The open-source model is a decentralized software development model that encourages open collaboration. A main principle of open-source software development is peer production, with products such as source code and documentation available to the public; the open-source movement in software began as a response to the limitations of proprietary code. The model is used for projects such as in open-source appropriate technology, open-source drug discovery. Open source promotes universal access via an open-source or free license to a product's design or blueprint, universal redistribution of that design or blueprint. Before the phrase open source became adopted and producers used a variety of other terms. Open source gained hold with the rise of the Internet; the open-source software movement arose to clarify copyright, licensing and consumer issues. Open source refers to a computer program in which the source code is available to the general public for use or modification from its original design.
Open-source code is meant to be a collaborative effort, where programmers improve upon the source code and share the changes within the community. Code is released under the terms of a software license. Depending on the license terms, others may download and publish their version back to the community. Many large formal institutions have sprung up to support the development of the open-source movement, including the Apache Software Foundation, which supports community projects such as the open-source framework Apache Hadoop and the open-source HTTP server Apache HTTP; the sharing of technical information predates the personal computer considerably. For instance, in the early years of automobile development a group of capital monopolists owned the rights to a 2-cycle gasoline-engine patent filed by George B. Selden. By controlling this patent, they were able to monopolize the industry and force car manufacturers to adhere to their demands, or risk a lawsuit. In 1911, independent automaker Henry Ford won a challenge to the Selden patent.
The result was that the Selden patent became worthless and a new association was formed. The new association instituted a cross-licensing agreement among all US automotive manufacturers: although each company would develop technology and file patents, these patents were shared and without the exchange of money among all the manufacturers. By the time the US entered World War II, 92 Ford patents and 515 patents from other companies were being shared among these manufacturers, without any exchange of money. Early instances of the free sharing of source code include IBM's source releases of its operating systems and other programs in the 1950s and 1960s, the SHARE user group that formed to facilitate the exchange of software. Beginning in the 1960s, ARPANET researchers used an open "Request for Comments" process to encourage feedback in early telecommunication network protocols; this led to the birth of the early Internet in 1969. The sharing of source code on the Internet began when the Internet was primitive, with software distributed via UUCP, Usenet, IRC, Gopher.
BSD, for example, was first distributed by posts to comp.os.linux on the Usenet, where its development was discussed. Linux followed in this model; the term "open source" was first proposed by a group of people in the free software movement who were critical of the political agenda and moral philosophy implied in the term "free software" and sought to reframe the discourse to reflect a more commercially minded position. In addition, the ambiguity of the term "free software" was seen as discouraging business adoption. However, the disambiguation of "free" exists in English as it can refer to cost; the group included Christine Peterson, Todd Anderson, Larry Augustin, Jon Hall, Sam Ockman, Michael Tiemann and Eric S. Raymond. Peterson suggested "open source" at a meeting held at Palo Alto, California, in reaction to Netscape's announcement in January 1998 of a source code release for Navigator. Linus Torvalds gave his support the following day, Phil Hughes backed the term in Linux Journal. Richard Stallman, the founder of the free software movement seemed to adopt the term, but changed his mind.
Netscape released its source code under the Netscape Public License and under the Mozilla Public License. Raymond was active in the effort to popularize the new term, he made the first public call to the free software community to adopt it in February 1998. Shortly after, he founded The Open Source Initiative in collaboration with Bruce Perens; the term gained further visibility through an event organized in April 1998 by technology publisher Tim O'Reilly. Titled the "Freeware Summit" and known as the "Open Source Summit", the event was attended by the leaders of many of the most important free and open-source projects, including Linus Torvalds, Larry Wall, Brian Behlendorf, Eric Allman, Guido van Rossum, Michael Tiemann, Paul Vixie, Jamie Zawinski, Eric Raymond. At that meeting, alternatives to the term "free software" were discussed. Tiemann argued for "sourceware" as a new term, while Raymond argued for "open source"; the assembled developers took a vote, the winner was announced at a press conference the same evening."Open source" has never managed to supersede the older term "free software", giving rise to the combined term free and open-source software.
Some economists agree that open-source is an information good or "knowledge good" with original work involving a significant amount of time and effort. The cost of reproducing the work is low enough that add
Fortune telling fraud called the bujo or egg curse scam, is a type of confidence trick, based on a claim of secret or occult information. The basic feature of the scam involves diagnosing the victim with some sort of secret problem that only the grifter can detect or diagnose, charging the mark for ineffectual treatments; the archetypical grifter working the scam is a fortune teller who announces that the mark is suffering from a curse that her magic can relieve, while threatening dire consequences if the curse is not lifted. In this scam, a fortune teller uses her cold reading skill to detect that a client is genuinely troubled rather than seeking entertainment; the fortune teller informs the mark that they are the victim of a curse, but that for a fee a spell can be cast to remove the curse. In Romany, this trick is called bujo meaning "bag", but now meaning "a swindle involving a large amount of money from a gullible fortune-telling customer."This name comes from a traditional form: the mark is told that the curse is in their money.
In some cases the curse is "verified" by a sleight of hand trick involving an egg, The grifter tells the mark to bring an egg to a reading, which when cracked open reveals disgusting matter or symbols of evil. This discovery confirms the curse; these scams continue into the present day. A 1996 reported decision out of Hawaii described the scam as "a centuries old confidence game that victimized the elderly or those with emotional problems", describing its operation in this manner: In the Bujo, one of the female members of the Merino clan would tell the client that the future holds evil. Sleight of hand tricks, such as removing a clump of hair from a newly broken egg, were used as evidence that a client was either possessed by an evil spirit or under the influence of a curse; the female member of the Merino clan devised methods of extracting the victim's money. The victim may have been told that the money was the root of all evil, that it had to be tossed into the ocean or buried near a fresh grave in a graveyard, credit cards were used on extravagant shopping sprees to purchase food, clothing and other merchandise for members of the Merino family's use and enjoyment.
A Texas woman was sentenced to 21⁄2 years on Federal charges for wire fraud and money laundering after she operated a scam involving a psychic telephone line. Not only did she receive fees of several hundred dollars for her psychic counselling, but she convinced her clients to send her money and property to be cleansed of "evil". In 2002, two self-described California based psychics were indicted on Federal mail fraud charges after persuading people to pay them to be cleared of bad karma. In 2006, two Connecticut women told another woman that God was going to kill her unless she paid them to perform various rituals, including chicken sacrifices, on her behalf. In Palmdale, California, a psychic reader was accused of inducing a 12-year-old girl to steal $10,000 worth of jewelry from her parents by threats of a curse. In 2013, con artists running a classic bujo scam were targeting Asian immigrants in New York City, tailoring their tales of curses to fit the Chinese folk religion. In Florida, a tarot card reader is facing trial for fleecing romance writer Jude Deveraux out of more than 25 million dollars.
In December of 2018 Janet Lee known as the Greenwich psychic, was ordered by a judge in a civil lawsuit to pay one of her clients back $30,000. In 2015 Lee had convinced the client to hand over her entire life savings to Lee in cash for cleansing as there were "dark forces" surrounding the money, she told the client that she would put the money in a safety box in St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Manhattan for 6 months until the money was cleansed. At the end of the 6 months Lee refused to give the money back forcing the client to file the lawsuit. A desire to protect people from this scam has been one argument made to justify legislation that makes fortune telling a crime. A New York State statute condemns a person who "claims or pretends" to "influence or affect evil spirits or curses" in its prohibition of fortune telling, while letting a person "who engages in the aforedescribed conduct as part of a show or exhibition for the purpose of entertainment or amusement" off the hook. Most current judicial opinions have held that fortune telling in itself is protected speech under the First Amendment, though some judges have noted that "such devices are if not uniformly used to bilk or fleece gullible patrons."
In the Datalink Computer Services incident, a mark was fleeced of several million dollars by a firm that claimed that his computer was infected with viruses, that the infection indicated an elaborate conspiracy against him on the Internet, involving the Central Intelligence Agency and Opus Dei. The victim was charged for elaborate and unnecessary computer security services, including the claim that a member of the Indian military had been sent to Honduras to investigate the source of the virus; the alleged scam lasted from August 2004 through October 2010 and is estimated to have cost the victim between 6 and US$20 million. The victim stated that he had been defrauded by "grifters of the highest order". See Telemarketing fraud for information about a common scam in which fraud artists install malware on victims' computers; the US television series Shut Eye features a number of fictional examples of fortune telling fraud in the first six minutes of the first epi
"Out of Sight, Out of Mind" was the 101st episode of the M*A*S*H television series, the fourth episode of the fifth season. Written by Ken Levine and David Isaacs and directed by Gene Reynolds, it first aired on October 5, 1976 and was repeated December 28, 1976, it features Hawkeye having to contend with sudden blindness after an accident. Hawkeye is asked by the nurses to fix a malfunctioning stove in the nurses' tent. While doing so, a gas pocket builds up and explodes, flash burning and blinding Hawkeye. A specialist is called in to examine his eyes, he is told he must keep them bandaged for a week, after which time the specialist will be able to tell whether the damage to his eyes is permanent. Hawkeye is despondent over the possibility of losing his sight and his surgical career. However, as the week goes on, he becomes fascinated by the stimulation of his other senses due to sensory deprivation, he meets and bonds with patient Tom Straw, blinded in combat. He participates in the OR. Frank, has been winning money from the rest of the staff camp by betting on baseball games.
The key to his success is that he cheats by listening to the games on the radio the night before, when everyone else is asleep, suckers people listening to the rebroadcast into betting on the losing team. Hawkeye, aware of Frank's scheme, arranges it so that Frank's radio is connected to the camp PA, "broadcasts" a fake Indians-Yankees ballgame into it at night, with B. J. Klinger, Radar providing background noise. Hawkeye ends his phony broadcast with the Indians winning 5-4; when the real game's final score is broadcast over the PA the next morning, Frank notices the different outcome, inadvertently blurts out that he listened to the game last night, the other staff members begin to accost him, demanding their lost money back. The specialist returns and removes the bandages, Hawkeye, with great relief, announces that his sight is returned. However, shortly thereafter, Hawkeye appears in the nurses' tent with his eyes bandaged again, explaining that he had a relapse. However, this turns out to be just a ruse to trick the nurses into getting undressed in his presence, one, exposed when he catches a cup one of the nurses throws to him.
This prompts the nurses to kick him out their tent. M*A*S*H on IMDb "Out of Sight, Out of Mind" on IMDb