TED Conversations

AmirHossein Honardust

This conversation is closed.

How do you define "openness"?

How do you define openness?
How do you define free as in freedom?
How do you define wiki?
And What are the conditions that a service should provide so that this service considered an open service?

Share:

Closing Statement from AmirHossein Honardust

Thank you all for participating.
Your points of view are different but almost pointing to one big end: Humans need freedom.

Please feel free to read this conversation and contact me if you want make me happy by telling me more about your opinions.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    May 24 2013: The first two I think you always have to have a standard of reasonableness. In other words, how much openness is reasonable? For instance, if being open might get someone killed, it might be unreasonable to be open. But openness also stimulates creativity, so a large amount of openness is desirable. One must balance the different factors and be reasonable. The same for freedom, a reasonable amount of freedom. Wiki I don't know, can you define?
    • thumb
      May 24 2013: That was a really interesting answer. I'm confused, Are you referring that the radical openness is the problem itself, or the users use of that data would be the problem from your perspective?

      I define wiki as a collaborative work of a team from different points of view and different cultures that which provides an ultimate product that would be respond to the need of all, or at least as near as it can get. :)
      • thumb
        May 24 2013: Well, personally, AmirHossein, I like to be as open as possible without taking too big of risks. For example, here in the United States we are encouraged not to tell people our Social Security number, which is a number every citizen has for identification and to allow them to participate in government programs. So I will be very open if someone asks me a question, but I would not for example tell them my Social Security number.

        Perhaps when it comes to openness, we should ask ourselves why the other person wants to know, is it for a positive reason that will make things better for one or more people, or is there a strong chance they will hurt someone with it?
        • thumb
          May 24 2013: So if i understood right, You believe that the problem comes from the users of that open data.
          What i really like to know is that have you ever tried to trust an stranger (small matters counts as well) and he/she betrayed your trust? Or on the effect of warnings of social medias, You are alerted to not to trust strange request by default?
          I find that social medias exaggerate every thing; And i find my society very suspicious and scary. But after i noticed my source of this kind of thinking, I started to trust others. a little bit more every day. Of course there was some problems and some betrayed my trust. But when you put that side by side to the big circle of trust and communications that i've achieved to own, there is no comparison.
          From my believe people are more capable of trust then advertised.
          What do you think? :)

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.