Sustain SustainOSS

Guest

Max Jones


Panelist

Richard Littauer


Show Notes

In this first ever cross-over episode of Sustain and Open Source for Climate, host Richard welcomes guest Max Jones, a data scientist and open source software developer who works at Carbon Plan. Max discusses the importance of open source in bringing about effective climate action, the role of Carbon Plan in building accessible data products and tools, and how being a nonprofit is advantageous for open source development. The conversation also touches on funding models for open source projects in nonprofits, including support from individual donors, grants, and collaboration with governmental and private entities like NASA and Microsoft. Additionally, Max shares insights into the development of tools for better visualization of climate data, the impact of open source on climate action, and the challenges of ensuring software and data accessibility and reproducibility. Press download now to hear more!
[00:02:50] Richard outlines Max’s background in open source software development focused on climate action, including his leadership role at Carbon Plan.


[00:03:31] Max discusses the mission of Carbon Plan, emphasizing the importance of transparency and accessibility in climate solutions.


[00:04:23] Max describes his role in leading open source initiatives at Carbon Plan.


[00:03:23] The conversation shifts to the practical aspects of running a non-profit focused on open source projects, including funding mechanisms such as grants from NASA.


[00:06:58] Max explains one of their projects that involve tools for visualizing large-scale climate data to assist cities in planning and decision-making. He mentions how these tools are designed to be accessible to both scientists and the general public.


[00:08:13] There’s a discussion about community engagement with their tools, noting that while many people reach out with questions or feature requests, there have been few contributions in terms of pull requests.


[00:08:53] Max reflects on a collaboration with the Washington Post using their tools to inform public understanding of climate projections.


[00:10:37] Max discusses the broader use of the tools by various agencies and the importance of transparency for reproducibility in research.
[00:11:24] Max emphasizes the importance of reproducibility in open source projects across academia, industry, and the non-profit sector, and he acknowledges the challenges in ensuring that external users can engage with and reproduce their computational workflows.


[00:12:56] The conversation shares insights into building a community around open source projects, particularly through involvement with the Pangeo project, which supports reproducibility and scalability in earth science workflows.


[00:14:08] Max talks about the importance of finding common needs across different fields to promote broader collaboration and integration and mentions the Zarr project.


[00:15:51] We hear about the size of the team at Carbon Plan which includes various roles.


[00:16:28] Richard inquires about the funding landscape for open source projects at Carbon Plan. Max mentions the initial funding received through collaborations with NASA and Microsoft. He emphasizes the importance of ongoing government and agency support for both new tools and the maintenance of existing software.


[00:17:51] Max talks about contributing back to open source communities, highlighting the practice of reporting bugs and engaging with upstream dependencies to improve tools.


[00:18:38] The necessity of open source for transparency in climate solutions is discussed, contrasting with closed source companies that sell proprietary products to governments. Max argues for the importance of open source in ensuring accountability and better outcomes in climate solutions.


[00:20:07] Max discusses the broader aspects of open resources, such as leveraging open standards, data, and hardware. He mentio

Guests

Eva Maxfield Brown | Boris Veytsman


Panelist

Richard Littauer


Show Notes

In this episode of Sustain, host Richard Littauer engages with guests Eva Maxfield Brown and Boris Veytsman to explore their co-authored paper, "Biomedical Open Source Software: Crucial Packages and Hidden Heroes." The paper focuses on identifying crucial but often overlooked software dependencies in biomedical research. The discussions delve into how the study used data from two million papers to map these dependencies, revealing both well-supported and undermaintained software components vital to scientific research. There’s a conversation on the methodological challenges and the concept of "Nebraska packages," which are essential yet potentially undermaintained elements crucial to the software stack used in both industry and science. The conversation also covers broader implications for software sustainability, security, and future research directions, including improving how software contributions are tracked and recognized within scientific careers. Press download now to hear more!


[00:01:47] Richard dives into the paper co-authored by Eva and Boris. Boris explains the origins of the paper, starting from a workshop at CZI aimed at accelerating science through sustainable software, leading to the analysis of software used in biomedical research. He highlights the focus on identifying crucial yet often unmentioned software dependencies in research software, which he labels as “unsung heroes.”


[00:05:22] Boris provides findings from their study, noting that while many foundational packages were cited, there are significant packages that, despite their critical role, remain uncited.


[00:06:43] Eva discusses the concept of “Nebraska packages,” which are essential yet potentially undermaintained components that are crucial to the software stack used in both industry and science. Also, she elaborates on the methodological challenges of determining which packages to include in their analysis, particularly in terms of dependencies that vary between different users and contexts.


[00:09:42] Richard reflects on the broader implications of their discussion for the open source community, particularly in terms of software sustainability and security. Eva emphasizes the importance of security across all fields and discusses the potential impact of software bugs on scientific research and the need for robust software infrastructure.


[00:12:04] Boris comments on the necessity of well-tested tools in the scientific community, given that many scientists may lack a strong background in software development and training.


[00:13:47] Richard quotes from the paper discussing the absence of cycles in the network of software packages used in science, indicating a more robust design compared to general software. He questions this in light of earlier comments about scientists not being great at coding.


[00:14:08] Eva explains that the paper’s findings about acyclic dependencies (DAGs) might seem surprising given the common perception that scientific software is poorly developed. She notes that while scientists may not be trained in proper software packaging, the Python environment helps prevent cyclic dependencies.


[00:17:31] Richard brings up “Katz centrality” which is discussed in the paper, and Boris clarifies that “Katz centrality” refers to a concept by Leo Katz on network centrality, explaining how it helps determine the importance of nodes within a network.


[00:20:13] Richard questions the practical applications of the research findings, probing for advice on supporting crucial but underrecognized dependencies within software ecosystems. Eva addresses future research directions, including improving ecosystem matching algorithms for better accuracy in linking software mentions to the correct ecosystems.


[00:22:50] Eva suggests expanding the research to cover more domains beyond biomedicine, considering differe

Guest

Emmy Tsang


Panelist

Richard Littauer


Show Notes

In this episode of Sustain, host Richard Littauer welcomes Emmy Tsang, the Engagement Lead at Invest in Open Infrastructure (IOI). Emmy introduces the mission of IOI, which focuses on increasing investment in and adoption of open infrastructure to promote equitable access and participation in research. The discussion delves into what constitutes 'open infrastructure,' the need for nuanced definitions, and IOI's efforts in providing evidence-based tools, strategic support, and funding pilots within the space. Emmy also highlights IOI's inaugural 'State of Open Infrastructure 2024' report, set to serve as an annual resource for understanding the open infrastructure landscape. They discuss the report's contents, including analysis of funding, governance trends, and policies affecting open infrastructure, and Emmy invites feedback from the community to improve future iterations of the report. Press download to hear more!


[00:01:04] Emmy explains IOI and how it provides tools and recommendations, strategic support, and runs funding pilots.


[00:02:14] There’s a discussion on the growth of the IOI team and the importance of a global perspective, as well as an explanation of IOI’s funding and fiscal sponsorship by Code for Science and Society.


[00:03:47] Emmy explains open infrastructure as a spectrum and the importance of context and mentions the five criteria for defining open infrastructure.


[00:07:37] Richard asks Emmy for clarification on the definition of infrastructure on the context of open infrastructure. She tells us a broader definition as services and technologies relied upon by researchers and scholars and gives an example.


[00:10:34] Richard questions how IOI integrates community feedback into their work. Emmy explains IOI’s privileged position to consider open infrastructure at an ecosystem level, mentions the Infra Finder tool for open infrastructure discovery, and her role as an engagement person. She also mentions shifting power in funding decisions and increasing accessibility of funding to low and middle-income economies.


[00:15:32] The “State of Open Infrastructure 2024” report will launch on May 28th. Emmy discusses the topics covered in the report, explains how they used their Infra Finder tool, and the data from the report will be shared openly via Zenodo.


[00:19:38] Richard appreciates the scope and ambition of the report and wonders about the primary audience of the report and its relevance to open source maintainers. We learn the report is targeted at funders, but also relevant to maintainers and developers of open infrastructures.


[00:25:16] Emmy responds on how they reach out to potential infrastructures and encourage storytelling through their work and engagement. She explains the unique perspective IOI brings to the concept of infrastructure and emphasizes the importance of defining success and sustainability for open infrastructure. Also, she mentions the “Graceful Transitions” section in the report, highlighting organizational changes in infrastructures.


[00:30:18] Richard agrees on the need for personal and emotional discussions about transitions in open source projects. Emmy invites listeners to participate in community conversations about the report’s chapters and shares details on the upcoming community conversations and how to join the mailing list for updates.


[00:32:40] Find out where you can read the report and follow Emmy on the interwebs.


Quotes

[00:04:14 ] “We find it easy to put open into really clear binaries, you’re open or not open, etc, etc.”


[00:04:43] “Most of the time these binaries don’t really make sense.”


[00:06:29] “We’re viewing open infrastructure more as a spectrum.”


[00:26:42] “What does success and sustainability mean for open infrastructure?”


Spotlight


[00:34:24] Richard’s spotlight is the book, The (Big)Year That Flew By by Arja

Guest

Simon Vansintjan


Panelist

Richard Littauer


Show Notes

In this episode, host Richard Littauer and guest Simon Vansintjan dive into the topic of open-source sustainability in the music industry. Simon, a long-time friend of Richard and a seasoned coder and designer, introduces Mirlo, an innovative online platform he's working on that combines elements of Bandcamp and Patreon to enable direct financial support for musicians. Mirlo, an open-source project built with a full-stack TypeScript, Express, Redis, Postgres, and React, aims to provide an alternative to traditional music streaming services by focusing on direct artist support and community engagement. Simon discusses the challenges and benefits of building Mirlo as a cooperative, the intricacies of its development and funding model, and the broader implications of open-source principles in creating a more equitable and sustainable ecosystem for musicians. Hit download now to hear more!


[00:01:38] What is Mirlo? Simon explains it’s an online record store where users can buy digital music directly from musicians and provide monthly support, similar to a combination of Bandcamp and Patreon.


[00:02:32] Simon discusses Mirlo’s open source status and its tech stack, which includes TypeScript/JavaScript, Express, Redis, Postgres, and React.


[00:03:13] Richard inquires about the origins of Mirlo, and Simon describes his work with Resonate, issues with legacy code, and the decision to create Mirlo to explore sustainable business models without venture capital.


[00:04:16] We hear that Spotify isn’t profitable as Simon discusses the challenges streaming service face, which led Mirlo to adopt a different model.


[00:05:04] Simon explains Mirlo’s co-op structure, focusing on worker empowerment and non-hierarchical decision-making, contrasting it with Resonate’s multi-stakeholder co-op model.


[00:08:57] Richard asks about Mirlo’s sustainability model. Simon describes Mirlo’s revenue model, which includes taking a small cut from each sale, user contributions that cover server costs, and plans for grants and a Kickstarter campaign.


[00:10:23] Simon explains the complexities of starting as a nonprofit and the decision to form an LLC for greater flexibility.


[00:11:03] Richard questions the distinction between artists and worker owners. Simon discusses the different models for including musicians as co-owners, ongoing experimentation with the co-op structure, and the importance of recognizing musicians’ contributions to Mirlo.


[00:13:07] The conversation turns to contributors to the GitHub codebase, and Richard mentions a couple of contributors and wonders if they have equal shares as worker owners. Simon explains that neither contributor is a worker owner, and he talks about the challenges in tracking contributions for co-ownership.


[00:16:28] Simon highlights the slow process of building trust and the challenges posed by financial constraints, emphasizing the need for time and money.


[00:18:29] Richard shifts focus to the codebase and notes the absence of contributing docs, asking about the onboarding process for new contributors. Simon explains their use of a Discord server for feedback and onboarding.


[00:20:18] Richard questions the benefits of being open source for Mirlo, and Simon emphasizes all the significant benefits of being open source.


[00:21:30] Mirlo’s competitive space is brought up and Simon acknowledges the moral aspect and mentions Mirlo’s near feature parity with Bandcamp, excluding merch and label support. He explains the Mirlo isn’t necessarily trying to compete directly with major platforms but aims to create a diverse, open, and transparent internet space.


[00:23:52] Simon explains the Kickstarter rewards, including a compilation album and merch, and when it ends.


[00:25:31] Richard praises Mirlo’s intentional cooperative approach and its efforts to maintain and grow the platform susta

Guest

Dr. Carlotta A. Berry


Panelist

Richard Littauer


Show Notes

In this episode, host Richard Littauer engages in a conversation with Dr. Carlotta Berry, a Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and a passionate advocate for diversity in STEM. Carlotta shares her journey from an undergraduate student rarely seeing diversity in her field to becoming an engineering professor determined to change that narrative. She discusses her work at the Children's Museum of Indianapolis, emphasizing the importance of making STEM accessible and exciting for all, especially girls and underrepresented minorities. She also dives into her motivations behind founding two nonprofits, Black in Engineering and Black in Robotics, highlighting their roles during the racial reckoning and the importance of maintaining momentum in diversity efforts amidst societal backlashes. Additionally, Carlotta touches upon her engagement with open source communities, particularly in robotics, to further democratize STEM education. The discussion also covers her unique approaches to connecting with younger audiences through hip hop slam poetry on TikTok and the significance of representation in every aspect of STEM, from academia to community initiatives. Press download now to hear more!


[00:01:05] Carlotta tells us about the Children’s Museum of Indianapolis and describes it as one of the largest children’s museums in the world, detailing its features and her role there in STEM and robotics activities.


[00:02:00] Richard comments on Carlotta’s extensive education and asks about her journey from PHD to her current position. She explains her motivation for pursuing a PhD was to become an engineering professor and to represent diversity in the field.


[00:02:59] Carlotta recounts that her PhD experience was relatively smooth compared to her undergrad challenges, highlighting the focus on subjects she loved.


[00:04:57] The conversation turns to Carlotta’s involvement with nonprofits, particularly ‘Black in Engineering’ and ‘Black in Robotics’, and she shares the origin of these groups. She talks about the purpose of ‘Black in Engineering’ and its relevance in the current political climate.


[00:08:26] Richard inquires how Carlotta stays motivated amid setbacks in civil rights progress. Carlotta cites the resilience of past civil rights leaders as inspiration and emphasizes the role of true allies.


[00:10:41] The discussion shifts to open source, and Carlotta outlines her work in STEM communication and her involvement with open source hardware through her robots, the ‘flower bots’. Also, she acknowledges she has built a community primarily through social media engagement.


[00:15:16] Carlotta explains Rose Bot’s origin, related to her school’s mascot, and its connection with various STEM outreach and education initiatives, such as Rosie, Lily, and Daisy bots. She celebrates the success of her program in increasing enrollment and diversity in computer science and software engineering, as well as her own department.


[00:17:50] Richard inquires about Carlotta’s day-to-day activities and how she manages everything. She clarifies she’s a workaholic with a high teaching lead at a teaching-focused school and does not balance well, yet she is passionate about her work, and she details her daily schedule.


[00:20:25] What is Carlotta’s mentoring approach for young women in STEM? She emphasizes honesty and support for her students, sharing her own struggles and the importance of community and resources to navigate the difficulties in engineering education.


[00:23:46] Richard asks Carlotta what changes she would suggest for the broader open source community to increase diversity and representation in STEM. Carlotta advises against working in silos, stressing the importance of education about open source, reaching beyond typical recruitment space

Guest

Susan Kennedy


Panelists

Richard Littauer | Eriol Fox


Show Notes

In this episode, hosts Richard Littauer and Eriol Fox chat with Susan Kennedy, a program manager at the Open Technology Fund (OTF), to explore the intricacies of sustaining open source technologies. OTF, a nonprofit organization, plays a vital role in promoting internet freedom in oppressive regimes by supporting the development of anti-censorship and anti-surveillance technologies. Funded by the U.S. Congress but operating independently, OTF aids in navigating the challenges attached to open source project sustainability and maintenance. Susan outlines OTF's fund mechanism, highlighting its commitment to supporting open source projects that are pivotal for internet freedom. Also, the episode shines a light on the newly initiated FOSS Sustainability Fund by OTF, designed to specifically address the financial and logistical hurdles facing open source technologies today. Press download to hear more!


[00:01:41] Susan explains the OTF’s role as a non-profit promoting internet freedom through anti-censorship and anti-surveillance technologies, mainly funded by the U.S. government but operates independently.


[00:02:37] There’s a comparison of OTF to Germany’s Sovereign Tech Fund, emphasizing differences in funding despite both being government funded.


[00:03:51] There’s a discussion on how OTF funds projects like Signal despite potential congressional controversies.


[00:04:15] Susan introduces the FOSS Sustainability Fund aimed at supporting open source technologies for internet freedom.


[00:06:15] Susan gives details on the scale of the FOSS Sustainability Fund, mentioning financial contributions from other private donors alongside U.S. government funds.


[00:07:34] We find out the details of eligibility criteria for FOSS Sustainability Fund applicants, as Susan emphasizes projects with a track record and active community engagement.


[00:09:00] Susan discusses the outcomes from the pilot funding round, focusing on the importance of community meetings and interaction. Also, she talks about exploration of sustainability as a lifecycle, including potential sunsetting of projects, emphasizing that sustainability might look different for each project.


[00:13:17] Susan talks about exploration of sustainability as a lifecycle, including potential sunsetting of projects, emphasizing that sustainability might look different for each project.


[00:15:19] Richard questions the approach of funding projects that are charismatic and grant-savvy, instead of focusing on lesser-known but critical projects, questioning the open application process. Susan defends the open application process of the Internet Freedom Fund, explaining it allows for a broader reach and inclusivity, ensuring opportunities for lesser-known projects to apply.


[00:17:06] Richard asks if a small, unrelated project like ‘right pad’ used by major projects can apply, leading to a broader discussion on the relevance of small projects within significant tools. Susan responds by focusing on the end-users’ needs, emphasizing the importance of even small projects if they are critical to larger tools like Tails.


[00:18:51] Susan highlights the two-phase application process designed to guide applicants efficiently, providing feedback and advice on project fit and impact, and she describes the iterative application process.


[00:19:51] Eriol discusses the advisory aspect of OTF’s application process, noting the interaction and intention of their approach which aids applicants in refining their proposals. They raise concerns about projects using sustainability funds to tackle debt and asks how OTF views the alignment of tech debt resolution with user-centric sustainability.


[00:21:34] Susan elaborates on distinguishing between tech debt and sustainability, advocating for a balanced approach that includes both technical fixes and enhancements in user engageme