Blog

  • This Time It’s Different

    Those of us who have been around the block in the high tech space can point to a number of moments where the hype went way beyond the actual value. The worst example of this was probably crypto and NFTs, which are slot machines built on a casino where the house definitely has the upper hand. The world of AI is the successor to crypto, with one very important difference: the tools that have been lumped under “AI” are actually useful, or potentially useful. But that is also part of the problem: because there are some well-known use cases, there’s a tendency to exaggerate the usefulness of the technology. There’s also a tendency to exaggerate the possibilities of the technology to the point of delusion.

    Let’s start with the first problem: the term itself, “Artificial Intelligence”. It is neither “artificial” nor “intelligent”. What it actually is is advanced pattern recognition and language automation. For that insight, I credit Dr. Emily M. Bender, professor of linguistics and computational linguistics at the University of Washington. Labeling language automation tools as “AI” brings about the worst comparisons to dystopian sci-fi, but it also is, frankly, just wrong. No large language model is remotely sentient. None of the language automation tools are paving the way to Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) – the type of technology that “wakes up” and… makes us breakfast? provides tips on the betterment of humanity? decides humans have had their day and builds skynet? All of these scenarios are a bit silly, and the hype beasts concern trolling over implausible outcomes has become most wearisome.

    While we were distracted by the dystopia vs utopia non-debate, real harms have been perpetrated against real humans with these tools. And with the increasing compute power behind these language models, the degree of potential harm grows with each passing day. Real harms in the form of disinformation, bias, devaluing of creative works, and a growing inability to retract or prevent any of these harms. Add to that the growing body of research that shows LLMs are vulnerable to data poisoning and reverse engineering of its training data and it’s clear that we haven’t quite thought out the ramifications of relying on these tools.

    I’ll wrap up this blog post by (hopefully) stating the obvious: LLMs are obviously here to stay and can already do a number of useful things. I know I look forward to having an LLM fulfill my more mundane, rote tasks. But it’s crucial that we don’t anthropomorphize LLMs and ascribe to them characteristics that are definitely not there, however much we might wish them to be. It’s equally important not to buy into the dystopian doomerism about rogue AI, which is its own form of egregious hype. The more we worry about implausible hypotheticals, the more we risk missing the danger that’s here today. Humans were already good at institutionalizing bias and spreading misinformation. Now, with LLMs, we can do it faster and at a much larger scale. Buckle up!

    My guiding lights on this topic are the amazing people of the DAIR Institute, led by founder Dr. Timnit Gebru. Other influences are Kim Crayton and the aforementioned Dr. Bender. Read them today – don’t believe the hype.

  • Son of a Preacher Man

    1985: Rural Northeastern Arkansas

    When I was 12, I had an… well, I don’t know quite what to call it, but I think of it as an existential crisis. It started as an overwhelming sense of dread whenever we would drive in to our place of work. We ran a crafts business, and I was one of the employees – me, my older brother (17), and our parents. It was just us. We had moved to my mother’s small, rural hometown in northeast Arkansas to launch a business and capitalize on her family’s help in the form of free or cheap housing and office space, not to mention sweat equity partners like my aunt and uncle.

    Anyway, every morning we would make the short drive to the shop, and every morning I would feel a sense of overwhelming dread. A sense of neverending doom and dispair that this is it. This is my life. It’s never going to evolve from this into something better. Such was my mental state that when I somehow heard about Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am” in response to the philosophical question of whether or not we are real or merely living in someone else’s dream, my brain went absolutely wild. I went from an overwhelming sense of gloom to a full-on panic. Every day, I would question whether my world was real or imagined by someone else, and every day I would come to the unsettling conclusion that I didn’t know. An uneasy feeling settled in the pit of my stomach, and it wouldn’t budge. It was at this point that I started to wonder, “Is this what it feels like to go insane?” Cue another panic attack, but now, instead of thinking about the uncertainty of existence, I was dogged by the uncertainty of my sanity. Naturally, I dealth with these issues by… never telling anyone.

    At some point, after some months of mental anguish, I decided that if this is a dream, then I may as well make it a good dream and have fun with it. And that’s how I came to the conclusion that I wasn’t crazy. No crazy person could make such a logical deduction! Looking back, I like to think that it couldn’t have been that bad if I came up with a way to cope with it. But there’s a reason why that particular time period was scary for us and why it led to the summer of panic in 1985 – and also explains why this blog/newsletter is called “son of a preacher man”. 1984-1985 was a period of great uncertainty for us, much of it self-inflicted by my parents, and specifically my father.

    Flashback: Southwestern Missouri and the Ministry

    Before launching our business, we were a church-leading family in the Southern Baptist denomination. We were “in the ministry”, and my father had been a music leader, youth pastor, and associate pastor in Northwestern Arkansas, and then became a head pastor in 1980 in Southwestern Missouri. After being voted out of his first church after his first year (I’ll come back to this episode in a future installment) he and his followers decided they were going to start a new church, Victory Baptist Church. My father developed some rather strident views: The Southern Baptist Convention was “too liberal” and was insufficiently unkind to those in queer communities. He also was not fond of recent trends to ordain women. He was extremely bigoted against blacks and immigrants, as was our mother. As with most southern moms, she held the same views but was highly skilled in hiding it with a veneer of niceness and civility. They would never admit it, but they were functionally segregationists.

    Victory Baptist was where we were free to be us, shedding the official ties to the “liberal” SBC and putting all of our fundamentalist beliefs out in the open: scientific evidence of creation theory, avoiding the path to damnation paved with the gay agenda, abortion is murder, and the end times and the rapture were just around the corner. The rapture scared the shit out of me. I lived much of my childhood convinced that at any given moment, my mom would disappear and I would be left behind. Cue a number of moments where I would desparately try to find my mother out of fear that she had been taken away. Underneath that anxiety was the dual fear that I had been left behind because I didn’t pass muster as a Christian. So we created a small school to avoid the herecy rampant in our government schools and teach our kids the values of homophobic, racist, fundamentalist Christianity.

    Over time, my father grew increasingly frustrated with this ambitious project. I’ve honestly never quite understood why. From a career perspective, he probably felt that he could never achieve greatness as a politico-spiritual leader. One of the themes I’ll return to in this blog is my father’s narcissism – and my grandmother’s. But there was also undiagnosed mental illness and severe bouts with depression. He certainly didn’t have any changes in belief – his core beliefs are the same now, several decades on. Whatever the reason(s), by the summer of 1984, he was done, and he quit, throwing the family into chaos. We were unable to make mortgage payments, and we lost our house by that fall. This precipitated one of the most unsettling incidents I’ve ever witnessed. While we were moving out of our foreclosed house, my father suffered what I believe was a nervous breakdown and blacked out over a period of several hours. He started acting weirdly, eg. while loading a moving truck, placing furniture in a position on the edge where it would certainly fall off onto the road. When someone pointed this out, he shrugged it off and walked away. I’ll never forget walking into our house looking for my parents, and seeing my dad with his head buried in his hands. He kept repeating, “I can’t do it. I can’t do it” with my mom assuring him, “Yes, you can.” By this point, we had frantically begun to look for others to help us with the move move, and thankfully, they showed up to do the thankless job of making sure my dad didn’t place himself or others in harm’s way. When it came time to make the first delivery to our new rental home, a 30-mile drive on rural roads, they convinced him to get on the truck but would not let him drive – he was clearly too incapacitated to trust behind the wheel. He was characterized as “off” and not really present. At some point during this drive, he “work up” and wondered where he was. He had completely blacked out and had no recall of the preceding events.

    What It All Means

    It would be all too easy to look at these events and say, aha, that was some real trauma, and believe that this was the extent of it. But the fact is that our lives in the evangelical community prepped us for a lifetime of trauma and abuse. The irony is that the difficulties I outlined above are part and parcel of a lifetime spent moving from one traumatic moment to the next. The trauma of never knowing if you were good enough to get into heaven. The trauma of believing in a literal hell that awaits you if you don’t measure up. The trauma that stems from a continuous fear of being “left behind” by the better Christians. The trauma of believing we were heading into the “end times” and preparing for the 2nd coming of Christ. The trauma of living in a household with a Father who saw himself as the anointed head of household and head of the church, our “Christian flock”, coupled with the stress and paranoia that stemmed from all of the above. And then, ultimately, how it all fell apart when we could no longer maintain that veneer that we had strived for so long to present to the outside world.

    I tell this story, because, while my personal crisis the following year pales in comparison to my father’s, it shows a direct link between a traumatic period of our family’s life and my inability as a child to process all of the prior trauma. This period of time, during my most formative years, had a profound effect on who I am today. As an adult, looking backwards, I often return to that traumatic time, haunted by its many ramifications: a brother who later came out as gay, whom I would describe as “psychologically broken” by my fundamentalist parents; a father and mother who never evolved emotionally, choosing to remain steadfast in their awfulness; and a strong desire to seek a replacement for the certainty of fundamentalist Christianity, as abusive as it was, which meant I have often been vulnerable to charismatic grifters with good storytelling skills.

    In many ways, our family’s story of the past 40 years is America’s story of the past 40 years, especially evangelical Christian America. Abusive relationships with authoritarian Christian leaders, hateful bigotry, an ambition to purge America of its sinful waywardness, a desire for the freedom to dominate others that we deem to be lesser, and most of all, political striving – it’s all there in our family. I don’t think most Americans truly understand evangelicals and the dangers of their beliefs. In this blog series, I plan to peel back the layers that we wanted everyone to see and show the seedy underbelly of how this culture functions – or, rather, doesn’t. I will lay bare our unapologetic racism. I will expose our suspicion of democratic principles and our cavalier dismantling of them. And I will hopefully show that there is no compromise with those who sincerely believe that they are liberating America from Satan. But I’m not going to create boring academic lectures; I’m going to pull examples from our family’s history to *show* these principles in action, laying bare the subtext and speaking the unspoken. I continue to be disappointed with how most of our media cover the evangelical movement. I hope that by putting a human face on this movement, I can help others to understand this world more fully.

    Also on:

    brid.gy Medium

  • Why is This Site Called Pro-Life?

    You may have noticed the name of this blog and wondered what this is all about. Am I going to scream at you that abortion is murder and stopping the baby killers? No. Well… unless the subject is infant and maternal mortality in the United States, in which case I will tell you that our terrible racist healthcare “system” and lack of reproductive rights does in fact put babies, and their mamas, at risk. The United States leads the industrialized world in infant and maternal mortality, and not in a good way.

    There are a number of reasons why this is the case:

    • Lack of comprehensive health care – the US leads the world in bankruptcies from illness
    • Rampant poverty, especially among younger women of color of childbearing age
    • High rates of unwanted pregnancies (for a number of reasons – will go into detail in a future blog post)
    • Relatively poor health: high rates of diabetes and other chronic debilitating health issues as well as lowest life expectancy of industrialized countries
    • Lack of prenatal care (will address this in the future – know that this is connected to the US’ overall rejection of reproductive rights for women)

    In every point made above, there is a readily available solution. In fact, every other industrialized nation has solved this problem, and it would be relatively easy for the US to address these issues. The irony is that those most opposed to abortion – those with the gall to call themselves “pro-life” – have resisted every opportunity to address any of the above issues. Every. Single. Time. In fact, they are the ones most vehemently opposed to addressing these problems. Sickening, no? Isn’t it odd that those who call themselves “pro-life” are actually ensuring that more women and children die?

    One of the reasons I started this blog and named it “We Are Pro-Life” is because we, those of us who actually care about people in our communities, we are the real pro-life advocates. We are the ones who advocate for trans lives. We are the ones who defend black lives. We are the ones with the core belief that everyone is equal in the eyes of our creator.

    We. Are. Pro. Life.

    Not those other clowns.

  • There is No Open Source Community

    There is No Open Source Community

     

    In January, 2006, I published this article on O’Reilly’s OnLAMP.com site, which was recently shut down. I’ve always been proud of this essay, because I think I got a lot right.  I’m republishing it now in the hopes that it will continue to educate others – and perhaps  allow others to critically evaluate where I fell short in my arguments.  The central thesis is here:

    The commoditization of software and a gradual, long-term reduction in price have played far more important roles than previously recognized. Business strategy designed to leverage open source should focus more on economies of scale (in terms of user and developer bases) and less on pleasing a mythical, monolithic community.

    Basically, stop treating open source as a social movement, because it’s not. This false assumption has caused much harm to software developers and users alike (more on that in a follow-up article). However, while I’m busy patting myself on the back for writing about software commoditization, I missed something fairly big: the value of source code itself is essentially worthless. This may have actually been more important than the price of software.

  • Tales of Privilege

    Here’s my latest on Medium:

    Much has been said recently about privilege and, specifically, white male privilege. How it feeds into the success of many people, especially those who benefit from institutions that privilege whiteness, maleness, and more specifically, maleness that falls within the strict bounds of gender and sexuality norms. It has been said that it’s impossible to separate the role of privilege from one’s success. That they are tightly coupled, and to suggest that one can have success without acknowledging the role of social privilege is highly disingenuous and tantamount to thievery. In other words, check your privilege. This is an attempt to put my story in this context and to show how conventional wisdom doesn’t always apply to individual stories.

    Read the complete post.

  • Open Source and SaaS

    Now that I work in an engineering environment tailored for SaaS development, I’ve developed a better understanding of the challenges they face when open sourcing their code. I wrote it up for OpenSource.com in a 2-part article, “How to decide whether to open source your SaaS solution.

    Some tidbits:

    The decision to open source code requires a fair bit of planning if you want to do it right, especially when it comes to user support and documentation. In the case of SaaS, the required planning is different, although it shares some factors with any open source effort. In my series, How to Make Money from Open Source Platforms, I focused on software that exists solely to be deployed on a computer, whether on a local machine, in a data center, or in a cloud platform (yes, I know the last two are redundant).

    There was a simple reason for this focus: It was what I knew. In my career, I have always worked with software, of commercial and community origins, to be installed somewhere. Now I work directly with engineers who take software designed to work solely on their website and with their particular infrastructure, automation, and orchestration. The fact they have been able to take this software and offer it to others in a way that is not only usable but can actually power other businesses is a testament to their commitment to an open source world.

    This article attempts to summarize their experience and point out lessons to draw from it. I’ll also try to identify how open source efforts relate to business and product strategy for SaaS models.

    I try to go into some level of detail, using my favorite tool: supply chain funnel analysis. If you’re looking into taking your SaaS code open source, I hope this helps you.

    Read the full article

  • Prague Symposium Agenda – Oct 26

    As part of our ongoing relationship with the Linux Foundation, we have another symposium coming up this week, co-located with the Open Source Summit in Prague. (Registration is $150 for OS Summit attendees) We have a great agenda!

    What: Open Source Entrepreneur Symposium

    When: Thursday, October 26, 9:00 – 17:00

    Where: “London” Conference Room, Open Source Summit

    Tickets: Add to your Open Source Summit Europe registration – inquire at the registration desk.

    Agenda

    9:00 – There is no Open Source Business Model – Stephen Walli, Microsoft

    9:55am – Bootstrapping is the New Black: Building a Profitable Open Source Enterprise from Day One – Leslie Hawthorn, Red Hat, and Beth “pidge” Flanagan, Togan Labs

    10:50 – coffee break

    11:00 – Innovating in the open: Lessons from a 3 time founder of successful open source based businesses – Evan Powell, Cloudbyte

    12:00 – Lunch

    13:15 – Managing internal or external open source supply chains – Shane Coughlan, Leader, Open Chain Project

    14:10 – Why contributing upstream is sustainable engineering – Colin Charles, Percona

    15:00 – break

    15:10 – The great open source business model smackdown. It’s the debate to end all debates! Evan Powell, Stephen Walli, Beth Flanagan, and Colin Charles

  • Podcast: Shane Coughlan of Openchain

    Podcast: Shane Coughlan of Openchain

    Shane Coughlan is the founder and manager of the Openchain Project, which “builds trust in open source by making open source license compliance simpler and more consistent.” As any software asset management person can tell you, they get cross-eyed when it comes to open source license compliance. My opinion has always been that this was due to lack of information outside of the immediate sphere of open source developers. The Openchain Project aims to remedy that, and in this podcast we talked about the challenges of doing that. It’s a great listen!

  • TechRepublic: Open Source and Corporate Funding

    I have more to say about this. See the original article on TechRepublic.

    Basic argument goes like this, “individual developers working in their mom’s basement no longer drive open source development! Now it’s all about the corporate $$$$.” My initial thought is “duh”. I’ve always felt that the narrative about a decentralized army creating amazing software that undermined large vendors was entirely wrong. So it’s not that open source is “increasingly” about corporate funding – it was *always* about corporate funding. And as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, open source is not free software. Free software, also known as software freedom, has been about the rights of individual developers and users against the IP cabal of the TIC (techno industrial complex). Open source was about, “yeah, that’s great – but how can I profit from that?”

    So congrats to TechRepublic for being about 15 years behind. I guess?

  • EnterpriseIT Writeup on LA Symposium

    EnterpriseIT Writeup on LA Symposium

    If you’ve been watching this space, you know we’ve been gearing up for our LA symposium on September 14, co-located with the Linux Foundation’s Open Source Summit. Swapnil Bhartiya walks through the different talks and why you should go – as well as a good bit from me about OSEN and the event:

    “The secret of 21st century innovation is that much of it doesn’t happen inside software vendors anymore, rather the most innovative companies have learned how to make use of all the innovation that happens outside their office walls and often beyond their control.

    So how does one take advantage of the open source innovation happening outside of your purview? And learn how to build products and business in this new collaborative model? That’s why you should attend – RSVP now ($149.99).