Nigel McFarlane

Moving from A to B

Written by admin on April 21, 2009

The computer industry has to date relied greatly on secrets. Such secrets originate merely from the desire to get something done. It is more efficient to complete a work and push it out than it is to complete a work and spend extra time deconstructing it for the full scrutiny of others.

Unfortunately, when an invisible or opaque piece of software is presented as a solution to a problem, its own nature is held back. It acquires the mystique of a witch’s potion, and engenders concern in everyone but the originator. Because most software is translated from somewhat readable source to unreadable data (shrouding), and only the unreadable data is delivered for inspection, the buyer has no choice but to operate in ignorance. If that situation prevailed in the law, the only true law would be: Beware the King’s Wrath.

Despite the youth of ICT, it has not take academics and others long to openly debate (and thus reveal) many of the early computing secrets. It has not taken long for enthusiasts to duplicate the logic used in simple software. Many of the former secrets of the software industry are now public knowledge. That knowledge has been delivered to the fields of Computer Science and Software Engineering. Such public knowledge is also constantly growing. When former secrets are captured in publicly available software, they are no longer shrouded. They are open for all to see, hence Open Source.

In ICT it takes longer for elaborately transformed secrets to leak out than it does the simple ones. The Law and Accountancy are not, however, exact analogues to software – they have natural stopping points. In those examples, participants will only tolerate a certain complexity. In those industries, individual humans (or at least groups of humans) must be able to appreciate any given piece of law or any accounting practice. ICT has a much higher tolerance for complexity, because the original secrets are shrouded in a way that prevents a detailed examination. Like the fable of the four blind men and the elephant, one can only grope at a part of a software whole, with partial conclusions at best. At face value, ICT professionals thus allow themselves an ignorance that lawyers and accountants only indulge in when they can get someone else to do the work.

The Open Source movement is a corrective action aimed at revealing all the elaborately transformed software secrets in the ICT industry. It is a simple response by the have-nots to the haves: go and make your own lunch.

Some secret-holders are willing to contribute their secrets to Open Source, even if they strive to retain some control (Adobe, Sun). Other secret-holders do not go gently at all (Microsoft). For the uncooperative secret holders, the Open Source movement must take a combatative stance. There is no choice but to hand-duplicate the labour of the secret holders. Even if this is done on a full-time, professional basis, it is still a lengthy catch-up process. That is why Open Source software takes so long to evolve.

At the end of this catch-up, software will no longer be a secret. It will be written down in the public domain and exposed to public comment. When that comes, businesses should expect to benefit from it the way they benefit from Tax Law or from Accounting’s double entry methodology. There is a cost of interaction (or access), but no concept of ownership. The yielding of secrets to the public domain is a natural process with no natural obstacles except time. In truth, there are only artificial obstacles. Open Source is an end to which all of ICT turns.