Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Jason Hoffman
Jason's posts

Post has shared content
Before Solving a Problem, Make Sure You've Got the Right Problem

I was pleased to see the measured tone of the White House response to the citizen petition about #SOPA and #PIPA!/response/combating-online-piracy-while-protecting-open-and-innovative-internet

and yet I found myself profoundly disturbed by something that seems to me to go to the root of the problem in Washington: the failure to correctly diagnose the problem we are trying to solve, but instead to accept, seemingly uncritically, the claims of various interest groups. The offending paragraph is as follows:

"Let us be clear—online piracy is a real problem that harms the American economy, and threatens jobs for significant numbers of middle class workers and hurts some of our nation's most creative and innovative companies and entrepreneurs. It harms everyone from struggling artists to production crews, and from startup social media companies to large movie studios. While we are strongly committed to the vigorous enforcement of intellectual property rights, existing tools are not strong enough to root out the worst online pirates beyond our borders."

In the entire discussion, I've seen no discussion of credible evidence of this economic harm. There's no question in my mind that piracy exists, that people around the world are enjoying creative content without paying for it, and even that some criminals are profiting by redistributing it. But is there actual economic harm?

In my experience at O'Reilly, the losses due to piracy are far outweighed by the benefits of the free flow of information, which makes the world richer, and develops new markets for legitimate content. Most of the people who are downloading unauthorized copies of O'Reilly books would never have paid us for them anyway; meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of others are buying content from us, many of them in countries that we were never able to do business with when our products were not available in digital form.

History shows us, again and again, that frontiers are lawless places, but that as they get richer and more settled, they join in the rule of law. American publishing, now the largest publishing industry in the world, began with piracy. (I have a post coming on that subject on Monday.)

Congress (and the White House) need to spend time thinking hard about how best to grow our economy - and that means being careful not to close off the frontier, or to harm those trying to settle it, in order to protect those who want to remain safe at home. British publishers could have come to America in the 19th century; they chose not to, and as a result, we grew our own indigenous publishing industry, which relied at first, in no small part, on pirating British and European works.

If the goal is really to support jobs and the American economy, internet "protectionism" is not the way to do it.

It is said (though I've not found the source) that Einstein once remarked that if given 60 minutes to save the world, he would spend 55 of them defining the problem. And defining the problem means collecting and studying real evidence, not the overblown claims of an industry that has fought the introduction of every new technology that has turned out, in the end, to grow their business rather than threaten it.

P.S. If Congress and the White House really want to fight pirates who are hurting the economy, they should be working to rein in patent trolls. There, the evidence of economic harm is clear, in multi-billion dollar transfers of wealth from companies building real products to those who have learned how to work the patent system while producing no value for consumers.

P. P.S. See also my previous piece on the subject of doing an independent investigation of the facts rather than just listening to the appeals of lobbyists,

Post has attachment
This is a good one. If you think you know what cloud is. You don't!

Post has shared content
Fours ago this March, we held the first (and so far, only) DTrace conference, dtrace.conf (, It was, in +Theo Schlossnagle's words, awesome. In fact, it was so awesome, that I didn't want to start holding it annually for its own sake. (My fears of mediocrity were heightened by +stephen o'grady, who pointedly observed to me that the only direction for what had been such a terrific conference was pretty much straight down.) But now as we approach the four year anniversary, it occurs to me that an Olympiad might be the right cadence: since 2008, a lot of terrific work has been done on, for and with DTrace -- and I know that I for one would love to hear from the likes of new faces like @slfritchie, @chrisandrews, @crispeditor-- and about the new DTrace-based work from familiar ones like +Adam Leventhal (of course), +Eric Schrock, +Matthew Ahrens, +Theo Schlossnagle, +Brendan Gregg, +Dave Pacheco, +Robert Mustacchi, +Mark Cavage, Matt Amdur and Jarod Jenson (among many others!).

So would there be interest in dtrace.conf(12) to be held in (say) March? Location would be in San Francisco, and it would be either a day or (given that the short length was the only complaint of the attendees) two. I would anticipate doing this again in an unconference style -- so I would ask that everyone come mentally prepared to present (if informally) or otherwise lead a discussion or session. To help me/us gauge interest in dtrace.conf(12), please leave a comment or a +1 here if you think you might come -- and here's to the new Olympiad!
Wait while more posts are being loaded