[p2p-research] Implications of Alpha

[marc fawzi]

Hi Ryan,

I would agree with all points below but I'm confused as to how you
relate it to SaaS?  SaaS is not open. It can be fully closed, just
with an API. Facebook is SaaS in the sense that it offers its platform
APIs to any developer (with some stupid restrictions but it is a SaaS
platform in my view, just like Salesforce is)

What gave you the impression that SaaS refers to open systems?

Marc

On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 6:20 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Marc,
>
> My own view is that open is a good, but not necessary element of good.  I
> use many closed systems that I love.  Do I wish they were open?  Yes.  Will
> they be soon?  Not likely.  So, I can live in a world of only open and limit
> my options, or I can advocate for open and try to use it where it makes
> sense.  Bright line morality may feel good, but it isn't reality.  The world
> is a messy place.  Dialogue and collaboration happen, and collaboration
> entails give and take.
>
> Maybe we can assume socialists are similar enough to P2P to merit
> collaboration (as Herve does) or maybe we can assume that for profit is too
> odious to work with as some no doubt do.  For me, I rule nothing out.
> Michael Albert ruling out those who do not fight capitalism from his forum
> is childish and counter-productive.  I understand trying to control
> discourse, but without authentic dialogue and full menagerie of all types of
> organizations, the best solutions will not be found.  Morality means
> balancing competing interests in my view.
>
> Mistakes are in not reasoning and in not pursuing dreams...not in failing to
> follow a certain prescriptive worldview.  I support P2P and advocate for it
> as a collaborative ideal--even as a market philosophy--I do not see it as
> exclusive, optimal at all times nor do I want it to replace all other forms
> of systems even in technology.
>
> Ryan Lanham
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 7:48 AM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It would be infinitely more useful is he'd open it up as a service
>> (software as a service, to be accessed from other Web and P2P client
>> applications.
>>
>> I could think of many uses for its data collection and computational
>> capability in decision support systems as well as in any software that
>> needs to make decisions based on real world data.
>>
>> Letting people use it directly, as opposed to having it be a backend
>> service for software developed by others, is a huge mistake, IMO.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I've been thinking about Wolfram's Alpha.  The question I'd like to ask
>> > him
>> > is, what will it change.
>> >
>> > I saw JOHO's (David Weinberger's) interview.  It was fascinating.
>> >
>> > Here's my 2 cents:  The research paper and the informing blog post may
>> > be
>> > dead.  Yes, stringing ideas together to make a point is still useful,
>> > but
>> > now anyone can answer a question properly structured.  So, ideas may
>> > become
>> > more changes of queries.
>> >
>> > Another separate point, Michel recently sent around an academic Call for
>> > Papers for a P2P conference.  Isn't that a bit odd, inherently?  A COP
>> > on
>> > P2P?
>> >
>> > Ryan Lanham
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > p2presearch mailing list
>> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Marc Fawzi
>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>
>



-- 

Marc Fawzi
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi