Today, we were lucky enough to have Chris DiBona, Open Source Programs Manager at Google, during his quick trip down to Wellington to meet some ministers. Chris flew to New Zealand for Kiwi Foo Camp (a.k.a Baa camp) a conference held in Auckland and largely sponsored by Google.
Before Chris came to Google he was an editor for Slashdot and co-editor for Open Sources: Voices From the Open Source Revolution and Open Sources 2.0.
Chris has also been involved in two start-ups. The first was Konstrux Technologies, which implements GForge for companies. This he described as a positive experience however the major fall back was a lack of funding. After making a bit of money, Chris went on to begin his own start-up Damage Studios, which “went toast” due to a lack of funding.
Why no funding? Essentially venture capitalists don’t fund games. Typically, it was only after he started at Google (when Warcraft was making truckloads) that he was inundated with investment offers and flattery. “Chris, you were so ahead of your time, if only you had stayed in the game a little longer.” The experience still leaves him a bit soul crushed and is perhaps the reason for his sure advice to entrepreneurs… “Don’t do it!” A bit scary if you constitute a member of Creative HQ’s 15 start-up companies sitting in the crowd. Lightening up Chris says he hopes to do another start-up someday but underlines this will be hard given that Google is an amazing company to work for and they treat him really well, both in terms of family-time and financially.
The search engine Google began with the concept of “back rub,” the basic idea that if other sites link to you it’s important. Screening through a series of snapshots of the Google office, he pointed out a few of his favourites…like the fan thats in every computer science office he’s worked and does nothing! Chris talked about issues with Google’s previous hardware design. The set-up meant that servicing was a nightmare and it wasn’t very reliable. These issues were addressed this through a software strategy to exploit the processing power of the off-the-shelf PC hardware.
While the functioning of Google had us all gob-smacked, the real focus of the seminar was open-source, not surprising given this is Chris’s baby. We have Richard Stallman and his broken printer to thank for the idea of open-source. Richard was fed up with his printer jamming every 3rd page and even more annoyed that the solution to the problem constituted a breach of IP rights. The logical consequence was the creation of an entire free software system.
Today Open Source comprises around 50% of all software. It is basically a set of ideals expressed via licenses, which include weekly reciprocal licenses, Apache Software Licenses, LGPL, MPL, CPDL and FSFGPL. All requirements of these licenses are keyed on distribution, which involves both shipping out to others and links. If there are areas where Google want a stronger community around code, they put more people on on it. There are many motivations for releasing code. One study ranking primary motivations put Intellectual Curiosity Stimulation 44.9%, Skills Improvement 41.3%, Work Needs 33.8%, Open Source Idealism 33.1%, Non-work Functionality 29.7% and Professional Status 27.3%.
Someone from the audience asked how Google police their code release? Chris noted that there is no need for any extensive policing. Around half the time Google release their code as part of a platform strategy to encourage others to use it. Their open-source licence choice is really a means of reaching their target audience.
Google uses open source for reasons of control and ownership, adaptability and flexibility. If Google wants to do something out of the ordinary, they just do it. By not owning the software they are owning their destiny. Notably Google refuse to take in any public domain software unless it is strictly governed. In terms of how Google takes part in open-source, “they just do stuff.” Their open-source program comprises of code release, donations, international license discipline, API/ Protocol license discipline, advancing computer science, industry trade group participation, open-source infrastructure and open-source leadership. Google has released around 1 million lines of code and contributes around 9.5 million in donations.
Clearly a influential component of the giant Google, is the social compact they have with a variety of sources. Chris’s eyes light up as he begins speaking about the one laptop per child initiative he’s heading up for Google. The idea is to distribute these cute little machines to children in third world countries. The cool little green antennae, pick up the wireless connection, which is transmitted from computer to computer. The computers have a gig of Ram and run LinuxBios. The estimated costs of each is US $130 and Google intend to distribute a truckload.
As Father of the Google Summer of Code, some time was spent talking about this initiative. Chris is a practical guy. He doesn’t talk to enterprise corporates, only to developers, students and… humans. So the practicality of the Google Summer of Code is right down his alley. The Apache Software Foundation is one of the organisations involved in the programme. ASF provide mentors to work with the participating students. Surprisingly these students come from a variety of disciplines including biology, mechanical engineering, English literature, interior design, urban planning, astronomy, cartography, genetics and developmental psychology. One of Chris’s favourites was when a student got “the matrix” playing on his calculator. “Too cool,” he exclaims.
Chris proceeded to talk about the Google group working on Patent Law Reform. Software patents in the US are way too broad and consequentially a hindrance on company innovation. It costs around US $20,000 to get a patent and they are a fortune to enforce. When asked about Google’s policy on the GPL V3 s 7(c) law reform, Chis said they see it as is an ‘extra step which could take some time.’ Google has specifically decided not to take this step. Chris sees the section as deeply flawed for reasons of time and legal efficiency but the license is other ways fine. Chris has made some recommendations and notes that “in the end they will or won’t take my advice.”
Finally the question that everyone wants answered is posed. Does Google really want to own the internet? Chris with a humorous disclaimer exclaims “have you seen the internet?” Google’s mission is essentially to provide better access to information around the world. Naturally they have and will continue to come up against challenges. These are however accompanied by landmarks. Chris points out too many companies limit themselves because of what they are scared might happen. Following Google’s example it is better to confront these issues head on.
Thanks our principal sponsor Geekzone and to Victoria University for hosting this event.
0 Comments