A Semi-Daily Advocate of the Modern School, Industrial Unionism, and
I've long considered that if all else failed, I might try to get a Ph.D. at the Epistemology and Learning Group at MIT. My new post at Ed-Tech Insider pretty much guarantees that won't happen, I think.
Burn on. Just look at all the gooey institution-speak in Resnick's response:1. The insincere thanks. You can almost hear the bruxellating teeth all the way from Cambridge.2. Then they mischaracterize your argument--I see the problem as one that goes to the core of what we mean by open source. Resnick clearly thinks that showing it to his chums is open enough. I call bullshit on him and you did, too. Damn good on ya.3. If they "planned" to release the source code, then why haven't they. Empty promises, empty suits, vaporous and bureaucratic and full of crap.4. He may feel the process has worked very well, but that is only because he doesn't have to deal with inconvenient carpings by the like of Tom Hoffman and his ilk, God bless their little aggavating gadfly hearts.5. What process? Not an open process that's for sure. I think this is the most profound criticism of the project. Hasn't this been the problem in our government for the last six years--no accountability. The lesson of blogging is simple--we cannot rely on the government to watch the henhouse. In the same way we cannot just "trust" Resnick. He shouldn't trust himself. I have seen so many of these kinds of project bury themselves because no one but a "small group of collaboratore" ever were allowed to buy in.6. I laugh out loud as I read that the sum and total of interest that they wish Tom to have is for him to download the product. They are saying to him, "Here, you can be a consumer and give us some feedback that way, you ignorant hinterlander." 7. I guarantee you that the money is down the tubes and the project will follow suit soon. What a waste, but a foreseeable one. Sorry that you were treated so summarily and so foolishly. Fuck'em.
Post a Comment