Quote: (Originally Posted by
AD_ward9)
We discussed this on another thread.
Open Revolution is not open source as per GNU type licences. Open Revolution does publish the sources for all to see, publishes the safety process, the verification models and their sources, the circuits, their safety review, the mechanical drawings.
Actually, if I recall correctly, you publsh(ed) pseudocode, which is not "source" in the sense of the word that computer engineers (software and hardware) see it.
My point is simply that an "open" system is, as I define it, one which is free to copy and free to use. The GPL is one step back from "fully open", in that it is intended to (and does, according to several decided court cases) act as a virus, causing anything that incoroporates any part of what is covered by the GPL to likewise be covered by the GPL, whether the user intended that or not.
"Open Revolution" is nothing of the kind. The "open" part of it is intended to allow people to form a conclusion about the safety of the unit (that is, the soundness of the design), but not to allow them to use what has been learned on their own or incorporate it. I honestly believe that "open" is the wrong word for it, but that's ok - this is a semantics argument coming from someone who has a long background in
real open-source technology (e.g. FreeBSD).
Quote:
However, we have a high regard for Iain's integrity and the altruism of safety comes first in their business, just like in ours. We both believe there have been a string of CCR deaths from poor design. We both would like that to end.
With all due respect,
if you are correct in that assertion (I am not passing judgement in this thread on that matter) then you cannot succeed in this goal
unless your work is accompanied with political activism to bar from production/use anything that doesn't meet "your view".
And, IMHO, failure or not, the bottom line is that always being aware of Mr. Murphy and covering for his appearance is part and parcel if remaining alive underwater.
Quote:
Diving gives access to a wonderful environment under the sea, that it is only really diving that is preserving. When we dive I for one feel grateful at the priviledge of seeing things under the sea, live, in ways previous generations never could. I hope more can enjoy and be part of this. To make that come about, we do need safer equipment. If there is a better way than the Open Revolution initiative to do that, I am keen to hear of it. Please tell me the solution rather than the problem.
Cheers,
Alex
I'm not criticizing your efforts - more units on the market with different perspectives on design = more choice, which is always good. So long as that effort does not turn towards
limiting other's choice, I've no quarrel with it whatsoever.
I'm just pointing out that as soon as one runs to the patent office (or any of its analogues in the realm of product protection for commercial purposes) then the idea that this is all about altruism goes in the handwash bucket.
Not that profit is bad, mind you. You'll never see me quarrel with someone's quest for an honest buck, and frankly, I'm looking forward to seeing an actual unit in the flesh. You have definite differences from the other units out there, and some will call those revolutionary. I want to see 'em work before I decide if they are or not
In all honesty I hope you do wildly succeed, because that's good for everyone in the marketplace.
I have my suspicions as to how it will wind up from a competitive standpoint (all things considered, including cost of operation along with capital cost, balanced by what the market perceives as its benefits.) That is, how the value proposition works out for what you're building. But again, I'm not going to pass judgement there until I have something more than mere conjecture - which is all I've got right now.
I personally doubt I would/will be interested in buying one, but I could be wrong. That judgement would have to wait until they're actually "out there" and available to be looked at and toyed with.
No offense intended AD - the more the merrier, and the more information put forward the better,
so long as no part of the effort is attempting to force others from the marketplace.