board, the Mesh Potato and a spate of other interestingly named items. And along with our regular columns don't miss our new monthly column: Economy Size Geek.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook








US Constitution is Open Source
On April 29th, 2008 Frymaster (not verified) says:
Doc,
Your analogy is interesting, and perhaps more powerful than you intended. The US Constitution itself is open source, if you will, and editable. "The Framers" intended that Americans would change it to meet changing times, hence the series of amendments covering key rights like voting, and, most importantly, consuming alcohol. But they set the bar high, requiring super-majorities in both houses of Congress PLUS each of the states.
It's a high bar, but it makes sure that a substantial majority backs any changes. To do that, first these code-based network need to become a force for action.
They don't change the
On April 29th, 2008 Anonymous (not verified) says:
They don't change the constitution anymore, they just ignore it.
Look at the patriot act, what happens if you have a law that breaks the 1st, 4th, 5th and 8th, amendments (possibly others) of the constitution? .. well if the supreme court doesn't rule on it and congress doesn't care.. then its law.
Open Source government is a HORRIBLE idea because it is like a pure democracy that would cause tyranny of the minority by the ruling majority and all of us will at some point find ourselves as a minority on some issue.
You need to understand that democracy is a bad thing, it is two wolves and a sheep deciding on whats for dinner.. The US is also NOT a democracy and if it was, we could vote on what color to paint the white house. No the US is a Constitutionally Limited Representative Republic or in other words, a government designed to protect the minority FROM a oppressive majority.
“Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant -- and a fearful master.” —George Washington, 1797
Government itself is the problem because government itself is force. This desire for force for men to control other men, that has brought about all the great evils, war, rape murder, and theft of our history. Force itself is the problem and that's all government is. We should have as little of it as humanly possible.
Post new comment