I just finished a quick 1st time read-through of the FLOSS book (well a couple of days ago tbh but I ain't had no internet access).
Thought I would share my initial impressions, and I'm curious about other peoples take on it...
Ok, this is going to be very much about 1st impressions. I'm not going to return to the book for specifics, this is purely whatever has stuck with me so far.
I do intend to return to several of the articles,most of which I have made notes for, to lead to a fuller understanding/engagement.
Also, as an aside to the various authors, please don't be pissed if I am a little offhand.
So, here we go. The intro I found a little 'dry'. I do understand the rigours and expectations of academic writing but come on, big yerselves up a bit, there's some good stuff in here:)
The first couple of articles I didn't really enjoy. Preaching to the converted I would say. THis is probably a personal thing. After a lifetime in and around the music industry, I'm done with the whole copyright debate. Can't remember which article it is but the one that starts with, and I paraphrase, "never has copyright been more keenly scrutinised by artists", well that's nonsense. THere was, as is commonplace when copyright issues raise their Cerberus like heads amongst the FLOSS community, a minor flame war regarding licenses for pure data stuff recently. One guy had the temerity to just say, again I paraphrase "here you go, a big folder with all my abstractions etc. Do what thou whilt with 'em. Sure enough, the responses pile in "oh no, you can't do that. If you release without a license it is automatically assigned one, and you wont like that one, whooo. THis is exactly the same argument the Performing Rights Society (PRS) here in the UK, has been peddling for years, " oh your piece is being performed in concert or on the radio, then it's automatically copyrighted through us, blah blah deblah. No it isn't. Not if I dont want it to! Phew, rant over.
I do now feel I have a firmer understanding of the whole Free Sotware V Open Source argument, so thanks for clearing that up for me somewhat.
Some of the stuff 'bout online communities I found fascinating and engaging but the place where it really gets going for me is in the critical theory. Deleuze, Foucoult, Guattari, Adorno, Jameson, Lacan, Debord, Marx fer krissakes! and lots of new peeps(to me) whose names I can't remember off the top of my head atm.
I'm also a big fan of the use of online articles as footnotes. There's a hell of a lot of more of a chance that I'm gonna checkout something online rather than buy a book to check out 2 pages. Again academia seems to be coming round to the fact that there is indeed worthy material available online. The book seems to serve as an excellent starting point towards contemporary theorists and their work, and for that it can only be applauded.
So overall, well done Aymeric and Marloes, you pulled it off again;)
There are issues with typos and a few weird phrases but hey if this was in Dutch/French some of my tenses 'might' be a little wonky as well. Also, in my early version there's a paragraph repeated twice at one point..
Good job y'all,
Jbz
--- [email protected] irc.goto10.org #pure:dyne
