A new crowdsourcing company, called Cambrian House, launched this week. The idea is pretty straightforward – open source software development minus the free labor. It's a little hard to evaluate whether Cambrian House can develop competitive applications in an increasingly crowded market, but I'm impressed with the degree to which they've thought out the model. I also like that they intend to put the crowd to work at three separate tasks: 1) originating the ideas; 2) evaluating the ideas; and 3) developing the code itself. A lot of the discussion in the media and the blogosphere since my original article came out has focused on the last of these functions -- I suppose because it's easiest to get one's head around--when in fact the crowd's ability to distinguish between fodder and folderol is, to my way of thinking anyway, the most fascinating and perhaps useful aspect of the crowdsourcing model (as well as being one of the only areas in which crowdsourcing does in fact overlap with peer production, in that the labor can only be performed by the collective.) It's also hard not to be won over by the egalitarian spirit that seems to animate Cambrian House, even if it's a little eerily reminiscent of the It's-Good-to-be-Good-Especially-if-We-Can-Make-Gobs-of-Cash-in-the-Process zeitgeist of the late '90s. At any rate, I look forward to following Cambrian House's development, and wish them the best of luck. One question guys: Will the source code created by the crowd remain open to the crowd after it's launched, or is that contingent on the client?
Postscript: I hope my regular readers will forgive the lapse between posts. My goal is to never let more than a week elapse and, if significant or interesting developments occur, post in as reactive a manner possible. I appreciate your continued readership and, this especially, contributions.
Hi Jeff,
Thank you for mentioning Cambrian House in your blog. We are big fans and always tune in to your latest thoughts on the term you helped coin.
As far as your question:
Will the source code created by the crowd remain open to the crowd after it's launched, or is that contingent on the client?
The answer is yes. Code created by the crowd will remain open for anyone to download after it is launched. The rights to the code are owned by the Cambrian House community.
We know licenses can be sticky things, especially when it comes to open source. For a complete listing of our terms and conditions go to http://www.cambrianhouse.com/terms-and-conditions. I will blog about it more if this question becomes popular or remains unclear.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Jonathan Rasmusson (JR)
Cambrian House
Posted by: Jonathan Rasmusson | June 30, 2006 at 04:07 PM
After looking at the link that Jeff posted, spirit, I was really interested to see “how we view the world, act as though Karma exists” as a point on Cambrian House’s about us page. I have been asking myself how large organizations might be using CS to by-pass the burdens of, health benefits, paid holiday’s and all the other overheads that come with more traditional forms of employee/employer relationships. The moral/rights nature of the evolving market place should also be evolving on principles that are healthy for the larger community. One might find such a statement naive but it is in my mind central the long-term health of the “social order.” The use of CS for purely economic gain is the antithesis of what should be evolving along with what new technologies are making possible. I have been asking myself, who is going to consider those responsibilities? “Act” as though Karma exists appears to be a step in that direction. I might ad that to “acknowledge” that Karma exists between those who are involved would be closer to the mark! Three cheers on the Beta release. Alan.
Posted by: Alan | June 30, 2006 at 06:34 PM
This idea is not like open source at all. If the software is being kept a secret from people who do not pay for it (by either contributing code or cash), then it is a straightforward proprietary software house just like any other, with the only difference being it is run as a co-op. I'm sure you've heard this cheesy quote before (at least I HOPE you have) but open source works because it is not only free as in beer, but also because it is free as in speech. Your little comparison chart listing Open Source side by side with Cambrian House appears to leave that information out.
Posted by: James Randall | July 05, 2006 at 10:28 AM
Hiya James.
The software will not be kept secret. Anyone can download the source at anytime. What will vary from project to project will be the licensing model. This will be decided by the community. If an OSI compliant license is deemed best for that particular product that’s what we’ll use. If another form of licensing better suites the needs of our community, we will consider that too.
Posted by: Jonathan Rasmusson | July 06, 2006 at 07:35 AM
Jeff,
Great term ("crowdsourcing"), great writing ("Wired"), and great perspective ("Crowdsourcing.com)!
Human resources have often been the bane of employers since the beginning of time. New approaches to bringing talent and ideas together are always welcomed.
The way I see it, as time goes forward, crowdsourcing will surface as a primary method to solve problems for the business place. I'm not entirely sure this is great for "the little guy" as a whole so much. Sure the few will thrive, but no longer will be the day where one will receive compensation for average performance in a market as broad as the population.
It looks like crowdsourcing may have its roots well entrenched in Darwinistic theory.
Keep up the forward-thinking, Jeff!
Posted by: Tom Hall | July 20, 2006 at 07:04 AM
Tom, I hope you are not insinuating that the individuals who do get “sourced” might be called Pastafarianists. Alan.
Posted by: Alan | July 20, 2006 at 06:44 PM
Nike has done this for years except referred to it as 'childsourcing'. Someone makes money, just not the little guys.
Posted by: Johann Smeurgaston | July 21, 2006 at 10:51 PM
Hi.
I was also very inspired by the article, so much that I contemplate writing my thesis around the matter. My focus is usability, so I wonder if not "the crowd" could be asked to design the next WWW. In crowdsourcing there can be a a lack of "power to the people" and more a feel of companies making money on the human habit to have a hobby.
But the question for me would be, how can we create tools for the crowd (and for the ones using the crowd) so that the crowd can solve more tasks online doing all sorts of jobs. If we have hundreds of crowdsourcing projects in the future, then you will have to make the most inviting project in order to win the crowd...
Anyhow. I will follow the development here. Keep posting and sharing. Thanks
Posted by: Ole Gregersen | August 17, 2006 at 06:53 AM
This idea is not like open source at all. If the software is being kept a secret from people who do not pay for it (by either contributing code or cash), then it is a straightforward proprietary software house just like any other, with the only difference being it is run as a co-op. I'm sure you've heard this cheesy quote before (at least I HOPE you have) but open source works because it is not only free as in beer, but also because it is free as in speech. Your little comparison chart listing Open Source side by side with Cambrian House appears to leave that information out.
Posted by: Damier Ebene Canvas | July 22, 2010 at 12:50 AM
yeah truly a great site.I really enjoyed my visit.
Posted by: Health News | March 18, 2011 at 11:36 PM
I wish more people would write blogs like this that are really fun to read. With all the fluff floating around on the net, it is rare to read a blog like this instead.
Posted by: Air Jordan 1 | May 16, 2011 at 12:19 AM
Thank for the amazing content on your blog, I am very curious in this article and you have really helped me. I have just told a few of my friends about this on FaceBook and they love your content just as much as I do.
Posted by: Turbo fire | May 16, 2011 at 12:23 AM
"We are almost out of time" for a compromise, warned President Barack Obama as U.S. financial markets trembled at the prospect of economic chaos next week.
Posted by: Hermes | July 29, 2011 at 05:40 PM
http://www.canadagoosejacketss.com
Posted by: [email protected] | September 07, 2011 at 07:46 PM
When tomorrow turns in today, yesterday, and someday that no more important in your memory, we suddenly realize that we r pushed forward by time. This is not a train in still in which you may feel forward when another train goes by. It is the truth that we've all grown up. And we become different.
Posted by: ugg discount | September 15, 2011 at 07:47 PM
HHH Yes, the design of national policy is important, how our economic development plans for the next five years, how the implementation, how to make our economy even faster. Are designed to advance our focus to invest money in what ways it should be carefully arranged.
Posted by: radii supra shoes | October 04, 2011 at 10:53 AM
Thanks for this excellent plugin.hanks for the great plugin
Posted by: Cheap jerseys wholesale | November 09, 2011 at 06:04 PM
The moral/rights nature of the evolving market place should also be evolving on principles that are healthy for the larger community. One might find such a statement naive but it is in my mind central the long-term health of the “social order.” The use of CS for purely economic gain is the antithesis of what should be evolving along with what new technologies are making possible. I have been asking myself, who is going to consider those responsibilities? “Act” as though Karma exists appears to be a step in that direction. I might ad that to “acknowledge” that Karma exists between those who are involved would be closer to the mark! Three cheers on the Beta release. Alan.
Posted by: Jessica Alba | January 20, 2012 at 09:20 AM