Oracle vs Google

In 2006, Sun released it’s final version of Java as ‘open source software’. In 2010, Oracle purchased Java and described itself as the “steward of Java’s open source movement with a commitment to fostering a community of participants.” The components that make Java ‘open’ are known as ‘application programming interfaces’ (APIs). They allow participants to extend Java functionality without going back and either replicating or changing it. Most apps running on Facebook today are written this way. It’s what allows them to plug into different platforms across the net. On May 7 Oracle sued Google for copyright infringement because it used API’s to extend Java to work on Android devices. Now, did Oracle go back and declare Java API’s proprietary ..? If so, non-public APIs would make it a closed system. If not, a public API referencing non-public software really isn’t open anymore either, now is it ?

The name of the game

Just when Republicans were starting to feel that Mitt Romney is for real ..his senior campaign adviser blows his cover, What about all those socially conservative positions he took during the primaries that might not play well with more moderate voters in the general election ..? and may even contradict positions he took earlier in his political career ..? “Well, I think we hit a reset button for the national campaign .. change everything and, like an Etch-A-Sketch, shake it up and start all over again.” This is actually more revealing than deceptive.

Irreconcilable narratives

“The man who lets a leader prescribe his course is a wreck being towed to the scrap heap. It is the innovators, outside the status quo, who carry mankind forward.” Ayn Rand

I came across the following narrative in the paper this morning. I guess it’s a better example of ‘contradiction’ than ‘deception’ but it sounded jarring. If the Republican Party doesn’t admit there’s a fundamental contradiction going on here ..then they’re being genuinely dishonest. First, I hear the GOP say “we are willing to make tough choices to reduce federal deficits, limit spending, lower taxes and put the country on a better financial footing” [ link ]. Which leads me to believe they’re serious about reducing the size and expense of government. Then I hear Gingrich say: “..what I’ve been trying to do is in the tradition of Kennedy, which is to take very large ideas and try to get America moving again.” To accomplish this he pledges to: “..put colonies on the moon .. reshape the geopolitical landscape.. and put $2.50 per gallon gas in every tank” [ link ]. Now my prior belief that Republicans are serious about reducing the size and expense of government has been blown all to hell. He goes on to say: “I’m a visionary with big ideas that candidly, my opponents can’t comprehend” and paraphrases Proverbs 29:13 saying “You need a visionary leader with very big, bold ideas ..without vision, the people perish” [ link ]. And there goes my belief that Republicans value individual initiative. It sounds like he’s saying political leaders are better stewards of economic progress. I think there’s danger in confusing visionaries like Steve Jobs with visionaries running for political office. I’m not sure I’m ready to replace captains of industry with leaders of state.