[Edu-sig] Refocusing on Capabilities (was PySqueak)

[Paul D. Fernhout]

kirby urner wrote:
>>Say, Kirby, speaking of "data rich content", can you suggest any Bucky
>>Fuller-ish or synergetics-type graphics or clip art under a
>>free-as-in-freedom license somewhere on the web I could use to spice this
>>demo up when I move beyond having everything in one file?
> 
> Click around in my websites.
> 
> A lot of what's in synergetics is generic concepts organized in
> sometimes novel ways, but not owned in the sense the icosahedron is
> not owned, nor the sphere packing lattice we call the CCP etc.
> 
> So often what's fun, given Python and a few tools, is to generate
> one's own images (no permission required).

Excellent idea. And probably what I'll do if I go down that path. Thanks 
for the suggestion. Now just to get a three-D turtle going again in 
Python... :-)

> However, if you want already-ready images, there's lots at
> grunch.net/synergetics.  If you have any questions about a specific
> image, just sent me off-list email.  

Thanks for the generous offer; I may do that.

== a bit of a copyright and licensing rant follows, but it is not meant 
personally  ===

In practice, though, as a free software developer who dislikes paperwork, 
it's probably more work to ask (perhaps multiple times as new things are 
of interest) for permissions than it is worth, compared to, as you 
suggest, doing my own stuff programmatically (or otherwise).

In practice, I almost never think something is worth using enough to ask 
for permissions; I just don't use it and look for something else, or I 
even abandon the project.

I also would have to trust a longer copyright paper trail. This is not to 
suggest anything sleazy by anyone, just that it's easy in copyright issues 
for miscommunication or misinterpretations to arise as to what is 
permitted when someone other than the original author or copyright holder 
makes a formal statement. So what one person who knows the author or 
current owner thinks they can do safely often looks a lot less safe to 
someone else coming at things second or third hand and relying on indirect 
representations.

Looking for stuff that is already clearly licensed is generally just 
easier, like at:
   http://www.openclipart.org/
which links further to various other similar sites:
   http://www.openclipart.org/wiki/index.php/Similar_Projects
[No Bucky stuff I could find though.]
Googling on "free clipart" first leads me to commercial sites it seems. 
:-( Are there any other good free clip art sites people recommend for use 
for clip art for Python programs?

Or perhaps now that I think of it, Wikipedia could be a source:
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller
There are two GFDL images on the Bucky page.
Or more broadly, lots of GFDL images here:
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:GFDL_images
Unfortunately the GFDL license is GPL-incompatible! I've already had words 
with Richard Stallman about this, :-) but so far I haven't been able to 
get him to acknowledge how evil GPL-incompatibility is for a content 
license (especially one the FSF promotes)! :-) From:
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License
"The GNU FDL is incompatible in both directions with the GPL: that is GNU 
FDL material cannot be put into GPL code and GPL code cannot be put into a 
GNU FDL manual." See also:
   "Why You Shouldn't Use the GNU FDL"
   http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html
which suggests, among other things, just using the GPL instead for 
content. Ironically, this FSF page expounds on the problems with some 
Creative Commons licenses being GPL-incompatible,
     http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/
but is strangely silent on GFDL/GPL incompatibility issues which IMHO are 
similar. I'm hoping that incompatibility gets fixed in later versions of 
the GPL or GFDL. I've already had it make impossible another project 
(building GPL-d simulations based on Wikipedia content).

I'm not sure yet on Python-license and GFDL content compatibility; I think 
they might work, except the GFDL would take precedence and might not 
really give permission to run the combined work?

I'm really picky about these licensing issues, because it is so easy to 
use something incorrectly and recently the formerly civil problem of 
copyright infringement in the USA has been turned into a criminal offense 
(felony), and though it is not yet often enforced, it is made easily 
enforceable by broad interpretations of what it means to make a profit 
from redistributing something.
   http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/CFAleghist.htm
See also for example this slashdot article and also my comments here:
   http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/13/1624200
So, best to stay on the safest ground when possible and when building 
stuff for others to use, and an example of the "chilling effect" of such 
copyright legislation on innovation in the USA (or, another 
"infrastructure" problem :-).

> Joe Moore has a lot of images.
> Plenty of other sources.  Fuller School is definitely data rich (huge
> stash @ Stanford).

Well, in the internet age, perhaps it might have been better to burn it 
all then give it to a place like Stanford? :-) This is assuming the heirs 
weren't prudent enough to insist Stanford make the information available 
for free-as-in-freedom use; perhaps they were? If the heirs had just 
burned it, and disclaimed copyright interests, then at least what little 
remained might feel free-er to use when derived from any second-hand 
source (there would still be issues though, from those sources). Does any 
small player really want to tangle with the Stanford IP licensing system 
when it smells money? I already saw Stanford's IP department (in my 
opinion) damage the Bootstrap Institute effort just as it got started, 
with a license designed by Stanford for Stanford's own short term benefit.
  http://www.bootstrap.org/dkr/discussion/1087.html
Anyway, I'm sure the Stanford Fuller Archive would be a wonderful place to 
make a visit to, and spend much time in for inspiration, but I think it 
unfortunately may have limited relevance to free internet activities 
otherwise, barring a lot of work by others (hint :-) to get Stanford to 
allow Fuller's works to be freely used online to make derived works.

I guess somehow I just assumed there would be freely licensed works 
related to Bucky. Too bad Bucky didn't do his work in the open source / 
free software age. Effectively, even if his work is readable for 
free-as-in-beer on the web, it is on practical basis then lost as far as 
being the basis for direct improvements for free-as-in-freedom new works. 
Still inspiring of course, for indirect use, but it sounds like, barring a 
lot of permissions work, the actual concrete realizations just need to be 
ignored when doing something new. :-( Which is a surprise.

To be clear, of course there is a lot of Bucky stuff on-line now, to be 
read exactly as it was written, and I am grateful to people such as 
yourself for making that happen. I'm sure even that was, and is, a lot of 
work. What I am talking about is more using it as a springboard to move 
further by cutting and pasting bits and pieces and reorganizing it into 
new derived works (like an educational Card stack). This isn't Bucky 
specific though; this a general problem for making any sort of new 
educational materials derived from any author's work. It just more ironic 
and frustrating to see works about building a newer and more prosperous 
society for everyone tied down by some of the same chains (mostly chains 
of assumptions :-) trying to keep the rest of society down.

Anyway, you made a great suggestion of using the ideas to generate images, 
and I think that is probably the best way for me to go if I made a 
HyperCard-like Bucky stack as a demo. And that's much the same reason I'm 
reinventing Squeak in Python rather than using it as it, with it's 
licensing issues and licensing heritage. Thanks again for the suggestion, 
it especially makes sense in a programming context. Each card could be a 
little mini-simulation with a topic and some code that draws a graphics 
with a 2D or 3D turtle.

Which of course leads me (lazy programmer that I am :-) to the thought, is 
there any free-as-in-freedom Python source code to draw Bucky structures 
on the net? :-)

--Paul Fernhout