Potato I have

Simon Phipps has an excellent post on open data formats. Looking for a connection between a lot of new desktop tools, he notes:

all of these tools have worked out that lock-in is the new lock-out

And later:

injecting the network into society removes the commercial benefits previously achieved by closed behaviour […]. Truly open formats are creating the new market, and those who attempt to subvert the trend with pseudo-openness will fail.

While my sensitivity is not nearly as evolved as Mark Pilgrim’s outrage, Apple’s mostly closed data models are a doggedly nagging annoyance in my otherwise pleasant Dive Into Mac one year ago. I know where I want to go, and over time I’ll migrate my digital life into apps and formats that make me feel like the stuff is actually mine. It would be just ideal if Apple would move in this direction faster than I do, because I am so not in a place where I want to spend time doing what Fowler did here.

But how many people understand or care about open data? Far from enough to nudge Apple in a different direction I suspect.

(via t.bray)

I’ve been listening to this music for twenty years, but like a lot of us I wasn’t able to watch Coltrane or Evans or Wes Montgomery. Now I see YouTube starts to have some old concerts and TV shows.

I particularly like this one of Coltrane’s Quartet playing Naima somewhere in Europe (on Arte!) in 1965. Grainy B&W, very good camera work, and Elvin Jones is literally steaming – how great is that?

What do you make of Cecil Taylor’s facial expressions after he finishes playing here?

Someone in one of the comment threads laments the extreme paucity of recorded video of this amazing era; at the moment, I’m mighty happy to have stumbled on to some of it here.

Nature is not afraid to experiment with a core process — peer review — that they believe is working well, to see what the internet might bring: they are piloting one variation of an open peer review process, and have initiated a web debate (good supporting content from those links). Here’s an organization fully engaged with the question of what the web does.

From the comments on the oreilly post, a reminder that Nature was also behind the Britannica-vs-Wikipedia study last December that found W close to B in accuracy.

(via oreilly radar)