Re: open source vs. constructionist learning
El Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:40:27 +0800 Carlos Nazareno object...@gmail.com escribió: Which of the 2 scenarios is constructionist? How could you justify to not include source code? That's evil. As evil as suggesting the use of a platform that children would be unable to use if they wished to. Even good documentation doesn't replace the need for source code, because studying it isn't the only purpose, it's a matter of security, durability, and simply the right to know what it's really doing under the hoods. Having the ability to comfortably fix, enhace, and share it, make it run on any architecture current and future, and also serve as an aid to learn the language it's written on. But I'm sure there are thousands millions of reasons more. Also you shouldn't underestimate their ability to learn new skills. -- Ismael Luceno signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
re: open source vs. constructionist learning
How could you justify to not include source code? That's evil. As evil as suggesting the use of a platform that children would be unable to use if they wished to. -- I'm really sorry for cluttering the list again, but I had to immediately reply to this. Some developers need to put food on the table and feed themselves and their family. Do you think that's evil? Do you think that it's fair that the legendary genius Sean T. Cooper who made http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syndicate_(video_game) at Bullfrog who's now making a humble living as an indie Flash game developer (http://www.games.seantcooper.com) is forced to give away for free to everyone his isometric game engine that he's selling (http://www.games.seantcooper.com/Develop.aspx) which he worked on for over a decade? He's already freely giving to everyone via tutorials free as in beer games to enjoy, but must you take away his livelihood? Not every developer can be as fortunate to be as successful as John Carmack to afford a Ferrari and play with actual spacecraft to give away his game engines for free (we owe a great debt to this man). - About code/apps as art: can't you respect the artistic wishes of an artist? Is it evil for a magician to keep secret the tricks of his trade? Code is art. If you are the author, it contains a part of your soul. Is it fair to invade JD Salinger's privacy against his wishes and demand he give an interview just to get ? - I agree about the security issues of not having the sourcecode for review. That is why it is dangerous for governments to be completely reliant on closed-source technologies. How about this: provide the sourcecode/files for private review to the governing body (like the OLPC dev team or organizers of local deployments) to make sure it doesn't contain malware, backdoors, etc and plays nice with the system, but not open to the whole world because it can also be exploited for the wrong reasons (hacking, kid cheating without learning (my multiple choice math puzzle example)) or prevent the author from feeding himself? Or maybe for the author to give his utmost assurance that the software contains no malware if he/she is unable to legally give reveal the sourcecode or if it will truly impair his ability to feed and clothe himself and his family. Is that acceptable? - This is a hypothetical situation, but what if none of you guys or the kids speak the language the program was written in? What if the app was written in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malbolge ? Aside from the admiration of the sheer craftsmanship and awesome display of a true work of horror, what good is it to anyone who wants to patch and improve the software? - What I think is evil is people who freely take other peoples' work and not give anything back in return, use it for good/productively, give credit or contribute to the community. For example, pirates and black-hat hackers who do it for profit and not for reasons of limited finances or without the intention of giving back something in return when they have the opportunity to do so later on. I'm sorry if I offended you guys, but I hope you can see that some of my points are very valid. Mabuhay. -Naz -- carlos nazareno http://twitter.com/object404 http://www.object404.com -- interactive media specialist zen graffiti studios http://www.zengraffiti.com -- if you don't like the way the world is running, then change it instead of just complaining. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: open source vs. constructionist learning
El Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:06:04 +0800 Carlos Nazareno object...@gmail.com escribió: Some developers need to put food on the table and feed themselves and their family. Do you think that's evil? As long as they distribute their software as free software, it's a good thing. Distributing non-free software is evil. There's no reason to do privative software. If my employer started to do something like that I would immediately quit and find another job. But, even if you can't find a company that agrees with the free software philosophy, doing software for internal use only isn't something bad, and many companies need such software. Do you think that it's fair that the legendary genius Sean T. Cooper who made http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syndicate_(video_game) at Bullfrog who's now making a humble living as an indie Flash game developer (http://www.games.seantcooper.com) is forced to give away for free to everyone his isometric game engine that he's selling (http://www.games.seantcooper.com/Develop.aspx) which he worked on for over a decade? He's already freely giving to everyone via tutorials free as in beer games to enjoy, but must you take away his livelihood? Why making his work free software would make him poor? :S In fact, what prevents him from selling his engine if it were free software? He would make much more money... About code/apps as art: can't you respect the artistic wishes of an artist? Is it evil for a magician to keep secret the tricks of his trade? There's a huge difference between performance of an art and the software. But, back to the problem, you could solve it by simply releasing the artwork under a different license (e.g. CC-BY-ND). But the code itself should be free software. How about this: provide the sourcecode/files for private review to the governing body (like the OLPC dev team or organizers of local deployments) to make sure it doesn't contain malware, backdoors, etc and plays nice with the system, but not open to the whole world because it can also be exploited for the wrong reasons (hacking, kid cheating without learning (my multiple choice math puzzle example)) or prevent the author from feeding himself? Not general enough, and anyway why should the children trust OLPC? Why should I trust OLPC? I want to see it myself. BTW, you should re-read my previous e-mail, there are more reasons. Hacking/cheating would never be a problem we should care about, same can be done with the binary. Or maybe for the author to give his utmost assurance that the software contains no malware if he/she is unable to legally give reveal the sourcecode or if it will truly impair his ability to feed and clothe himself and his family. Is that acceptable? I don't see how releasing the code under acceptable terms (i.e. free software license) would make the author starve. But if he doesn't desires to do so, he could keep it in his HDD, nobody would use it... is that better? This is a hypothetical situation, but what if none of you guys or the kids speak the language the program was written in? Then we could learn it! that's fun :D. What if the app was written in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malbolge ? Aside from the admiration of the sheer craftsmanship and awesome display of a true work of horror, what good is it to anyone who wants to patch and improve the software? You're torturing your own argument. - What I think is evil is people who freely take other peoples' work and not give anything back in return, use it for good/productively, give credit or contribute to the community. For example, pirates and black-hat hackers who do it for profit and not for reasons of limited finances or without the intention of giving back something in return when they have the opportunity to do so later on. Yep, that's another kind of evil, but I don't feel affected by it... Except perhaps pirates, if I had a ship it would be a huge problem. But I don't see how that relates to our discussion, you get improvements and more software in return... Anyway, we should teach child what is good, and free software is the only answer. -- Ismael Luceno signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: open source vs. constructionist learning
On 13.04.2010, at 11:06, Carlos Nazareno wrote: I'm sorry if I offended you guys At this point you're not even offensive anymore, just pitiable. We're not demanding anyone is giving away anything for free. We simply choose to do that ourselves, and we want to enable others to do the same, so we make available everything someone else might need to build on our work. But nobody is forcing you to do as we do, so don't whine. - Bert - ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: open source vs. constructionist learning
On 13/04/2010 10:42, Ismael Luceno wrote: El Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:06:04 +0800 Carlos Nazarenoobject...@gmail.com escribió: Some developers need to put food on the table and feed themselves and their family. Do you think that's evil? As long as they distribute their software as free software, it's a good thing. Distributing non-free software is evil. How evil? Scale of 1 to 10: compared to what other evil things? There's no reason to do privative software. If my employer started to do something like that I would immediately quit and find another job. Lucky you. You have an employer. Not everyone is so fortunate. .. Why making his work free software would make him poor? :S In fact, what prevents him from selling his engine if it were free software? He would make much more money... RUBBISH. If people can get stuff without paying, they won't pay. I have a Paypal donate button on one of my web pages for people to use who are making a lot of use (including commercial/industrial) of some tools I am giving away free (and which indeed may well become OSS in due course - depends on something outside my control). It has yet to be taken up. I do not see that releasing the source will suddenly make users feel supportive enough to start making any donation at all. QED. About code/apps as art: can't you respect the artistic wishes of an artist? Is it evil for a magician to keep secret the tricks of his trade? There's a huge difference between performance of an art and the software. You don't have the right to make such an assertion. That's called fascism. Only the author has the right to make such a determination. I am on the verge of giving up on giving away software (I have given away quite a lot; some is in OLPC) - because I am broke. I literally cannot afford to commit time to it. And seeing people in the privileged position of being in employment accuse people such as me of being in any way evil discourages me from making any contribution at all. Why should I bother? I cannot pay my rent using the gratitude of the community! Richard Dobson ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: open source vs. constructionist learning
We're not demanding anyone is giving away anything for free. We simply choose to do that ourselves, and we want to enable others to do the same, so we make available everything someone else might need to build on our work. But nobody is forcing you to do as we do, so don't whine. I'm fine with open-sourcing my own stuff and I have been. The argument is relevant because if the kids access 3rd-party flash games on the web, they won't have access to the sourcecode. The VM brings the exact same situation as Apple allowing unapproved apps running on the iPhone. If we're talking about OLPC's official policy for apps that will be distributed in official main builds, there are no arguments about open source. Local deployments are free to do with their machines as they want. -- carlos nazareno http://twitter.com/object404 http://www.object404.com -- interactive media specialist zen graffiti studios http://www.zengraffiti.com -- if you don't like the way the world is running, then change it instead of just complaining. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: open source vs. constructionist learning
Carlos, This was posted to the wrong list. Please post questions about constructivist learning to IEAP i...@lists.sugarlabs.org where people who study education can provide a real answer. wad On Apr 12, 2010, at 9:40 PM, Carlos Nazareno wrote: Questions: A) Syntax vs. Algorithms Scenario 1: complex XO game is built in C, binary, complete C sourcecode + all source files + minimal documentation are included. Kid only understands Python. Sourcecode is complete gibberish. Kid enjoys game anyway learns from content. Scenario 2: complex XO game is built in C, binary, no sourcefiles or C sourcecode included, but algorithms/principles used to create the game + mechanics in English tutorial + pseudocode are included so users can create their own version of the game using any language. Kid only understands Python. Kid enjoys game anyway learns from content. Which of the 2 scenarios is constructionist? B) Engaging vs. Spoonfeeding Scenario 1: Closed binary of new free fantastic game is provided, contains chockful of puzzles easter eggs for kid to explore and discover. There are no spoilers available on the net. Kid explores and collaborates with friends classmates to solve the game, gain inspiration from the game implement their own inspired version in Python. Scenario 2: Sourcecode is included, kids peek into the sourcecode to get all the answers to the puzzles without having to explore, collaborate or flex their mental muscles or creativity. Basically no effort. Game over, game is done. They have a good laugh and move on to the next game. Which of the 2 scenarios is constructionist? Alternately, replace game with multiple choice math puzzles. Available multiple choice answers had no explanation, just the plain answers (e.g. 5, 12, 3.5, etc) C) Artistic Vision Scenario 1: I am an artist. This is my vision of a game, this is how I implemented it. This is my artistic statement, and I hope it inspires the audience to create their own artistic statement (hopefully games themselves too) inspired by it. I do not want users to tinker with and modify the sourcecode game itself I made, I want them to flex their mental muscles and creativity and create their own original games using any tool they want. Theoretical Example: http://www.amanita-design.net/samorost-1/ Scenario 2: Kid changes some of the text like the names of the characters, reskins some of the art assets, but game is unchanged. Laughs and enjoyment are had by friends, but nothing groundbreaking or original is achieved. Real-world Example: http://www.thepencilfarm.com/blog/2008/02/snow_day_at_the_beijing_olympi.html The *Official* Beijing Olympics committee hired programmmers who reverse engineered plagiarized Ferry Halim's game snow Day (http://www.orisinal.com - Please check it out, the Ferry is a truly gifted pioneering artist/game developer), not even bothering to replace some very obvious art assets. Which of the 2 scenarios is constructionist? (please note that I am into the mod community. I love to death the games mods that starting hackers budding game developers made in doom, quake, half-life unreal. Counterstrike Team Fortress would not exist without the mod community or the support ID software or Valve gave them.) I know you guys are sick of my voice, so I'm going to refrain from posting for a while. Please give the above serious thought, and I would really really appreciate it if I could hear your thoughts. Please have a great week, continue to rock on, you guys are my heroes. All the best, -n -- carlos nazareno http://twitter.com/object404 http://www.object404.com -- interactive media specialist zen graffiti studios http://www.zengraffiti.com -- if you don't like the way the world is running, then change it instead of just complaining. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
