<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Nick -</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
I doubt I can do justice to this for you, but will give a try.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">The idea(l) behind open-source is
two-fold: <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<ol>
<li>develop a "commons" of re-useable resources to be shared by
all. This concept really took off with the introduction of
Linus Thorvald's Adaptation of BSD Unix to run on IBM PCs and
an explosion of software built on top of and around that one
thing. This movement began a lot earlier and the world of
Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) variant of ATT Unix was
perhaps the strongest center for that... other efforts I was
aware of include things like the Andrew File System (AFS) out
of CMU (nod to Frank) and project Athena out of MIT.</li>
<li>crowdsource the troubleshooting, debugging, and validation
of system's design. By making the source code available and
free to use (with some restrictions), large numbers of
system/software designers become motivated to look at, adopt,
improve, build-upon that code-base and thereby improve and vet
the code well. There are notable exceptions indicating that
big holes/bugs can exist in spite of this scrutiny. I think
there was a hoopla a few years ago around some (obvious?)
security holes in the primary open-source router software used
in most pro-sumer grade network routers, and maybe even
commercial-class ones. <br>
</li>
</ol>
<p>This GitHub thing Roger posted is (as Roger indicated in his
subject/post) is clearly trolling on behalf of the anti-lockdown
movement... trying to use the open-source community mechanism
(open and free view of the software and the process of it's
development, and the ability for anyone to pitch in, comment,
criticize) against the ideas behind this particular model (and
ANY? similar model).</p>
<p>I'm not sure this is a first, but from what I know, there
haven't been "political" trolls haranguing GitHub mediated
open-source efforts... there have probably been "religious"
wars between differing schools of thought on the best way to
solve a particular problem, but the preferred way to handle that
is to FORK the project and let the alternative subset go pursue
their alternative ideas. <br>
</p>
<p>To some extent, this is the way the world is responding to the
pandemic at a policy level. Each country roughly has it's own
unique/idiosyncratic response to the pandemic... some perhaps
taking their lead from others. Within the USA (and I presume
other "federated" governments) we have states/governors
following the general guidelines (lame as they may be) of the
federal government and modifying/elaborating them to match their
regional context, and again each
county/city/borough/neighborhood may well do the same. In
principle these policies are open and transparent as are the
data that are gathered at each level on the resources expended
and the results obtained. This is the Open-Data aspect that
Tom Johnson and others here promote.</p>
<p>The US Constitution (and our entire body of law) might be
considered open-source and I suspect more than a few states and
younger countries have borrowed parts of our constitution and
legal system to build their own from (for better and worse)...
just as our Foundling Fatheds apparently used some of the
features exhibited by the (orally maintained) Iroquois
Federation and the ideas of French political thinkers such as
Montesquieu. <br>
</p>
<p></ramble></p>
<p> - Steve<br>
</p>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:016c01d6249f$43c1c260$cb454720$@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Marcus, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks for taking my question seriously. I
understood what I was talking about even less than I usually
do. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let’s say I was an evil genius and wanted
to introduce evil code into a project on github. What would
happen?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">N<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nicholas Thompson<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Emeritus Professor of Ethology and
Psychology<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Clark University<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:#0563C1">ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:#0563C1">https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Friam
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com"><friam-bounces@redfish.com></a> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Marcus
Daniels<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, May 7, 2020 11:05 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Friam@redfish.com"><Friam@redfish.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] Meanwhile, back on the troll
farms<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Nick writes:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">< </span></b>What
exactly IS the policing mechanism in open source. Darwinian?
Reputational? Does this HAVE to provoke a crisis of
confidence in the general public? Or could it be seen as a
heroic thrown-together first step that is now being improved?
><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">They are whining about simple or absent
unit tests as a litmus test for whether the code is
reliable. It’s like saying you don’t dare drive your car if
you didn’t take out its alternator and test its voltage output
last week. ‘cause someone might have changed the
alternator! Eventually there will be consequences if the
alternator fails, like stalling or the battery dying. Same
thing in a big simulation. All of the parts and pieces of a
simulation are there for a reason and global things will start
to change in noticeable ways if something is broken. I would
say getting mechanisms working correctly is less difficult
that choosing what mechanisms are appropriate in the first
place. Usually in use of a simulation one has
instrumentation available on almost everything, and there is a
constant checking and double- checking even if those checks
are not embodied in automated tests. Automated tests can even
give a false sense of security, because they may not deal with
the parameter ranges that happen in with the coupled system.
If you would rather have a bunch of unit tests, or to have
modelers using and stressing the code every day, you have the
wrong priorities.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">My irritation is with the notion of unit
tests as a prerequisite for code reliability. There are
tighter ways to integrate assertions of code behavior with the
code. The bandwagon obsession with unit tests is in some
sense an obstacle even better practices. I wouldn’t even
call them trolls, because a troll has intention to rile people
up. These folks are more like pompous ditto heads who feel
the need to posture about the right way to do software
engineering. People that love unit tests love not
understanding the problem they are solving, and prefer to work
in pieces. This take a is a little harsh, but in this
context (advising COVID-19 policy) I don’t find the behavior
very helpful.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Marcus<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a>
archives: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a>
FRIAM-COMIC <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>