Articles

lol, open-source warfare. Does using web 2.0 language make it easier to sell books?

ignoring the war

you sound like a tool enforcing expensive monopolies on the vast majority

open source is most peoples only hope in
a music
b art
c video
d webdesign
e animation

like to do all those things to put an animated video on the web costs over £6000 using the sugested tools sutch as adobe

wheras gimp(art) and the sutch like cost nothing and are mutch friendlier to deal with

the rest i agree with but freedom of info/the free market should work 4 us unless theres summit up with capitalism

mindless beaurocracy?
thats a diffrent story

This article makes me feel dirty for supporting the open source community. Yes there are similarities between both communities in that there is a collective effort to improve and accomplish some goal for mutual interests. But there is also rapid development when scientists freely share information. Christianity seems to also be a communal effort to do terrorist things. Like make our kids dumber by introducing god in the science class, or bombing abortion clinics...why did you associate this with christianity

Well done, on target ... we have a problem.

Every time I read about SciEng-Technology ... (1) change management, (2) objective systems, (3) systems evolution ... in DoD, Gov, politics ... I become disappointed and discouraged.

I think, one thing (because of other readings), then the terms/concepts/ideas are stolen from reality and spun into politically marketable bullshit that any politician, marketeer, manager can understand and work.

Technology change management, objective systems vision, systems evolution options/paths, Venture Architects as decision makers, SkunkWorks ... have great value are known about by GOs and SciEng-Hackers, but money flows to politics not success these days.

As a mater of fact (these days), failure is frequently better rewarded then any success.

Open-Source Warfare is jargon for a concept that has been well known to military strategists and politicians around the world for years.

Search "battlespace videography".

Is the global endgame Armageddon or Involution that fundamentally alters modern humans lifestream?

Your article reads as a thinly veiled allegory. From using Microsoft as an example of a "large company" to your choice of quotes about Linux to calling its programmers "hackers". It draws unnecessary negative attention to the Open Source community who write decent and useful software. Why call it Open-Source Warfare? Why not collaborative warfare? Or say how bad forums are for allowing so called "insurgents" to swap information. If you're going to write so editorially you could at least acknowledge the company/ies who paid you to do so.

Additionally, I hope you realise it's incorrect to label people who are resisting a war waged on them as "insurgents". Inside of Iraq they are enemy soldiers.

I have read the entire article and put together a response on my blog. I invite you to read my response, which is critical of the comparison between the Open Source movement and the insurgency movement.

Click here to view my response.

I am genuinely interested in sharing my opinion, and you will note that my blog has no advertisements which will generate revenue for me.

I welcome any feedback on my response.

Cheers,
Rob

I think you have focused on the subject. But as one of our friends said "Open-Source Warfare is jargon for a concept" ;)