Ha! Check it out. StackOverflow just released a Documentation project
:). http://stackoverflow.com/tour/documentation

It's not the end game, for sure; but it's a big step in the right
direction. With this, we may be able to converge on StackOverflow as a
central source for support (as we've converged on github as a central
source for repository management), thus increasing visibility of support
options and directly exposing the services of reputable user-providers
with reputable user-consumers. (I.e., someone who's willing to pay a lot
can just directly contract the support services of one of the major
contributors to the centralized documentation.)

Kael


On 08/01/2016 03:13 PM, Kael Shipman wrote:
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> You make a good point, and I think it can be well-addressed by several
> elements that already exist:
>
> First, and for me, most important, is customer service. Open Source
> has been way behind in this, but there's an obvious and easy solution:
> the third-party support network (like some of what Red Hat does).
> Things like Stack Overflow need to be formalized into infrastructure
> (i.e., vendor-independent services) that offer users the opportunity
> to make a living as experts answering questions. Again, this reflects
> the new level of economic democratization demonstrated already by
> other latent-supply businesses like Uber, et al. (To be clear, a
> "latent supply service" takes normal people with extra assets, like
> cars, time and knowledge, and gives them an opportunity to turn those
> assets into immediate income.)
>
> As for marketing, I'm still mashing this around a bit. Most
> interesting to me is that in a future where everything is open,
> "marketing" would serve to unify products, rather than divide them. In
> other words, you wouldn't have GnuCash vs Quickbooks -- you would
> GnuCash AND Quickbooks, each providing a unique interface over a
> common, standardized data storage mechanism for extended business
> data, of which financial data is a part.
>
> This would allow users with different personalities to use whatever
> program (i.e., interface) they want without having to force other
> users to use the same. That is, it would eliminate the classic "Asana
> vs Basecamp", "Quickbooks vs Quicken", "MS vs Libre", "Google vs
> Dropbox", etc. Because collaboration infrastructure would provide very
> low barriers to standardization and because culture would provide high
> pressure to comply (already indicated by the Convergence of the Web
> Browsers and the availability of APIs on paid services like the
> above), a world where programs are siblings (i.e., interchangeable
> units) in a "functionality hierarchy" seems perfectly conceivable to me.
>
> This is effectively like "programming the real world": You take
> standard OOP patterns and principles like inheritance, encapsulation,
> polymorphism and composition and apply them to organizations like
> businesses, government, nonprofits, unions, etc.... Each "class"
> (i.e., organization) becomes increasingly specific
> (single-responsibility principle), the elements of the system become
> more interdependent, and the sharing of common knowledge resources
> among organizations of the same essential category allows
> organizations to effectively "inherit" from and "compose" with others.
>
> Maybe I'm going a little crazy here :), but programs are the purest
> representation of ideal systems that we have, and it makes a lot of
> sense that humans would be evolving to more tightly mimic ideal
> systems design. The result of this evolution would be greater group
> cohesion, fewer resources wasted in conflicts, and greater efficiency
> in converting resources to benefit -- i.e., greater success for the
> human race (and arguably, eventual disaster for the planet).
>
> As a final note, I agree, products like LibreOffice desperately need
> investment, and not just in the specific program components that make
> it work. All of what it needs -- the marketing, documentation,
> customer service, etc. -- can be funded through a service like
> BountySource (well, BountySource in 5 years when it's really useful).
> At the end of the day, the user has to pay one way or another -- we
> just need to connect those dots, and that's not that hard.
>
> Kael
>
> On 08/01/2016 11:49 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> *Gentlemen,
>> If you believe that the future of Open Source should be in the
>> application area, your example of using a small portion of Quick
>> Books revenue to improve an Open Source product are missing the
>> entire process of having users.... Commercialization, advertising,
>> Customer service, documentation, help systems... at the end of the
>> entire process is the technical product (program).  The technically
>> most important part of a product, is almost the least important part
>> of bringing a solution to the real world.  Try looking at the almost
>> non-existent market penetration of Libre Office / Open Office is due
>> to the price, FREE, means nobody telling me why I want to use the
>> product, nobody telling me the product exists (NO advertising), no
>> training seminars for VARS, no product co-commissions = NO REASON I
>> SHOULD Hustle my users into the product.  I will get to service the
>> product and get nothing for recommending it.
>>
>> John A. Ward
>>
>> *
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>
>>     -----Original Message-----
>>     *From:* [email protected]
>>     [mailto:[email protected]]
>>     *Sent:* Thursday, July 28, 2016 09:00 AM
>>     *To:* [email protected]
>>     *Subject:* Osdc-list Digest, Vol 71, Issue 5
>>
>>     Send Osdc-list mailing list submissions to [email protected]
>>     To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>     https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/osdc-list or, via email,
>>     send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>     [email protected] You can reach the person managing
>>     the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit
>>     your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of
>>     Osdc-list digest..." Today's Topics: 1. DRAFT: Manifesto for an
>>     Open Future (Kael Shipman) 2. Re: DRAFT: Manifesto for an Open
>>     Future (Bryan Behrenshausen)
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     Message: 1 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 21:28:32 -0500 From: Kael
>>     Shipman To: OSDC List Subject: [Osdc-list] DRAFT: Manifesto for
>>     an Open Future Message-ID:
>>     <[email protected]> Content-Type:
>>     text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hey all! I've been playing with a
>>     project for the last few weeks and I'm at a point where I'd
>>     really love some feedback and/or help on it. As the subject
>>     implies, it's a manifesto that attempts to describe what the Open
>>     Future might look like. I'm creating it as a way to inspire a
>>     shared vision to use throughout the community as we develop
>>     technologies, software, protocols and business ideas. My dream is
>>     that once it's done (i.e., once we've managed to put it through
>>     the wringer as a community and come out with a document we can
>>     all more or less agree on, if that's possible), I can use it to
>>     guide the work that I do now and into the future, and perhaps
>>     others might find it useful for that as well. For example, when I
>>     look for jobs, I can look for companies that represent an
>>     opportunity for me to build a small piece of the open future, or
>>     when I look for education, I can look to cultivate skills that
>>     will better allow me to contribute to it. The manifesto itself is
>>     an attempt to provide three elements: 1) convincing evidence that
>>     an open future is inevitable; 2) an image of what it might look
>>     like and how it might work; and 3) a set of concrete steps we can
>>     take now to hasten its arrival, including building certain pieces
>>     of infrastructure. I'm writing it in response to the frustration
>>     that I've felt in trying to drive open principles forward today.
>>     Many of these principles don't quite work yet because,
>>     personally, I don't believe we have realized quite where we're
>>     going with it all, or just how much infrastructure we'll need to
>>     get there. Just as a basic example, Quickbooks Online now pulls
>>     in $30,000,000 every month. If even 1/10th of the customers who
>>     pay for Quickbooks online instead put a single QBO payment into
>>     GNUCash instead, we'd have a product far better than Quickbooks,
>>     and the whole world would benefit from it -- not just those who
>>     paid. The ROI on this proposition is obvious enough that even a
>>     child could grasp the implications -- yet we don't have systems
>>     in place to leverage it. The action item, then, is to fortify our
>>     systems for linking payments to features (BountySource is an
>>     open-source start to that, but has a long way to go), and to
>>     start getting progressive businesses (probably starting with the
>>     ones we work at) to redirect their software budgets to
>>     open-source projects. There are a number of other concrete things
>>     like this that we can do to start moving in the direction of the
>>     Open Future, and I think having a manifesto in hand that helps us
>>     remember what that future looks like and what we can do to
>>     encourage it would be extremely useful. So, without further ado,
>>     here is the unfinished draft so far:
>>     
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kael-shipman/Manifesto-for-an-Open-Future/master/Manifesto%20for%20an%20Open%20Future.fodt
>>     (you'll have to download it and open it in LibreOffice) And
>>     here's the full github repo:
>>     https://github.com/kael-shipman/Manifesto-for-an-Open-Future I
>>     look forward to hearing what people have to say! If anyone wants
>>     to help, please do shoot me a line. The irony of drafting a
>>     document like this alone is far from lost on me ;). Thanks for
>>     your time, Kael ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date:
>>     Thu, 28 Jul 2016 10:32:42 -0400 From: Bryan Behrenshausen To:
>>     [email protected] Subject: Re: [Osdc-list] DRAFT: Manifesto
>>     for an Open Future Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hi Kael, Neat! I
>>     look forward to reading and exploring this. Openness needs more
>>     manifestos, for sure. In that vein, you might also consider
>>     checking out Robert David Steele's similarly-titled project:
>>     
>> http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12998524-the-open-source-everything-manifesto
>>     Bryan ------------------------------
>>     _______________________________________________ Sign-up for our
>>     weekly newsletter: http://opensource.com/email-newsletter
>>     Osdc-list mailing list [email protected]
>>     https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/osdc-list End of
>>     Osdc-list Digest, Vol 71, Issue 5
>>     **************************************** 
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Osdc-list mailing list | This is a place for our readers, writers, 
>> moderators and artists to discuss matters concerning Opensource.com and 
>> otherwise do the work that makes this a community practicing the open source 
>> way.
>>
>> Sign-up for our weekly newsletter: http://opensource.com/email-newsletter
>>
>> Send a message: [email protected]
>> Change preferences: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/osdc-list
>> Unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/options/osdc-list
>

_______________________________________________
Osdc-list mailing list | This is a place for our readers, writers, moderators 
and artists to discuss matters concerning Opensource.com and otherwise do the 
work that makes this a community practicing the open source way.

Sign-up for our weekly newsletter: http://opensource.com/email-newsletter

Send a message: [email protected]
Change preferences: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/osdc-list
Unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/options/osdc-list

Reply via email to