> Many of us wear multiple hats. 90% of the time, it does not matter > which hat we are wearing, but it is critical to clarify which hat is > being worn when speaking if there is the possibility of ambiguity. > Also, it is not actual ambiguity in our minds that matters - it is the > potential for ambiguity in the minds of the recipient as well as those > who may read or hear those words downstream, possibly in a different > context.
....the above reminds me of a quote I heard last week at a Harvard Med. School conference: "there is no better antiseptic than sunlight" The basic lesson in this discussion from a business perspective is that transparency is a critical success factor if an organization/individual/company wants to position themselves as an "open source" solution provider. This issue has presented itself at least a couple of times on openhealth and elsewhere... Joseph K.S. Bhaskar wrote: > On 12/01/2007 12:18 AM, Molly Cheah wrote: >> >> No Tim. That was Tims' intepretation of what is open source. Frankly, > > [KSB] If (former US President) Bill Clinton could raise an ambiguity > about the word "is", there is probably room for interpretation of "open > source". Here are some places to read what others have to say: > > http://opensource.org/docs/osd > http://www.us.debian.org/intro/free > http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html > > I realize that I am mixing the terms "open source" and "free software" > to some extent, but they both mean very much the same thing in my mind, > and differences are amplified by personality clashes rather than > differences in meaning. [Many movements have charismatic leaders with > strong personalities and deeply held convictions - "sometimes wrong, but > never in doubt".] > > [KSB] <...snip...> > >> Currently the law in Malaysia on patient safety does not recognise >> statements that does or does not provide warranty of the application >> (tool) used in patient care. > > [KSB] This is truly unfortunate. Extrapolating, under Malaysian law, if > I were to create a very sharp obsidian cutting instrument, I would seem > to be violating patient safety, whether or not I provide a warranty that > it is suitable for use as a scalpel. > > [KSB] <...> > > Many of us wear multiple hats. 90% of the time, it does not matter > which hat we are wearing, but it is critical to clarify which hat is > being worn when speaking if there is the possibility of ambiguity. > Also, it is not actual ambiguity in our minds that matters - it is the > potential for ambiguity in the minds of the recipient as well as those > who may read or hear those words downstream, possibly in a different > context. > > For example, I wear (at least) three hats: > > - I manage GT.M, where we are trying to build a business based on > software released under the GPL. > > - I co-founded, and serve on the board of, WorldVistA, a > non-profitable charitable organization that advocates the use of > affordable healthcare IT through the use of VistA. > > - I recently started a term on the board of the VistA Software > Alliance, a trade group. > > When I advocate WorldVistA EHR, I need to be sure that the person I am > not speaking for VSA (which advocates all flavors of VistA, not just > WorldVistA EHR). Also, wearing my WorldVistA hat, I must be neutral > about the platform that VistA is deployed on, which I don't have to be > when I wear my GT.M hat. > > Life presents us with many opportunities to be misunderstood. > > Regards > -- Bhaskar > > ______________ > > The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. > If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all > copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; > and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that > any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by > persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. > > _____________ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > . >
