we all live in these digital spaces and
if it's a digital space we should have
rights whether we can code or not and I
think that that is the shift that we
need to kind of establish and that
software developers kind of didn't work
towards because they had the power that
they want
[Music]
hello and welcome to Tech won't save us
made in partnership with the nation
magazine I'm your host Paris marks and
this week my guest is tante you might
remember I talked to tante earlier this
year we did a live recording at the
Republica conference in Berlin but he's
back on the show to talk about a pretty
cool topic I think but before we talk
about that tante is a socio technologist
writer speaker and Lite working on Tech
and its social impact so we've been
talking a lot lately about the politics
of Technology right particular looking
at what these Tech billionaires are up
to because this has been in the
discussion so much because of the US
election and while this episode is
political you know we do shift our Focus
quite a bit and I thought that this was
almost like a good pallet cleanser so to
speak because we're talking about open
source and in particular some big issues
that have come up in open source
communities and open source discussions
recently you know I'm not going to claim
to be some big expert on open source
communities tante is much more involved
in that than I am but there has been
quite a bit of controversy lately around
what has been happening with WordPress
and a fight in particular that one of
wordpress's Founders Matt mullenweg has
been engaging in with a company called
WP engine but also these broader
discussions around Ai and what open-
source AI actually looks like what it
means and if it's really any better than
you know any other kind of generative AI
model because some of the assertions
that we've been receiving are that
closed AI is bad but open AI is
inherently good and that if AI is open
source then there are not these big
concerns that we have with so many of
the other generative AI models or or
just generative AI in general but I'm
not sure that that's the case and so
what I wanted to discuss with tante in
this episode was to dig into these key
issues these stories you know if you
haven't been following them as well as
we have but also to talk about what this
means for our understanding of Open
Source and the role that this concept in
this community and this approach to
software actually means in
2024 as commercial pressures have not
just been shaping the web and what we do
online and seemingly eroding so many of
the services that we rely on but also
are shaping the way that the open source
Community works and that we understand
open source in ways that are not
necessarily so great and whether that
means we need to adjust our
understanding and concept of Open Source
whether that means we need to approach
it in a different way or whether we need
to think about a different way of
framing a better approach to Software
that maybe is not so focused on licenses
and understanding source code but
something else completely so hopefully
you find this episode interesting
hopefully if you're someone who doesn't
engage so much with open source
communities or are not as informed on
what that means that you learn from this
episode because I have to say I had a
really great time talking to tante about
all of it and he definitely brings his
political perspective and his Lite
perspective to our understanding of Open
Source and what is happening with it
right now so if you do enjoy this
episode make sure to leave a f star
review on your podcast platform of
choice you can share the show on social
media or with any friends or colleagues
who you think would learn from it and if
you do want to support the work that
goes into making the show every single
week so we can do things like make the
data vampire series and have so many of
these in-depth discussions on important
issues that affect your life and the
lives of so many other people around us
you can join supporters like nushi from
Montreal Dylan and Gran Rapids Michigan
and Paul Louie in Amsterdam by going to
patreon.com teave us where you can
become a supporter as well well thanks
so much and enjoy this week's
conversation tante welcome back to Tech
won't save us thank you for giving me a
second opportunity to be on this
wonderful podcast absolutely you know I
always love to chat with you even when
we were talking earlier this year I was
like I don't know how it's taken this
long to get you on the show already so
having you back again so soon is like
totally okay because you should have
been on way earlier anyway yeah I'm like
on my long long path following Brian
Merchant to like become a regular guest
here like don't we all just want to be
Brian Merchant I mean that's like the
dream yeah we all want his long hair you
oh well you're already on that yeah but
it's thinning so yeah well I understand
that yeah yeah but yeah very excited to
have you back on the show and I think a
really interesting topic right and
something that we haven't really dug
into but I've been sort of following but
probably not nearly as closely as you
have and that is like you know what is
going on in open source but I think to
start like how that is represented by
what we see going on with WordPress
right now and I think many people know
WordPress is like this essential kind of
publishing tool that so many websites
rely on I think it's like something like
43% of websites use WordPress at least
over 40% of the biggest 10 million
websites I think okay gotcha but it's
like very relevant like things many
people might know ARS Technica they run
WordPress like big big Publications run
WordPress and small dinky blogs like
mine or whatever but it's it's a lot
yeah I used to use it a lot like back in
the day I haven't used it I would say in
the past few years but I used to build
websites on WordPress like all the time
up to about you know five or seven years
ago when I just stopped building as many
websites as I used to because I used to
get an idea and I would buy a domain
name and make a website and probably
never do anything with it after but you
know that was a fun thing to do for me
for a while so I used to be very
familiar with WordPress I haven't used
it in a while though so when the story
came up I was like wait what is going on
at WordPress so maybe you can describe a
bit more for us what is actually going
on here I believe this started in
September tell us what's up so like
maybe just to name the main actors on
this stage WordPress is an open source
project as many other open source
project people might know you can
download the software for free you get
the source code and you can install it
on your very very cheap webspace and you
have a publishing thingy going which is
one of the reasons why WordPress was so
popular because it runs on every cheap
shitty little host and it has plug for
everything whatever you need there is a
plugin for it some you might have to pay
for but like the whole infrastructure
you get by using the WordPress software
is amazing like it's it's crazy what you
can get there and for someone who
doesn't know web design there's also
like so many themes out there so you can
make your website look so many different
ways without having to know how to like
go in and change the code and all that
too right exactly and you don't have to
spend like yeah you probably have to
spend a few bucks a month on your
hosting and the domain or whatever but
it's very very cheap and still like I
mean every software sucks every software
that is used sucks but it's decent it
does a great job for like you want to
type a thing and it you want it to
appear on your website that's great so
WordPress many people believed was owned
by the WordPress Foundation like a
nonprofit that people thought owns like
the trademark and the wordpress.org
domain where your own WordPress
installation asks for plug-in updates
that's this is where you can find all
the plugins and all the stuff people
thought okay word the WordPress
Foundation is what governs this
infrastructure for the common good if
you want to call it that like this open
source project and like they provide the
infrastructure for the source code
hosting they also sometimes help people
who work on on WordPress with like
travel budgets and all kinds of stuff
like what these foundations for open
source projects do then there is
automatic automatic is a company owned
by Matt mck Matt mck is one of the
founders of Wordpress of the WordPress
open source project which again like we
don't want to get into the C so much but
WordPress itself was a fork of an older
platform that existed before that wasn't
as successful but like WordPress kind of
took off for a bunch of different reason
but Matt mck founded like this
wordpress.org Foundation that was the
open source arm and then his company
automatic that runs wordpress.com where
you can pay to have your WordPress
hosted for you like you don't even have
to rent webspace and domain whatever you
just go to wordpress.com Say Hey I want
this domain registered for me run the
thing do the thing I just want a window
where I can type [ __ ] and it's supposed
to appear which is a very convenient
offer like people like that people don't
want to dick around with uploading PHP
files to uh an FTP server anymore which
totally makes sense like valid business
model made Mt mck really really witch
like he's well off like he doesn't need
to give a [ __ ] about anything anymore
like not Mark Zuckerberg level rich but
like he's got a lot but still still very
very comfortable very very very
comfortable like he's he's the the guy
that when Tumblr basically crumbled he
bought the rests of Tumblr and keeps
that running for whatever and that all
belongs to automatic all kinds of other
like surrounding platforms also belong
to automtic some people might know
gravatar which gets your icon your
avatar appearing a that's also run by
automatic I was on there for the first
time in in years the other day because I
was trying to figure out how to make my
avatar in ghost comments appear and I
was like how where do I put it so I
looked it up and I was like it's
gravitar I haven't used that in so long
but
yeah yeah like automatic runs a lot of
that infrastructure and a lot of that
for free like you can use gravitar for
free you don't need to pay you can also
get a free blog on wordpress.com you
don't have to pay like there's probably
some ads in there and you don't have all
the features whatever but like the usual
Spiel as you know it but there were
competitors that also offer you hosting
your WordPress for you and also like a
managed hosted WordPress like iic D
where you don't even have to care about
having a c whatever like just you yell
at a person and say give me a WordPress
and they do that and like one of those
competitors of automatic is called WP
engine they also offer you to run your
WordPress for you they are probably
about as big as automatic when it comes
to how many blocks they host and
whatever but like they do the same thing
and there's a whole bunch of other
companies who do that for you they might
not be as big but there's a lot of them
basically every web Hoster you go to
today has a button for like just give me
a WordPress and they just give it to you
for a few bucks a month because
WordPress is so established and so
relevant like people want just that like
for some people that's just how you
publish on the internet so like those
are the players that we have for a long
time everyone was kind of fine or felt
like everyone was F fine like WordPress
was checking along like updates every
few months new features whatever blah
blah blah automatic made a lot of money
WP engine made a lot of money but for
some reason and we don't know why in
September Matt malen Wick was no longer
okay with this so it's sometimes a bit
hard to fully reconstruct what exactly
happened when because you get a lot of
the information just through leaks and
whatever but I'm trying to be as neutral
as possible here Matt malwi basically
sent over WP engine a demand for money
the argument was they Wen contributing
enough to Wordpress which I think might
be true like you could probably argue
that
many companies who use open source
software to make a lot of money are not
really contributing a lot like knock on
Jeff basis' door and ask how much Amazon
is really contributing to all the open
source software they they're running for
everyone and making a lot of money with
so he might have a case here like we
could always argue WP engine should
maybe do more hire more developers or
whatever like okay this is a
conversation you can have and just to be
clear when we're saying not contributing
enough to Wordpress we're talking about
WordPress the open source project
wordpress.org not wordpress.com which is
the commercial entity run by automatic
where you can host your website yes like
his surface level argument was I'm
putting all these hours of automatic
employees into the open source project
to make this better that you profit of
and you are not giving back like you're
not contributing as much as I am which
again might be true WP engine is owned
by like a private accurity firm they are
not in it for the good of everyone like
they want to get out as much money as
possible okay and that's how companies
work today that's the game what you're
saying private Equity isn't in there for
the public good private Equity is also
in automatic but like we're not talking
about yeah let not talk about that pie
yeah exactly but like on the other hand
WP engine did support the WordPress
Community like they funded a lot of
conferences and like they were like the
top sponsor in many many WordPress
conferences to like make them possible
so it's not like they took so I guess
their argument would be like okay we
don't contribute as many hours to the
open- source project that is
wordpress.org and you know the WordPress
project you know creating this software
and creating this kind of ecosystem of
services but we contribute to the
WordPress community in other ways by
funding these conferences funding these
initiatives to try to get people more
involved in in WordPress and all this
kind of stuff I guess that would be kind
of what they're they're also they're
also funding like actual development
like we talked about like WordPress has
all these plugins they're called like
new features for the thing and a few
really core plugins were developed by WP
engine or the developers were paid by WP
engine to get this thing going so it's
not like they didn't do anything but
again I'm totally on board arguing that
they probably could have given more like
they made a lot of money so they should
share but they're not okay whatever but
what Matt Mullen Wick demanded was not
just hey please contribute more like
basically he asked I want 8% of your
gains paid to automatic which looks
weird because automatic isn't the open
source project yeah sounds strange
sounds strange okay I mean everyone can
demand anything I can also send Matt
Mullen Wick an email demanding 8% of his
gains for whatever but like okay why
should anyone care well Matt mck speaks
at Big WordPress conferences so he was
basically threatening WP Engine with
like scorched Earth Earth tactics say
okay you're going to do this or I'm
going to [ __ ] talk you on every stage I
can get to and that's what he did he
called them a cancer to the WordPress
ecosystem including the stages that WP
engine is funding for him to be on yeah
exactly exactly and like he was at the
at that conference where he did it like
a big word Camp he was actually seen
basically attacking the wp engine
employees that had a booth there because
they were a gold sponsor like and they
don't know [ __ ] like they run the booth
there for go whatever so he talked [ __ ]
about them like getting out some weird
excuses about them butchering the
WordPress code whatever like it didn't
really make sense it it felt weird
because the things didn't add up like
either your problem is they're not
contributing to the open source project
okay valid argument why are you
demanding they give money to your
company that sounds strange okay yeah
and I guess this is where things start
to Pivot right because you have this
initial argument that this is about not
contributing to the open source project
but then as it evolves it becomes oh
you're using the WordPress branding or
the WordPress name and actually this is
a licensing problem which Matt Mullen is
using as the justification for demanding
8% of Revenue and stuff right exactly
the WordPress Foundation has a trademark
on the term WordPress and they have
given out one commercial license to that
and that is to wordpress.com to Matt
Mullen Wick's company they don't have a
trademark for WP like that's not what
they have so the whole argument again is
a bit fishy and like there's so many
companies that have WP whatever as the
name and that make money off of the
WordPress of their WordPress Services
whatever it is like building plugins
building themes there's so much going on
but he picked them for some reason
probably because they're the biggest
company like also fun fact automatic
used to be invested in WP engine wild
they sold their stake to the private
entity people so it's a confusing mess
another detail I found really
interesting there cuz I was reading
about this in The Verge as we were
preparing for this was on September 19th
the policy basically said that companies
were free to use the wp abbreviation any
way they saw fit but that language was
deleted after September 19th and saying
that other companies couldn't use WP in
a way that was confusing to people and
specifically called out WP engine there
so it even seems like before Matt molwig
launched this whole campaign what they
were doing was perfectly fine you know
we can debate as to whether they were
doing enough to support the open source
project which I think is a a legitimate
thing as you're saying but then when it
comes into this whole debate around the
licensing and stuff which is the
justification that seems to come later
from Matt mwg that is something that is
created just to kind of just ahead of
this whole Outburst that he has you know
so that he has some justification for
trying to demand this money launching
lawsuits all this kind of stuff exactly
and the the language change that you
just uh pointed at that was on the
wordpress.org page that was on the
foundation side that wasn't Matt Mullen
Wick's personal website or whatever we
believed but it was on like the
organizational that should be separate
things and to be clear it also says in
that policy that if you would like to
use the WordPress trademark commercially
please contact automatic which is the
commercial company not the organization
exactly it's a strange mess that just
certain people seem to do things and
roles that they shouldn't have or that
they shouldn't act in this way like the
WordPress Foundation is this abstract
thing that runs the project whatever
that means like like who runs the
foundation it has three directors one of
the directors is Matt mck two other
people there basically have nothing to
do with the community like they are not
developers they they haven't a long
stake in the community like one guy did
work press tutorials till like 2014 or
whatever when his company was bought by
met Mal's company and now he's on the
board for whatever reason so it became
painfully obvious that the WordPress
Foundation that people believed was in
charge of this open source project that
basically everyone relies on like either
directly or like because the people that
publish the things that you want to read
use it that the this Foundation really
isn't a foundation but that's just one
guy who also has a company that tries to
make money of the thing that the
foundation does and who seems to switch
rool whatever way he sees fit at any
given point in time and that kept on
happening like a bit later when the
conflict escalated a bit like lawyers
were send out season desists and all
that kind of stuff like at some point
Met m Wick probably as the Director of
wordpress.org decided that WP engines
customers no longer could access the
wordpress.org infrastructure which means
no one who ran their blog or their
website on WP engine could get security
updates for their software anymore no
one could install new software anymore
because that always goes directly
through wordpress.org because that's
where you're supposed to get the
canonical write and updated versions of
everything that's like wordpress.org is
the trust anchor of the whole
infrastructure that's where everything
lives because the foundation runs it
that's why people believe that this is a
trustworthy Enterprise everyone can get
you some code to install on your website
but you never know if that makes sense
or if that's trustworthy but if it's on
wordpress.org you have a certain level
of trust to it he basically disconnected
everyone on his competitor's website
from that infrastructure where there was
never like a terminology that
wordpress.org wasn't for everyone who
wants to use it like there isn't a way
to like I need to pay for it or you
don't need to have a login there
basically to install stuff that's the
reason why WordPress got so big because
you had this big repository themes
plugins whatever that you could just
install but suddenly for some people
that no longer was true which was kind
of a break with the social contract of
Open Source like what's going on here
what happened he even escalated that
like the people who have wordpress.org
accounts because they are developers of
the open source software or they
contributors to the project they they
run the accessibility team or the social
media or they run events whatever they
have an A wordpress.org account on
beginning of October a weird little
checkbox appeared under the login form
where you like enter your email enter
your password and then there's a
checkbox where you have to say I'm not
in any way affiliated with double WP
engine so you can only log into the
system if you basically legally claim
not to have any affiliation with WP
engine what does that mean like if
you're a freelancer and you have clients
that run their stuff on WP engine are
you know associated with them Affiliated
this wasn't something that the open
source project decided it was something
Matt mck decided and everyone was
surprised like the people in the open
source project were surprised like in an
internal slack of the project they asked
him okay what does this mean if I just
check and it's not true will I get sued
and he just refused to answer basically
it's like yeah you got to know what
you're doing okay thank you I mean it
was so bad that the people who run like
the accessibility team that tries to
develop accessibility features for they
couldn't meet because no one who manages
the team could log in like that's the
state where he left this project going
the checkbox is still there that's so
wild so I I guess based on that I kind
of have two questions right you know
you're talking about this this big
disruption at as we've been saying this
you know kind of piece of software that
is so foundational to so much of the web
or at least the web that most people use
right because so many websites are built
on top of it so I wonder first of all
what is the Fallout of this for
WordPress itself like is this project as
we understand it kind of threatened what
does this mean for the future of it and
then I guess the broader question that
comes out of that too after addressing
WordPress specifically is what does this
tell us about open source more broadly
and and open source projects more
generally I mean it's hard to say what
this will do to the project because many
people who use WordPress don't really
know a lot like they just hired a dude
or a girl to build a website for them
and they use WordPress because many
people do but they're not really
involved with the whole thing they just
know okay I didn't have to pay a license
for the thing that's cool but for the
WordPress project what we see is that
many people who had influential roles
who were contributors for many many
years who developed core features or who
who maintained core plugins that
basically everyone used publicly left
the project saying okay I'm not no
longer contributing to this Matt malen
wck because he also got criticized by
his employees he gave everyone a buyout
offer like okay at least 30,000 bucks
just tell me you don't agree with me
fine you can go here's your money keep
your laptop I don't give a [ __ ] he even
Ed the anti like a few weeks later
saying hey here has n months of a buyout
and you can just leave he lost a lot of
people we know as of early October when
that first offer went out it was9
employees or 88.4% of automatics staff
that took it and left and there's been
recent reporting that suggests the
number is quite a bit higher now exactly
and of course some of them will be
working on wordpress.com so I mean
that's his business risk if he wants to
treat his employees badly that's his
thing but of course this will also
decrease the amount of resources that
the WordPress project will have at their
disposal
which is a challenge but also like
WordPress also lived off as I said like
people use WordPress who don't know who
didn't choose that who just use it
because somebody who set it up for them
use it what's with these people who made
a living setting that up for people like
can they trust this platform anymore
they could be locked out of like their
source of income tomorrow because they
criticized met Mullen wick on Twitter
that can happen that's a thing that can
happen well you can only imagine like so
many people who as you say are not
technical people who wanted to get a
website set up and hired someone to help
them do that and maybe the person who
they hired to help them do that decided
to put it on WP engine and now all of a
sudden their website is threatened and
they don't know what to do about it or
why there's this problem in the first
place you know it was just supposed to
be this Dependable as you say
trustworthy infrastructure and now all
of a sudden that is kind of thrown into
Jeopardy and even if you're not on WP
engine the question then becomes I guess
like what is the future of this project
if this guy Matt mowag is just kind of
like losing it and has total control
over it yeah and that is I think very
dangerous for that Community like
WordPress isn't where it is because it's
the most amazing piece of software ever
written yeah I've heard it's really
bloated now yeah it's very old and I'm
not saying it's bad but like code that
old just gets a few weird idiosyncrasies
and it gets Byzantine because you want
to support the old versions because
people still run it whatever it's hard
to run a project that long so the code
quality or whatever was never the point
for WordPress the point for WordPress
was there's this trusted in this trusted
infrastructure that I can hook into
where I can get all kinds of stuff that
is open source that I can run for myself
like that is something that we've not
like the two of us but like we as like
the tech Pew that's what you've been
telling people like you need to get your
own domain run your own website publish
to your own control do your own thing
and people did that and they used
WordPress because that's one of the most
affordable ways to do
there are many other more fancy
Technologies people use these days but
they are significantly more complex to
run and often times more costly and you
need to know more to run it or you have
to pay a company to do it for you and
that is a big challenge for the role
that this project has because what this
creates is of course friction and I mean
some people leave the project but they
still kind of want to support their
customers so there's always like this
this conversation with an open source
called a fork because the code is open
source you can take it and develop it on
your own in a different path or with a
different governing body like that
happens a lot like you said with what
WordPress did originally right it seemed
like it forked something that was
already there it was not an unfriendly
Fork like the developer of the original
software was also part of Wordpress
Forks happen but if you Fork now
WordPress into like there already is an
older WordPress fork for some reason but
that never really took off but now you
have like three four five different
versions and in like five years you
suddenly no longer have like this large
platform that everyone can use but
you're in some Splinter that certain
features don't work or and you don't
even know anymore because you just
thought I installed this WordPress thing
and it always work and it no longer does
so for the project and its reputation
this is a real danger as well for the
professionals who live off of doing
WordPress but also for people who kind
of rely on it and who never know what
happens next and of course if you have
like say you have users or you you run
your own web shop for whatever which you
can do with WordPress which works now
you no longer get security updates for
some reason or M mck decides okay if you
make money with this I'm going to try to
force you to pay me a cut no one knows
what's going on Malin Wick isn't
predictable in what he's doing like it
didn't make sense to go this whole
scorched Earth path but that's where we
are right now and what came out in like
the conversation like no wordpress.org
doesn't belong to the foundation that's
his private website like he owns the
domain that's his thing and like he
actually argued that he didn't have any
responsibility to host plugins that WP
engine developed and paid for on the
wordpress.org website because he said
hey that's my website I can decide
whatever I publish there yeah that
seemed really notable as well right that
as part of all this he basically said
WordPress is mine not just the
commercial side of it but you know the
kind that's supposed to be an open
source project too and I wonder you know
pivoting then like getting to the second
part of my question there what does this
mean for the broader discussions that
are happening now about open source in
the future of Open Source to see such a
notable and such a large and significant
open source project you know becoming as
unstable as it has become as you've been
saying yeah the license of the code
hasn't changed WordPress is still open
source it's a GPL license project you
can download it you can do whatever you
want with the code that's the rules but
what this has shown us again like for
many that might not be a super new uh
thing but like this makes it so tangible
how little this whole licensing thing
does for us like it's not nothing like
open source licenses are important
they're an important tool but they only
get us so far because many of the op of
even big open source projects they have
this there's even a meme that some
projects are run by like bdfl a
benevolent dictator for life and that's
not said as a bad thing that's like oh
it's cutesy lyus tals is a benevolent
dictator for life for Linux because
Linux is what Lin toval says Linux is
and many other projects like the python
Lang which is like the language I mostly
use they had that for a long time until
that guy said this isn't cool we need to
find a different strategy where people
have like stake and there's voting going
on and transparency and it's not up to
my whims but many projects still have
like this very strong man I know of no
project where it's a woman that takes
that role might exist I know of none so
you have these strong men that as long
as as they are fine as long as they
mentally stable everything works but
then for some reason think things shift
and you never know why suddenly things
can spiral very quickly and I think
that's what we've seen with WordPress
like people
didn't you could have seen that
something was up with the way that this
project was organized a project that as
we said runs more than 40% of the web
basically and a lot of that is Spam as
well but okay like it runs so much and
no one ever ask okay why is the
foundation run by the guy who also has
this company why is there no election of
the directors how is the community
really having a say in what's going on
like because automatic pays many of the
developers automatic also decides what
gets developed which I mean that's how
open source Works who writes the code
decides what goes but many other
projects try to like structure okay what
is our road map what are our goals what
are our values what do we want and what
would be for example something that that
automatic could develop as a plugin for
their extra customers why does that need
to be in the core WordPress package like
the core WordPress package if you just
download the thing from the
wordpress.org P it does a lot of
upselling for Automatic Products like
automatic has like a jetpack plugin that
does all kinds of [ __ ] for you and they
try to weasel that in yeah that's what
immediately came to mind when you were
saying that yeah totally um so automatic
has this very special relationship which
I mean I understand like the founder and
the company like but if you are a
professional who wants to govern the
infrastructure that runs so much of the
web like at some point point you should
ask why is this happening this looks
weird as you were describing the
benevolent dictator part of it I was
thinking of like in some countries that
like have dictators when the dictator
dies all like the fighting over who's
going to have power next like that was
what was going on in my mind like who is
going to take over the Throne of the
open source project when the benevolent
dictator founder of the project
dies yeah like many projects have
evolved and have established like actual
grownup processes where there's like
people are elected and there's term
limits and transparency like Democratic
PR because an open source project of a
certain size needs to be Democratic to
make sense need to so the the users the
developers they all need to have like
the ability to have a stake in this but
worldpress never had that but as long as
like automatic kept paying some of the
bills no one no one really looked at it
like Matt is such a nice guy it's it's
fine and for a long time like many
people saw him like that like he gave to
all kinds of courses like he bought
Tumblr when it would have been shut down
otherwise but like even a few months ago
like he started selling all the content
from wordpress.com and from Tumblr to AI
companies to train their models on to
make some money like that was the first
Rift where people realized maybe he's
not such a cool guy but like I mean he
has a company he wants to make money
it's fine and he pays a lot of people
which is also good like people need to
make a living I get that maybe WordPress
just needs to become a da a
decentralized autonomous organization
and bring us into the web three future
like that
seems that that is that is one path or
you could just look at what other
similar projects have done but of course
he would have to seize control of a lot
of the stuff and things would maybe
change maybe the project would develop
in ways that wouldn't perfectly align
with automatic strategy and he's not
willing to give up that the recent
interviews he's kept repeating like no
no I'm not going to seize any sort of
power over this project like this is my
project basically you're just guests and
that means like the whole idea of trust
into like this open source project is
broken like there's no you can't trust
this you can't know what this guy is
doing next that is really something that
should have been avoided like a decade
ago maybe or years ago at least and it
shows how little even wellestablished
open Force projects think about this
idea of of participation and Democratic
principles that need to be in place for
like these public infrastructures the
idea of open source is always
collectively we're building this public
good code for everyone to use for
everyone to share like yeah the comments
like we're contributing to the comments
like there's code for everyone and
that's great okay but maybe that's not
enough to just throw codes somewhere
maybe a project is more than that and
maybe we need to think about governance
and we need to think about how power
Works in this project because if I
control the software that you need to
write like your newsletter your website
your whatever I have a lot of power over
you if I can shut down remotely your
website or can make your life harder
that is a lot of power and
responsibility I have and if that's not
checked that should make everyone very
uncomfortable well I feel like on that
point you know it gets to something
quite important right and discussions
that have been happening for a while
around the commercialization of Open
Source the way that it has been captured
by a lot of these major tech companies
and also the kind of evolution in how
some of these projects have been moving
but I guess also this comparison between
like open source and free software and
whether open source was really what it
was positioned to be in the first place
because as you were saying it's so much
about a license to the project being
able to see the source code to the
project but you know it's not the same
thing as like free software anyone can
just kind of do what they want sort of a
thing how do you see that kind of
broader trajectory in discussions and
and understanding of Open Source the
term free software is older that was
basically coined by Richard stallman who
is a Despicable man who should never be
let near a computer a microphone or
anything I I was going to ask if that
concept seems like tainted by its
association with him I think it is he's
a horrible human being but he came up
with this idea and I think for for
somewhat weird reasons and I think they
don't really hold up for the world today
and for what I'm trying to argue for it
okay the idea of free software was that
people who run code on their their
machine or who have to interact with
code should have the ability to change
it to see it to change it and to shape
it in the way that it serves them which
is a liberating idea as in general like
and that was what he built the G project
it is called and like the free software
foundation around this idea like okay if
you don't have the code to the software
you run you are controlled by the
software it's a very
simplified idea but for him it goes so
far that he doesn't use laptops where
the firmware like the stuff that
programs the chips in there if that
isn't free he's not going to use it like
for the longest time he didn't use
wireless network cards because they had
proprietary firmware in there he goes
that far like he's very extreme in that
regard extreme to like a fault probably
but like the idea makes sense to say
okay if this if if our world is so built
on us living at least parts of our lives
in digital infrastructures we should see
what's going on there we should know
what's going on there and we should be
able to change things in a system that
we use to serve us because the computer
that we bought should serve us it should
help us do what we want and not block us
from I don't know you've downloaded the
software and I don't want to let you
start it or whatever that's something
that goes against what the free software
movement went for but the free software
movement even though it's politics are a
bit shady and I don't think we can get
into it like it's it's very libertarian
in in its leanings it was definitely at
least a politically influenced movement
was more than just a license business
didn't like that but business like
getting free code like free labor is
cool but the whole politics are a bit
[ __ ] so the open source initiative
formed to kind of like the idea of Open
Source like this terminology was there
before but like they published the open
source definition what makes a thing
open source that was based on debian's
free software guide Lin deban is a Linux
distribution also a very free software
leaning distribution that if you don't
change things in the settings it doesn't
install things that are binary you can't
install like slack on there without uh
much fiddling around because they think
hey this isn't what you want you want
something that is open for you and the
OSI the open source initiative kind of
codified what open source means as the
open source definition which you can
find on open source.org they also got
like the domain like they are the and
they kind of bless license this that you
can put your software under as either
open source or not and if it's open
source like they are compatible you know
if you have an MIT license thing and an
Apache License thing you know okay I can
just Mash these things together and they
have no license trouble which
corporations really liked like that's
cool you know which software you can use
for free that's great you don't have to
pay the people who build it it's not a
very complex document but it's very much
based around the idea of Licensing yeah
there's some political wording around it
but like the main case is this license
compatible with this and what do you
have to do if you use this license
whatever that's what kind of shape what
open source means but at some point
people no longer said free software they
started saying open source and that kind
of was an important shift I think
because it kind of allowed like the
whole conversation to forgot that
there's politics behind this politics
that should be analyzed and maybe
updated a bit and changed and whatever
but there were politics and they've been
not fully stripped but at least taken a
lot back and I think that that was where
some of the problems started because
yeah WordPress is an open source project
yes you can get the source but we
realize in this case just getting the
source isn't really it that's not enough
I guess that shift kind of happens like
in the 90s would that be right to think
about I think it started already in the
in the 90s but I'm in Germany as we know
I'm European Germany's always a few
years back so it took a lot longer for
things to reach here so maybe in the US
it got relevant a bit faster but these
days if your license is blessed by The
OSI
even if legal documents talk about open
source software they reference what the
OSI says open source is like this isn't
a legally binding document but it has
quasi legal power to a certain degree
yeah it's generally accepted it's a very
influential
definition it's massively influential
and it's not wrong like it's not that
they made up something different like it
aligns with the mechanics that the free
software movement came up with to
support legally the things that they
cared about but they just took the tool
and not the reasons why the tools are
the way they are and not fully again
people there also like the the person
who wrote the open source definition for
Debian also contributed to the OSI but
like there's people believing what they
do and there's the way an organization
influences the World by what it does and
I think the OSI basically stripped all
the the inconvenient politics out of it
so you could still and you could still
say hey this is open source this is not
open source you could still be the good
guy saying hey we we're contributing to
open source you can have this thing from
us but it was a big shift so based on
what you're saying there you know and
that discussion around the open source
initiative and its definition of what
open source is as I was saying as and as
we've been discussing there has been
this concern in the trajectory of Open
Source in the ability of major tech
companies to you know capture what is
being done by open source to profit from
it and for the earlier kind of more
idealistic hopes of what open source
would be to not necessarily being
followed through on and I guess that
plays into the other big open- Source
story that we wanted to talk about
because on the one hand you have what is
happening with WordPress and and what
Matt Mullen is doing but then on the
other piece of this there's been a lot
of discussion over the past couple years
about open source AI right and this kind
of assertion that if Ai and generative
AI in particular is open- Source then it
is like inherently better and it's
easier to address the problems with it
you know as we've been discussing so
much about open Ai and the potential
consequences of a lot of these large
language models and things like that and
the open source initiative recently made
a definition of what open source AI is
but there's been a lot of criticism of
that definition and it seems like you
know kind of further degrading this
earlier definition of Open Source and
what it's supposed to mean so can you
fill us in on what's going on there and
what is so concerning about this
development yeah a few months ago like
maybe now it's even more than a year ago
the OSI thinking about defining what
open source AI is because for example
meta really pushed their models that
they released as open source AI because
you could download it and and use it
under certain conditions which I think
is a really deceptive framing personally
but yeah it totally is like we we we'll
get to that in a second and I mean also
there's like open AI who kind of have
that in the name but they're the
opposite so I understand like their
intention to feel like okay maybe we
should clear this up a bit and then they
started like a very collaborative
process where many people who are kind
of in the OSI or in the around the OSI
like there's a public discussion forum
where people could argue about the
definitions and like there were were
many many versions and like on a few
days ago like the actual 1.0 version
like the the first official release was
made in this their pitch was we have
values that we have put into our open
source definition and now we want to
apply these values to open source AI to
Define which open source AI is blessed
by us and which not and as you said with
this whole uh open source is always good
kind of thing because that's what what
everyone's been hearing all the time
like even civil rights oriented NGO are
saying hey everything should be open
sourced like public money public code is
a thing that's very big in Germany where
many NGO is arguing hey if we pay it
with tax money it should be open source
and everyone should be able to see it
why is this proprietary so the OSI said
okay we're going to build an open source
AI definition based on our values and
like the the whole open source um
definition is based on on Four Freedoms
they call it that you should have as a
user of a system and the first freedom
is to use the system in whatever way you
want you shouldn't have to ask for
permission and the license can't tell
you you can use it for this but you
can't use it for this like you should be
able to do whatever you want like an
image generator model that would tell
you you can't generate images of Paris
marks would not be open source it would
go against what what that stand for the
second freedom is you should be able to
study how the system works that's where
all the licensing thing comes from you
you need to be able to see the code to
study how the system works that was why
the the whole licensing angle was so
important you should be allowed to
modify the system to your needs you
should be able to take something out
that annoys you or adds something to it
and the fourth freedom is you should be
able to share that if I take the code
and I add something to it I should be
allowed to give that to everyone I want
those are the four Freedom that the
whole open source idea is buil on they
said okay let's do that for open source
AI it worked very well for source code
back then back in the days like when the
whole open source definition was created
I was still a young student trying to
get Linux to run on my laptops and
wireless never worked it was very
annoying but back then it really worked
because you always got like code you
downloaded packages that you could use
and look at and if it's proprietary we
all remember like Windows then you
download like an exe file and ran it but
you had no idea what it does whatever
back then it really worked this whole
approach showed its problems already
with the Bove to software as a service
because all these software as and
service providers they use all kinds of
Open Source but because they never give
you source code like because you never
interact with the system that way they
can kind of cheat their way around
giving you their modifications like they
us the software and they obey by all the
licenses but they kind of can cheat
around they don't give you the full
access you can't go to to meta and tell
them hey you use all kinds of Open
Source in your stuff give me the the
code for the news feed or whatever if
anyone wants that I mean it's just Spam
anyways but we've seen there that it's a
problem and now they're trying to use
that for AI and AI is a bit of a
different Beast than source code source
code is like you have a bunch of files
maybe a compiler runs it and then you
have a program like that's how these
things work with a I you also have like
some code programs that run but that's
like the smallest part a neural network
is is Trivial it's it's a few hundred
lines of code like it doesn't really
matter but what matters is the data
everyone knows like what we call AI
today is statistical model that has been
trained on data and it's like the
extraction of patterns from the data so
you need to look at the data to know
what's in there like the person who
wrote the the original open source
definition Bruce parents also said like
for a I the training data is like the
code because you need it to understand
it to study the system to see what
biases are in there to see why it reacts
in a certain way you need to be able to
analyze the data but what the
open-source AI definition of the OSI did
like they said okay yeah you have to
give everyone the code you have to give
people the way the code train the data
and you have to give people the license
to do everything with the network you
give them you have to give them the
weights which is is it's called like
that's basically the statistical summary
of the training data that you can use
you have to give people all that with
all the freedom and they can share it
and all the things that that we talked
about earlier but they added that for
the data that for the training data you
don't need to give people all the
training data they said that you can
also just describe the training data
that's so
funny just describe the data you don't
need to tell us what's in there you know
just just give us a an idea you know
yeah yeah I mean they say you you need
to describe in a reasonable detail so
people could reproduce something that is
kind of like the network you have but
they can never reproduce the network you
have they never really know if what's in
there and what's not in there they never
fully understand the system and one can
say I this is just a purest argument
because hey who will ever read all the
data files and change that but the point
is either you can understand what's in
there and check it and filter it and see
what's going on or you can't that's been
a bit of a challenge because they now
basically labeled a lot of stuff that
many people would consider proprietary
open source yes you can download like
meta's weights and run the thing even
though like the OSI wouldn't consider
meta stuff open source AI because meta
restricts certain things that you can do
there's a few open-source models but you
never know what's in there it looks
small but it is a conceptual shift and
whether you actually know what you're
getting on your machine or not and from
like a computer scientist this point
like you don't know if there's an attack
Vector in there many people who build
actual software they try to create
reproducible builds like I give you the
source code I show you how I built the
binary you can compare them and you can
make sure that you get exactly what I
told you is in your code I can guarantee
that you get exactly this thing running
on your machine so you can fully trust
whatever I gave you this has been
severed in this open source regard and
again the OSI said hey we need to give
some structure to the space open source
AI is being thrown around and no one
knows what it means so we gave them a
definition but this definition kind of
gives cooperations a lot of leeway to
get away with things that no one
beforehand would have accepted as open
source and the process leading there was
the community told them that like for
months people told them this is a
problem this isn't according to what we
believe in as a community as open source
developers but they went through with it
and they got a bunch of supporters on
board which is like mostly uh large
language model producers who think this
is a great definition of whatever it is
Mozilla is in there and a few others are
in there who all think this is a great
definition I understand that because
they want to be able to label their
stuff as open source because that's
basically like the software fair trade
stamp that you can get so you can say
yeah we're one of the good guys but and
no one argues about like okay but why
can't they give you the data and that is
an interesting question like why
shouldn't you be able to give me your
training data and we know why that is
because a lot of that is isn't licensed
like a lot of that has been stolen a lot
of that you actually aren't allowed to
use a lot of that stuff has been maybe
gathered in illegal ways and you
shouldn't have it but you can't show me
that you'll just say yeah there's some
video information in there because you
don't want to tell them hey I scraped
all of YouTube because then Google's
lawyers will come but we see again like
the OSI tries to build like a legal
structure a legal looking structure like
a structure of rules to give it a name
and then it's open source but the
community again is being like looked
over and has this issue of okay what's
the next step can I now release source
code where I just give you part of the
source code and the rest I just describe
roughly yeah I wrote some really great
code here and it really trust me bro
it's not a crypt Miner for S code no one
would have accepted that but now that
it's AI everyone accepts that and that's
a big problem where even the the small
values that we have in this open source
Community are undermined just because
the tech change right that that's what
really stands out to me as I hear you
describe that right is how the
definition that is being constructed
shows very clearly how the organization
has been corrupted by the commercial
impulses that we see corrupting so much
else of what goes on online and and what
goes on in web communities and and what
is degrading so many of the services
that we rely on and even when you're
talking about um you know the
description of the training data it
feels like in so many of these models
you know we've been having this
discussion for the past two years in so
many of these models that these
companies are relying on the the amount
of data that they're using and like the
amount of computation that's required to
train something like this is such that
okay if you wanted to try to replicate
it like the number of people who would
have the compute to actually be able to
do that is so minuscule that okay even
if they describe what the training data
is and even if you try to go gather it
and try to go train your own model and
stuff that's going to be so much more
difficult because the power and because
the amount of compute that you would
need is not there but there was one
piece of this that I found really
interesting that kind of relates to what
you were just talking about which is the
legal element of this right you know you
were talking about how so much of this
training data is stuff that has been
scraped that you probably shouldn't have
been able to scrape because it is you
know under copyright or whatever and you
noted in uh piece that you wrote about
this that in Germany at least and I'm
sure a number of other countries that if
something is considered open source you
have more kind of leeway to scrape and
to take things off the web than if it is
considered more of a commercial product
so if these models are increasingly
considered open source then that gives
them a sort of kind of legal immunity or
or a bit of legal protection in scraping
all the stuff from Disney or all the
stuff from YouTube or or whatever I
don't know about the other legislations
of course but in Germany there's like a
scraping exemption for like copyright if
you do research you're allowed to
basically scrape everything but you have
to do research but saying hey I released
this as open source this is my research
project gives you like access to these
legal special rules that are supposed to
be for universities and whatever but
suddenly you're able to use them and
then you the big foundational model is
then released there and then your your
commercial thing is just like twiddling
around with the weights a bit what
whatever or whatever and I think this is
a dangerous precedent of like a
corporate takeover of a term that was
supposed to codify like a common good
like public good in a way like the
Commons in a in a software kind of way
that is I think the most painful thing
we've seen in the last few weeks and
it's not a new thing like corporations
have led not having to pay people for
their software work for a long time
because like estimates think that
reproducing the open source stack that
we have today like commercially would
cost in the trillions it's it's absur
how much money that would cost so yeah
they love it and hey if if there's the
comments then okay let them use it I
don't I don't give a [ __ ] it's fine but
the way that they start to wiggle their
way into the comment and then try to
like lock people out from it that is a
really dangerous precedent I believe and
I think that one of the reasons why that
worked so well is because of this shift
from free software to open source where
it has been like okay yeah we have this
licenses and if they're compatible
everything is fine and if a project
wants to do some democracy and some more
grownup processes fine but others is
also fine if it's just a corporation and
guy named Matt that's also fine and I
think we're seeing with these two
examples that we haven't done our
homework in the last decade because
everything was going so well we had all
the software and everything worked and
every everyone gets all the software
they need and now they can use I don't
know whisper or whatever open AI
releases as open source even though you
just get weights it's it's just just a
binary blob it's a proprietary tool that
you can run for free like when I was
young you could run winam for free you
didn't have to pay for it but you had no
idea what was in there and that's the
same for these models and I think that
if as a society we think that a we think
that software should be in the core of
so many of the services that we use and
we think that software can be part of
maybe a better future or more liberating
future can contribute to that then I
think we need to defend what that means
and I think that just looking at at
licenses and like technicalities of
which code can be link to which code
isn't enough saying this is an open
source project doesn't cut it anymore
maybe it needs to be like a public good
project which means it is open source
but it also has Democratic participation
of the developers and the users and all
the different stakeholders whatever like
thinking more about these processes of
governance of thinking okay how do we
decide what happens which of course is
hard because people are not paid for
this a lot of the time people just do it
in their free time and they work on what
they care about and what they scratch
their itch is what programers say so
it's hard to tell them hey you need to
work on this because that's our strategy
that obviously doesn't work but okay how
does such a community Define their
values and where they want to go and how
if not enforce how can you get that done
if those are your values someone should
work on it if no one works on it that's
not your values and that's also
important to realize and to communicate
to the users and I think that we've not
done a great job and many I'm not saying
no projects have like many project have
even in the space around just the CMS
thing that WordPress covers there's many
projects that have done better jobs that
have like actual governance structures
but what they often forget is like for
example you can vote if you're a
developer or a core developer like if
you've put in enough hours you get to
vote which is a way to organize it I
understand but on the other hand is that
enough like shouldn't users have a say
in how things work if it's a user facing
thing if WordPress is used by 40% of the
web and so many people use it why can
only people who can write PHP code or
css for the design why can only they
contribute why can only they say
something and realize that they say
something and I think the next step
towards like let's say the the um
evolution of free software open source
whatever you want to call it needs to
look at that like how can users actually
have a say and have a voice and have a
seat at the table but like looking
further okay if this is a public good
how do we actually make it Democratic
because I think it can't be if it's not
then by accident it might be for a
second but like we can never rely on it
if it's an infrastructure just as I
think we press is an infrastructure it
shouldn't be in the hands of a person it
should be in the hands of the people if
it runs 40% of the [ __ ] web then we
need to take it away and we need to find
ways to make that more reasonable and
more aligned with the values that at
least people living in Democratic
countries share and I think that's
that's important I think it also aligns
with what I think free software was
supposed to mean I'm not a Libertarian
but I think that that is a reasonable
way to think about how this can actually
contribute to a public good and maybe it
will get slower because democracy isn't
efficient but it doesn't need to be
that's not what it's for it's there to
give everyone a voice and have everyone
hurt and give everyone their rights and
I think that that is the homework that
we to do in the next few weeks and
months and years to like Salvage this
idea of software that is there for
everyone the comments that I think are
massively important but that we see are
being taken over by other interests that
are not getting more people in and
getting more people access and
understanding but like logging things
away and closing things again in a
certain way and it's sad to see so many
like I have the website for for the open
source AI definition open and like the
organization that slide through that
support it it's like Mozilla what the
[ __ ] are you doing this is shouldn't
happen that's something that many people
have seen in the last few weeks that's
why we've seen so much agitation about
not really super meaningful changes in
WordPress like if you're not on WP
engine it doesn't affect you that much
but I think it shows structural
weaknesses that we have in the structure
that is supposed to hold up the web
which is a thing that where we spend I
don't know about you but I spend a lot
of my life there it's where I keep a lot
of my stuff yeah I completely agree with
you and I appreciate that perspective as
well right to understand what is
actually going on in this space with
open source as you know we're seeing
these growing commercial pressures
affecting so much of what's happening on
the web so it's no surprise to see it
happening in open source communities as
well something that's not entirely new
but that has been growing over time and
I feel like when you're talking about
this Democratic element you know one of
the things that I point to so much is it
feels like a lot of this nostalgia for a
way that the web used to be is often
from the perspective of coders and
programmers and people who can make
these changes to code and often doesn't
think about the impact of users or
people who are like non-technical users
of the web and making sure that they
also have a voice in what the future of
the web is going to be and to make sure
that they're still able to participate
in it without having the skills to code
things on their own and I feel like when
you're talking about that Democratic
element and bringing users in as well I
think that's a really important piece
there too to make sure that everyone is
included in this discussion and that we
can think about what this non-commercial
web or or non-commercial way of
developing these things is going to look
like that's not just about the people
who are contributing their coding time
but about everyone else who's using it
too I think that's like a very important
point that the visions of the web were
structured by dudes like me like
computer scientists and programmers like
the free software idea was built by
storman for programmers like he wanted
to be able to fix the [ __ ] and he can do
that but many others can't and I think
that just doesn't just apply to like
software in a narrow sense if we think
about currently there this still this
wibbly wobbly situation of post Twitter
SLX like how is the Social Web reshaping
uh with this platform kind of dying or
changing in the way it it has but
there's still the problem of okay you
can go to Blue Sky now you're the Blue
Sky deaths decide how your platform
looks or you can go to Mastodon so the
madon team decides how your platform
looks like where is your Democratic
right as a user of that platform to like
influence of course you can vote and on
issues but who understands what a GitHub
issue of a project is and how to
formulate that in a way that the death
will not just throw it out I think that
while this might sound for some to like
okay software I don't care about
software I think it it actually affects
how our lives work and maybe that's
something that we need to drag this
discussion out of like the software part
it's like no no we all live in these
digital spaces and if it's a digital
space we should have rights whether we
can code or not and I think that that is
the shift that we need to kind of
establish and that software developers
kind of didn't work towards because they
had the power that they want I
completely agree tante it's always great
to speak with you to get your
perspective on what is going on with all
these important issues and fill us in on
what is happening with open source at
this what feels like a really pivotal
moment for it thanks so much for taking
the time thank you for the
invitation tante is a socio technologist
writer speaker and Lite Tech won't save
us is made in partnership with the
nation magazine and is hosted by me
Paris marks production is by Eric Wickam
and transcripts are by Bridget poo fry
Tech won't save us ores on the support
of listeners like you to keep providing
critical perspectives on the tech
industry you can join hundreds of other
supporters by going to patreon.com tews
us and making a pledge of your own
thanks for listening and make sure to
come back next week
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]