With a slightly skeptical view toward my involvement with groups like the FSF and my work in the FLOSS community, at least one academic tried to suggest that taking a principled position in favor of software freedom might compromise the positivist social science research program in which I am engaged.

"...A strong free software movement focused on the principled issues of software freedom -- and a strong FSF in particular -- will determine what freedoms the next generation of computer users enjoy. At stake is no less than the next generation's autonomy. If you are not an FSF associate member, now is the time to become one..."

Those of us in the free/libre and open source software (FLOSS) community know the routine by now.

"I'm a bit of a rebel," Benjamin Mako Hill says, "with rather too many causes." Best known for his many roles in Debian, Hill is also a member of the Ubuntu Community Council, an advisor to One Laptop Per Child, a director of Software Freedom International, and the originator of several free software projects -- to say nothing of an active voice for the Free Culture Movement, and the occasional or

"At the end of day two of FOSS camp in Cambridge, I was able to grab some time with Benjamin Mako Hill. I had blogged about Mako's appointment to the board of the Free Software Foundation back in July but this was the first time that I really got to meet him. He's quite an amiable guy and very enthusiastic about what he's involved with (it definitely comes through in the interview). Check it out..."

The glorious weather that had punctuated the first two days of the conference held, heralding in the third day in a blaze of sunshine. The conference proper was introduced by a keynote by Benjamin Mako Hill on Antifeatures: Why your software works against you and why software freedom offers hope of a better future.

" The idea of open source is that allowing users to change and redistribute the software will make it more powerful and reliable. But this is not guaranteed. Developers of proprietary software are not necessarily incompetent. Sometimes they produce a program which is powerful and reliable, even though it does not respect the users’ freedom.

With any paradigm shift, it is difficult to see the new world from the old one, even though it is glaringly obvious once you’ve crossed over. Empirical evidence is one way to bridge the gap. To that end, I want to show some solid evidence for the “impossible” things that commons-based peer production (CBPP) has already accomplished—things that the old conventional wisdom would tell us “can’t be done”. This week, I’ll look at what is probably the most obvious case: free software.

Benjamin Mako Hill gave a very insightful presentation at Linux Conf Australia 2010. Now the video and audio are available online. He talks about the "market segmentation" or price discrimination on vast number of hardware and software companies practice. About challenge-response protocols, drm, tivoization, monopolies and the role of free software.