Data Journalism Crash Course #4: Open Source Communities
Image by the author

Co-creation, collaboration, sharing, community. What do these words have in common? The essence. Each of these terms is rooted in cooperation, in mutual aid, in joining efforts for a common goal.

And depending on where these principles are applied, the result can be efficient and highly profitable — if not financially, at the very least, with better use of time and human resources.

For those working with digital development, the most encouraged form of collaboration is Open Source Software, also known as FOSS, an acronym for Free and Open Source Software.

Open projects are great for anyone who wants to receive collaboration from others, learn from analyzing real projects or getting their “hands dirty” with true intellectual craftsmanship.

Open source is a term that means exactly what it says. This concerns the source code of the software, which can be adapted for different purposes. The term was created by OSI (Open Source Initiative) which uses it from an essentially technical point of view.

Because it does not have a license cost, open-source software offers the opportunity for greater investment in services and training, ensuring a greater and better return on IT investments. In the vast majority of cases, these tools are shared online by the developers, and anyone can access them without any restrictions.

The term open-source, as well as it is ideal, was developed by Eric Raymond and other OSI founders to present free software to companies in a more commercial way, avoiding an ethical and rights debate.

The terminology “Open Source” appeared during a meeting that took place in February 1998, in a debate that involved personalities who would later become a reference on the subject. Examples include Todd Anderson, Chris Peterson, Larry Augustin, Jon “Maddog”, Sam Ockman, and Eric Raymond.

The acronym FLOSS, which means Free / Libre and Open Source Software, is an aggregating way of using the concepts of Free Software and Open Source in favor of the same software, since both differ only in argumentation, as mentioned before.

The developers and supporters of the Open Source concept say that this is not an anti-capitalist movement, but an alternative for the software industry market. This collaborative model present in open source led the author’s right to be looked at in another light.

The creation of the Open Source Development Lab (OSDL) is an example of the great efforts made by several companies such as IBM, Dell, Intel, and HP to work with the creation of open source technologies.

OSI imposes 10 important points for a software to be considered Open Source:

Free distribution

The program license must not in any way restrict free access through sales or even exchanges. Source code

Of fundamental importance, the software must contain a source code that must also allow distribution in compiled form. If the program is not distributed with its source code, the developer must provide a means to obtain the same. The source code must be readable and intelligible to any developer. Derived works

The software license must provide permission for modifications to be made, as well as derivative works. You must also allow them to be distributed, even after modification, under the same terms as the original license. Integrity of the source code author

The license must, clearly and explicitly, allow the distribution of the program built through the modified source code. However, the license may require that derived programs have a name or version number that is distinct from the original program. This will depend on the preference of the code developer. Non-discrimination against persons or groups

The license must be available to any group of people and any individual. Non-discrimination against areas of activity

The license must allow anyone from any specific branch to use the program. It should not prevent, for example, a company from using its code. Distribution of License

The rights associated with the software must apply to all those whose program is redistributed, without the need to execute a new license or additional license for these parts. Non-product specific license

The program is not part of another software, and to use it, the entire program must be distributed. If the program is extracted from that distribution, it is necessary to ensure that all parties are made available and redistributed to every one, since everyone has the same rights as those guaranteed in conjunction with the original program distribution. License should not restrict other programs

The license is not considered open source if it places restrictions on other programs that are distributed together with the licensed program. Technology neutral license

The license must allow the adoption of interfaces, styles, and technologies without restrictions. It means that no clause in the license can establish rules for these mentioned requirements to be applied to the program.

EXAMPLES OF OPEN SOURCE COMMUNITIES

CREATIVE COMMONS

Creative Commons Reel video

Creative Commons (CC) is a non-profit entity created to allow greater flexibility in the use of copyrighted works. The idea is to make it possible for an author/creator to allow the wider use of their materials by third parties, without them doing so in violation of intellectual property protection laws.

With a Creative Commons license, a composer can allow other artists to use some of his compositions by creating a mixture of rhythms, for example; a writer can make an article available and allow other authors to use it, either by publishing in other media, or by applying part of the content in a new text, or using the original, but making changes, anyway.

Thanks to the internet, this “collaborative spirit” has become much greater. The problem is that copyright protection laws are strict and often end up hindering the desire of many creators to not only give away their materials but also to use the creations of others who also want to share their work.

With Creative Commons, authors and creators can allow their works to be used in a much more flexible way. They can decide how and under what conditions their materials can be used by third parties. An example: a writer can allow anyone to use and change a text of his own, except in commercial applications. Note that, in this case, the Creative Commons license gives more freedom of use to the work, but does not remove the possibility of generating income from the original author: he may charge for the use of the text in the case of for-profit activities.

WIKIPEDIA

Almost 20 years ago, a discreet and humble way to disseminate and contribute to knowledge appeared on the internet. With the support of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia was born, and today has more than 54 million articles in 309 languages, written by volunteer collaborators around the world. Virtually all articles can be edited by those who wish to contribute, cite sources and references to enrich the information.

Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger were the creators of the project, which went public on January 15, 2001. The name Wikipedia came from the fusion of a reference to the Hawaiian word wiki (meaning fast, light) with the British term encyclopedia.

Because it is an open encyclopedia, many users and Internet users question the writing quality of the articles, the rate of virtual vandalism, and the accuracy of the information. Many articles in the Wikipedia database contain unverified or inconsistent information; however, anyone who takes the digital encyclopedia seriously and contributes to it has its merits: the scientific articles that Nature magazine compared in 2005 reached almost the same level of precision as those of the Encyclopædia Brittanica.

Wikipedia is often seen in academia as a source of inadequate information. Scholars point to its troubled environment due to “editing wars”, in which contributors struggle to maintain their text while suppressing that of others, although admitting there are great interest and originality in the work.

However, international literature seems to converge to what they conclude that Wikipedia’s success shows that self-organized communities can build high-quality information products. Wikipedia’s analyzes are increasingly detailed and critical, with no room for simplistic praise or rejection.

Wikipedia is not only an online encyclopedia but also a common good, a commons. Its quality and maintenance depend on the cognitive surplus, that is, in the free time of schooled people. It is recognized among the most successful collaborative initiatives on the Web, based on trust among millions of contributors and readers, supported by standards that promote reliability and objectivity.

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE

ABOUT. In: WIKIPEDIA. The free encyclopedia. Florida: Wikimedia Foundation, 19 march. 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About

AIBAR, E. et al. Wikipedia at university: what faculty think and do about it. The Electronic Library, v. 33, n. 4, p. 668–683, 2015.

Brasseur, VM (Vicky). Forge Your Future with Open Source: Build Your Skills. Build Your Network. Build the Future of Technology.Pragmatic Bookshelf.2018.

DALIP, D. H. et al. A general multiview framework for assessing the quality of collaboratively created content on web 2.0. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 68, n. 2, p. 286–308, 2017.

Herstatt, Cornelius / Ehls, Daniel. Open Source Innovation: The Phenomenon, Participant’s Behaviour, Business Implications.Routledge. 2018

Gain Access to Expert View — Subscribe to DDI Intel
['Deborah M.']
['Data Journalism', 'Technology', 'Open Source', 'Data Science', 'Journalism']