Are a simple way to judge the value of a “alt/grassroots” tech project.
Open data – is the basic part of a project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_data with out this open they cannot work.
* hard to say, I think all the limited user data it collects will be sold for profit, it’s the business model. The code of the product is up on github. Say ½ a open.
Open source – as in “free software” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software this keeps development healthy by increasing interconnectedness and bringing in serendipity. The Open licences are the “lock” that keep the first two in place, what we have isn’t perfect but they do expand the area of “trust” that a project needs to work, creative commons is a start here.
* Yes its based on Chromium and all its modified code is on github i think. Think a 1 open
Open “industrial” standards – this is a little understood but core open, it’s what the open internet and WWW are built from. Here is an outline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_standard
* its built on top of a major open source project, supports most openstanderds? 1 open
Open process – this is the most “nebulous” part, examples of the work flow would be wikis and activity streams. Projects are built on linking trust networks so open process is the “glue” that binds the links together. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process
* The development seems to be done in the open on github but the business model is hidden behind the company structure so say ½ a open.
So that’s 3 opens for a silver #4opens project
But my wider thoughts:
Looking at the intro page, it looks like they are shifting round the exploitation. “Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it” Modern interpretation Of this: #dotcons only shift exploitation to the commons, the point is to challenge exploitation.