Openness: May 2003 Archives

In some of my previous entries I’ve suggested that the actor-network theory and methodology can be used as a mode of explanation in elaborating the interplay between social structures and information (and IT in general). The factor ‘openness’ emerges as the main ingredient in the elaboration when using actor-network theory to explain how actors in a given topology can affect other actors, and also at the same time being affected by them.

The explanatory power of the actor-network methodology relies on the fact that in the same topology both human and non-human actors (elements, structures, processes, etc.) are treated as equally able to affect and influence each other. The affect is carried via the links between the various actors attempting to inscribe their attributes and properties into other actors with congruent properties and attributes (see: Translation).

So, is the Internet open-source?
Or, a more appropriate question would be: is it possible to produce an open communication medium such as the Internet without the open-source software?

Basing this argument on the actor-network theory and methodology and the openness factor, had the software that was used to build the Internet been a closed source software hidden from outside scrutiny, the resulting product, the Internet (whether we see the Internet as a mass medium, a publishing phenomenon, a set of communication tools, etc.) would not have been as open as we see it today. Why?

To use the actor-network language and the openness factor, the closed-source software is almost totally closed in both aspects: its content and its communication. With a closed content (i.e. the code) it is much harder to build compatible and interoperable software tools and much harder to make people use it. Modification to the closed-source software is limited to a very small group of people whose agenda is driven by the bottom line: profit. This suggests that the not so open content and not so open communication about the content is indeed a stagnating force in the exchange of ideas, thoughts and opinions, and innovation in general.

The open content and open communication concepts (with their attributes and properties) are indeed positively responsible for the openness of the Internet. Whether the open-source software is directly responsible for the openness of the Internet, or both the open source software and the Internet openness are both results of the open source philosophy is not very important.

In any case, the open content and open communication concepts have inscribed their properties and attributed onto the openness of the Internet (with varying degrees depending on the various form and flavors the Internet is being used) and also onto the open source software.

In properties and attributes: links, actors, topologies it has been suggested that the properties and attributes can be intrinsic and external.

The intrinsic properties are those that are inhibited as part of the process of the construction of an actor. For human actors these would be those properties and attributes (physical and mental) that do not change as part of the context and environment, i.e. context independent. The external properties and attributes are those that constantly change due to surrounding and environment, i.e. context dependent. Thus, the intrinsic and the external properties and attributes are not necessarily the same for all humans. However, there could be some that are common depending on the contextual situatedness of the human actor.

For non-human actors, lets take as an example an information system used in a given organizational setting. The information system comes predefined with certain functionality. Some of that functionality (usually referred as the core functionality) is not readily modifiable; it is this functionality that defines the system - its spirit, if changed than the nature of the information system has changed. Then, some other functionalities of the information system are intentionally modifiable to 'fit' the changing needs of the group/department/task that will use this particular information system. The modifications to these functionalities do not change the core nature of the system.

Further, in Translation in actor-network it is stated that "An issue of congruence and correspondence arises from the above discussion, for we can't compare an apple to an orange. In addition, no matter how actors are linked to one another, some actors just don’t get affected by the actors in the corresponding network topologies." So, for a translation to occur, i.e. the properties and attributes of one actor to be transferred and inscribed into another there must be some congruent properties and attributes.

Looking at the intrinsic and the external properties and attributes and their ability to change, content (the "what" is changed) and communication (the "means" by which the change is instigated) emerge as the congruent properties and attributes actors different actors (and definitely between human and non-human) prone to being modified and able to modify other actors through links in a given topology.

From the above it appears that an actor with its links in a relevant topology can perform upon other actors and links and be performed by other actors and links within the relevant and pertinent topology. The external content properties and attributes are those prone to being modified via the link (that in turn could also be performed upon and perform upon others). The basic properties and attributes of the links is their communicative openness: one-way link or two way links.

Also, the modifiable content depending on the intrinsic and external properties can be described and manifests itself in various degrees of openness. Similarly, the communication links vary in degree of their communicative properties via which the properties and the attributes of the actors are transferred and translated into other actors via inscription.

In Open source on hold in Oregon the Business Software Alliance, a software industry representative, claims that the Oregon state legislature encouraging the state institutions to consider open source, will "squelch software innovation, does not take into account hidden costs such as maintenance of open-source software and might actually harm the high-tech industry in Oregon."

The claim that open source with squelch innovation has been use by proprietary software makers without any viable argument or any research. If nothing more, the history has shown that open source has been a source of major innovations surrounding the Internet and beyond.

In addition, it is puzzling at best to understand why are the proprietary software makers against such legislature encouraging the consideration to use open source and not in any way mandating it?

The other point made in this article by the proprietary software makes it that such legislature "might actually harm the high-tech industry in Oregon."

Well, the proprietary software makers should realize that the competition in the real world of software development now includes a factor that was previously absent. Why not let the 'market forces' decide whether open source should be used by the various government institutions?

Among other concerns, it is precisely the issue of cost (relevant to market forces) that the Oregon bill is addressing: "Rep. Phil Barnhart, the bill's author, claimed the law is necessary to help agencies cut costs, to enable better interoperability among IT systems and to increase opportunities for Oregon's high-tech companies and workers."

It appears that the proprietary software makers’ lobbying efforts to block the use open source software in themselves are hurting innovation in software development by trying to remove from the ‘market’ a real competition.