By yaelk from Slashdot's hags department
Community manager Rikki Endsley writes:
The open source label was created back in 1998, not long after I got my start in tech publishing. Fast forward to late 2014, when I was thinking about how much open source technologies, communities, and business models have changed since 1998. I realized that there was no easy way (like a yearbook) to thumb through tech history to get a feel for open source. Sure, you can flip through the virtual pages of a Google search and read the "Best of" lists collected by a variety of technical publications and writers, much like you can thumb through newspapers from the 1980s to see how big we wore our shoulder pads, neon clothing, and hair back then. But neither research method is particularly efficient, nor do they provide snapshots that show diversity within communities and moments of time. The idea behind the Open Source Yearbook is to collaborate with open source communities to collect a diverse range of stories from the year. We let the writers pick the criteria, which means the yearbook isn't just full of the fastest, most popular, smartest, or best looking open source solutions. Instead, the yearbook offers a mix of open source solutions and projects, from a range of writers and communities, to offer a well-rounded (albeit incomplete) glimpse at what open source communities and projects looked like in 2015. The yearbook is now available for a free download.Read Replies (0)
By timothy from Slashdot's at-the-right-time department
The Washington Post reports that Apple has prevailed for the moment in its fight with the FBI over the agency's demand that Apple help them break the security of an iPhone — but not in the California case about the phone belonging to San Bernadino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook -- that more famous case, as we mentioned the other day, is of course not the only phone the FBI would like to peek into. New York federal judge James Orenstein scoffs in his 50-page decision at government arguments that Apple should be compelled to produce a software solution that would give them full access to content of the phone belonging to a drug dealer's phone.
[Orenstein] found that the All Writs Act does not apply in instances where Congress had the opportunity but failed to create an authority for the government to get the type of help it was seeking, such as having firms ensure they have a way to obtain data from encrypted phones.
He also found that ordering Apple to help the government by extracting data from the iPhone- which belonged to a drug dealer --would place an unreasonable burden on the company....
He also expressed concern about conferring too much authority in the government. "Nothing in the government's arguments suggests any principled limit on how far a court may go in requiring a person or company to violate the most deeply-rooted values to provide assistance to the government the court deems necessary," he said.
Whether the same logic will prevail in California is yet unclear; the New York decision is not binding on any other court.Read Replies (0)