<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><title>Michael Jay Lissner</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/" rel="alternate"></link><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/feeds/tag/open-source" rel="self"></link><id>https://michaeljaylissner.com/</id><updated>2013-06-28T22:56:37-07:00</updated><entry><title>New Tool to Remove Dead Feeds from OPML Files</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/posts/2013/06/28/trim-your-dead-feeds/" rel="alternate"></link><updated>2013-06-28T22:56:37-07:00</updated><author><name>Mike Lissner</name></author><id>tag:michaeljaylissner.com,2013-06-28:posts/2013/06/28/trim-your-dead-feeds/</id><summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Since Google Reader&amp;#8217;s closure is immenent, a lot of folks are looking for 
solutions. One problem I&amp;#8217;ve run into many times throughout the years is that
the feeds I have in Google Reader are largely dead, and there&amp;#8217;s no way to get
rid of the ones that are no longer updated or simply&amp;nbsp;gone. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://bitbucket.org/mlissner/trim-my-feeds/overview"&gt;So I built a&amp;nbsp;tool.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Check it out on BitBucket and give it a whirl. It&amp;#8217;ll go through an &lt;span class="caps"&gt;OPML&lt;/span&gt; file, 
check all the feeds in it, and make a new file for you that has them cleaned
out. In my case, it purged about 20% of the feeds I had &amp;#8212; a big&amp;nbsp;improvement. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#8217;s a simple tool, but look, if your friend hasn&amp;#8217;t updated their blog in 
two years&amp;#8230;they&amp;#8217;re probably not going to. If the feed is gone, you no longer 
need it cluttering your life. If a feed has been redirected, you should fix 
that in your reader! Little things,&amp;nbsp;right?&lt;/p&gt;</summary><category term="trim"></category><category term="opml"></category><category term="open source"></category><category term="google reader"></category><category term="exodus"></category></entry><entry><title>Project Idea: “User contribution aggregator”</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/posts/2010/06/28/project-idea-user-contribution-aggregator/" rel="alternate"></link><updated>2010-06-28T14:20:41-07:00</updated><author><name>Mike Lissner</name></author><id>tag:michaeljaylissner.com,2010-06-28:posts/2010/06/28/project-idea-user-contribution-aggregator/</id><summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;As a frequent contributor to various open source projects, I find that I often want to know just how much I have contributed over the years, and to which projects. With enough time, I could figure out every bug that I&amp;#8217;ve filed, every comment I&amp;#8217;ve posted, every patch that I&amp;#8217;ve submitted (there aren&amp;#8217;t many), and every &lt;em&gt;contribution&lt;/em&gt; I&amp;#8217;ve made. But it would take me a &lt;span class="caps"&gt;LOT&lt;/span&gt; of effort, and after not too long, I&amp;#8217;d be knee deep in records and notes of where I had&amp;nbsp;been.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For people that contribute and work on such projects, knowing these kinds of things is valuable in forming an online reputation. This lets people know whether you are a helpful person, what you find interesting, and where your expertise may be. If you&amp;#8217;re looking for work in such a field, it&amp;#8217;s great to be able to point to a record of contribution, and say, &amp;#8220;Yes, I am interested in this field, and I have a track record to prove it.&amp;#8221; It creates competition amongst&amp;nbsp;contributors.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But since the current eco-system of online contribution is so diversified, it becomes very challenging to determine a person&amp;#8217;s online reputation. Some sites do admirable work building in algorithms to calculate the value of users, and this is good. But if you&amp;#8217;re a person that has been interested in many applications, or that has been working on open-source projects for a long time, it&amp;#8217;s more likely than not that such systems fall&amp;nbsp;short.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What we need is an aggregated, centralized system that uses public APIs to build global &amp;#8220;meta&amp;#8221;-reputations.&lt;/strong&gt; This is likely not that hard, since many of the more-common systems for tracking user contributions already have APIs and &lt;span class="caps"&gt;RSS&lt;/span&gt; feeds for so many things. I&amp;#8217;m sure it&amp;#8217;s more complicated than simply plugging into an &lt;span class="caps"&gt;API&lt;/span&gt;, but creating such a system might not be that hard, and would create great value for the open-source&amp;nbsp;community.&lt;/p&gt;</summary><category term="user contribution"></category><category term="reputational system"></category><category term="Project idea"></category><category term="open source"></category><category term="aggregation"></category></entry><entry><title>Jacobsen v. Katzer Article Posted</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/posts/2009/10/03/jacobsen-v-katzer-article-posted/" rel="alternate"></link><updated>2009-10-03T21:52:21-07:00</updated><author><name>Mike Lissner</name></author><id>tag:michaeljaylissner.com,2009-10-03:posts/2009/10/03/jacobsen-v-katzer-article-posted/</id><summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Today I finally finished an article I have been writing for Wikipedia, as part of my &lt;a href="http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~bcarver/mediawiki/index.php/INFO_237_Fall_2009_Syllabus"&gt;&lt;span class="caps"&gt;IP&lt;/span&gt; Law class&lt;/a&gt;. The professor for this class is the same as the one that taught the Cyberlaw class I took in the Spring, and once again, he has asked us to work on Wikipedia as part of our&amp;nbsp;classwork.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;We were able to choose an article on Wikipedia that was related to the class, and I chose to work on the article on &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobsen_v._Katzer"&gt;Jacobsen v. Katzer&lt;/a&gt;, which is a very important case as it relates to open source licensing, patent law, copyright, &lt;span class="caps"&gt;DMCA&lt;/span&gt;, and just about every other possible &lt;span class="caps"&gt;IP&lt;/span&gt; law&amp;nbsp;issue.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, it was a very complicated case because Katzer has attempted to throw the book at Jacobsen (and vice versa). The court has not yet resolved all the issues, but from reading through about half of the court documents that &lt;a href="http://jmri.sourceforge.net/k/docket/index.shtml"&gt;Jacobsen has posted&lt;/a&gt;, it appears that Katzer&amp;nbsp;has:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Patented technology that was not his to&amp;nbsp;patent&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Attempted to get licensing fees from Jacobsen for those&amp;nbsp;patents&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Stolen the intellectual property of an open source project, stripped it of its license and then incorporated it into his own commercial&amp;nbsp;project&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Attempted to sue Jacobsen for copyright violation for something - I&amp;#8217;m not even sure&amp;nbsp;what&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;And more - see the article for&amp;nbsp;details&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In short, it&amp;#8217;s a nasty, nasty case, but ultimately it should work out for Jacobsen, and he should come out the better (or at least none the worse). At a minimum, he has to prove that the patents are invalid, Katzer stole his &lt;span class="caps"&gt;IP&lt;/span&gt;, and that he didn&amp;#8217;t steal Katzer&amp;#8217;s &lt;span class="caps"&gt;IP&lt;/span&gt; - a walk in the&amp;nbsp;park.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Clearly, that&amp;#8217;s easier said than done, but he&amp;#8217;s fighting what appears to be the good fight, and it looks like if he keeps at it, he will win in the&amp;nbsp;end.&lt;/p&gt;</summary><category term="patent"></category><category term="paper"></category><category term="open source"></category><category term="Jacobsen v. Katzer"></category><category term="FOIA"></category><category term="DMCA"></category><category term="copyright"></category></entry><entry><title>The Facts are In - Ars Technica Rocks</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/posts/2008/07/13/the-facts-are-in-ars-technica-rocks/" rel="alternate"></link><updated>2008-07-13T21:47:54-07:00</updated><author><name>Mike Lissner</name></author><id>tag:michaeljaylissner.com,2008-07-13:posts/2008/07/13/the-facts-are-in-ars-technica-rocks/</id><summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;For the past five years or so, I&amp;#8217;ve been using a feed reader of &lt;a href="http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/"&gt;one kind&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href="http://reader.google.com"&gt;another&lt;/a&gt; to read &lt;span class="caps"&gt;RSS&lt;/span&gt; feeds. For those who don&amp;#8217;t know what these are, they&amp;#8217;re great. What they allow you to do is &amp;#8220;subscribe&amp;#8221; to web sites, so that if the site is updated, you know pretty much immediately. I have about 40 of these subscriptions, which are mostly to friends&amp;#8217; blogs, news sites, or some other sites I like to keep track of. It&amp;#8217;s really convenient: I don&amp;#8217;t have to monitor some 40 sites, I just check my feed reader, and it will do the legwork for me on all of the&amp;nbsp;sites.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Anyway, I digress. One of the feeds I subscribe to is &lt;a href="http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.ars"&gt;Ars Technica, Open Ended&lt;/a&gt;, which is supposed to be their journal of open source news. It&amp;#8217;s usually top notch news, but I have noticed that occasionally certain open source news items don&amp;#8217;t make it to into Open Ended. I mentioned this to them yesterday, and today they have created a new &lt;span class="caps"&gt;RSS&lt;/span&gt; feed for open source&amp;nbsp;news. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Talk about service. They&amp;#8217;re officially the bomb. The new feed is &lt;a href="http://arstechnica.com/oss.rssx"&gt;arstechnica.com/oss.rssx&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Check it out. Pretty slick, I must&amp;nbsp;say.&lt;/p&gt;</summary><category term="ars technica"></category><category term="open source"></category></entry></feed>