Good point, Nik! Personally, I've been a proponent of open source
software for well over 20 years. Such tunnel vision was more common in
the early days, rare now. It is surprising to me to see this attitude
coming from a prominent institution.
Let me try a few approaches...
1. You could start by counter-argument: open source runs the Internet
(60-98%, depending on which measure, of internet servers/services are
running on Linux). Therefore, by the exhibited logic, the museum should
not be on the Internet. This of course is ridiculous and immediately
exposes a flaw in the logic.
2. Whether to use or not use software comes down to trust. Even
well-intentioned makers of software have allowed flaws introducing
security vulnerabilities. But this happens regardless of the maker, open
or proprietary (e.g., Microsoft). In general, open source might be
murkier to assess who is behind it, but open source affords everyone the
opportunity to see and assess the code themselves, a condition not
available with proprietary software. It is my opinion, an opinion shared
by many, is that having "many eyes" on an item will increase its quality
and security.
I think the problem here is the gross overgeneralization of the
aforementioned murkiness. If one is going to overgeneralize, you could
easily apply it to Microsoft-made software, for example, since their
software has been known to contain many, many security flaws over the
years. Yet, people still have a high degree of trust for this software
maker. And, yet, guess what? Even Microsoft is moving in the open source
direction!
My main point is this: open source is not the important criteria, rather
it is who has made and maintains the software that matters.
3. Again, I go back to the Linux community for the most obvious example.
There are many other examples (like macOS Darwin, Windows Core OS,
Android). In fact, with the prevalence of open source software in just
about everything, you'd be left with pen & paper if you really wanted to
fully avoid open source.
--wade
Lead developer & software architect for Walker Art Center
On 8/17/19 7:57 PM, mcn-l-requ...@mcn.edu wrote:
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 12:45:20 -0700
From: Nik Honeysett<nhoneys...@bpoc.org>
To: Museum Computer Network Listserv<mcn-l@mcn.edu>
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Assistance needed with ULAN data
Message-ID:<538fac0d-4c27-4350-b114-3cd8c3514...@bpoc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
This is a great left-turn from a ULAN question. Both the point of view of OSS
and the empowerment role of IT rather than as gatekeeper is fairly ubiquitous
in our field, and while I know this comes from frustration, (and I am guilty)
critique and antagonism, I?ve learned is not the answer. How do we engage and
educate these folks?
-nik
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu
To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
