The Evolution of Sociology of Software Architecture

The dialectical interplay of technology and sociological development goes back to the early days of human development, starting with stone tools and fire, and coming through the scientific and industrial revolutions; but it has never been as intense or as rapid as in the modern information age of software development and accelerating knowledge society (Mansell and Wehn, 1988; and Nico, 1994, p. 1602-1604). Software development causes social change, and social challenges demand software solutions. In turn, software solutions demand software application architecture. Software architecture (“SA”) (Fielding and Taylor, 2000) is a process for “defining a structural solution that meets all the technical and operations requirements...” (Microsoft, 2009, Chapter I). In the SA process, there is neither much emphasis on the sociological requirements of all social stakeholders nor on the society in w hich these stakeholders use, operate, group, manage, transact, dispute, and resolve social conflicts. For problems of society demanding sociological as well as software solutions, this study redefines software application architecture as “the process of defining a structured solution that meets all of the sociological , technical, and operational requirements…” This investigation aims to l ay the groundwork for, evolve, and develop an innovative and novel sub-branch of scientific study we name the “Sociology of Software Architecture” (hereinafter referred to as “SSA”). SSA is an interdisciplinary and comparative study integrating, synthesizing, and combining elements of the disciplines of sociology, sociology of technology, history of technology, sociology of knowledge society, epistemology, science methodology (philosophy of science), and software architecture. Sociology and technology have a strong, dynamic, and dialectical relationship and interplay, especially in software development. This thesis investigates and answers important and relevant questions, evolves and develops new scientific knowledge, proposes solutions, demonstrates and validates its benefits, shares its case studies and experiences, and advocates, promotes, and helps the future and further development of this novel method of science

Flexibility in contracting

publishedVersio

Representing the user: a sociological study of the discourse of human computer interaction

The discipline of Human Computer Interaction (HCI) was established in the early 1980's on the foundations of cognitive psychology, computer science and ergonomics. In recent years however, claims have been made for the relevance of forms of sociology to this avowedly multidisciplinary field, and a number of sociologists have attempted to contribute to the general enterprise of developing a deeper understanding of the computer user and thereby informing, and improving, software design. This thesis is, in one sense, a continuation of this emerging body of work. However, my contention is that little, if any, critical attention has been given within this work to questions that would seem to be of fundamental importance to attempts at collaboration between disciplines: how is the disciplinary organization of knowledge to be understood, and more specifically, can HCI be adequately described in the simple pluralist terms in which it tends to characterise itself? The primary focus then is on the discipline of HCI. Utilising a theoretical model which considers disciplines as distinctive discourses which constitute their own domains of objects, I analyse the discourse and practice of HCI in order to explicate some of its underlying premises and assumptions, and to argue that it has, unavoidably, set many of the parameters within which contributing disciplines must operate. Texts, audio and video tapes, and ethnographic observation of instances of HCI practice form the empirical basis of the thesis. In addition, an analysis of some recorded human-computer interactions, which like the study as a whole, exemplifies an approach that differs from the prevailing sociological models within the field, is used to support the argument

Reconceptualizing Open Access to Theses and Dissertations

The global COVID-19 crisis has turned public attention to the special need for accessing those cutting-edge studies that are needed for further scientific innovation. Theses and dissertations (TDs) are prominent examples of such studies. TDs are academic research projects conducted by graduate students to acquire a high academic degree, such as a PhD. They encompass not only knowledge about basic science but also knowledge that generates social and economic value for society. Therefore, access to TDs is imperative for promoting science and innovation. Open access to scientific publications has been in the focus of public policy discourse for two decades, but progress toward this end has been limited. As part of this discourse, there has been no systematic discussion of the special case of TDs and of the justification for adopting an open access publication policy toward them. The present study aims to fill this gap. We argue that the essence of TDs as unique outputs of academic research merits a special policy mandating the publication of these studies in open access format, subject to certain exceptions. This policy is underpinned by several arguments, which we develop in our study, based on historic and normative analysis. These considerations support reconceiving access to TDs using an open access approach designated particularly for them. To better understand current open access policies toward TDs, we conducted a limited semi-empirical investigation to collect information. Our findings confirm that–despite the growing awareness of the importance of an open access TDs policy–no standard policy exists. Therefore, we propose to establish a mandatory global policy and standardization regarding the publication of TDs in designated repositories, open to the public, that would generate together an “open world wide web of TDs.” Such a global framework would facilitate the progress of science and promote the public good worldwide. In the aftermath of the global COVID-19 crisis, it seems that the time is ripe for such a move at both international and national levels

The Value of New Scientific Communication Models for Chemistry

This paper is intended as a starting point for discussion on the possible future of scientific communication in chemistry, the value of new models of scientific communication enabled by web based technologies, and the necessary future steps to achieve the benefits of those new models. It is informed by a NSF sponsored workshop that was held on October 23-24, 2008 in Washington D.C. It provides an overview on the chemical communication system in chemistry and describes efforts to enhance scientific communication by introducing new web-based models of scientific communication. It observes that such innovations are still embryonic and have not yet found broad adoption and acceptance by the chemical community. The paper proceeds to analyze the reasons for this by identifying specific characteristics of the chemistry domain that relate to its research practices and socio-economic organization. It hypothesizes how these may influence communication practices, and produce resistance to changes of the current system similar to those that have been successfully deployed in other sciences and which have been proposed by pioneers within chemistry.National Science Foundation, Microsof

CREATe 2012-2016: Impact on society, industry and policy through research excellence and knowledge exchange

On the eve of the CREATe Festival May 2016, the Centre published this legacy report (edited by Kerry Patterson & Sukhpreet Singh with contributions from consortium researchers)

Getting Serious About User-Friendly Mass Market Licensing for Software

Software publishers use standard form end user licenses (“EULAs”) in mass market transactions on a regular basis. Most software users find EULAs perplexing and generally ignore them. Scholars, however, have focused on them intently. In the past twenty years over a hundred scholarly articles have been written on the subject. Most of these articles criticize EULAs and argue that courts should not enforce them. In their critique of EULAs, some scholars examine the adequacy of the offer, acceptance, and consideration. Others discuss EULAs as part of the troublesome issue of standard form contracting, and whether standard forms, on balance, harm or benefit consumers. Still others focus on the intellectual property-contract law interplay. These issues are important to be sure, but there is little left to say. The issues have been talked to death. Despite all the scholarly debate, one important reality remains: EULAs are here to stay for the foreseeable future. Courts, by and large, have enforced EULAs, provided the software publisher gives the user a reasonable opportunity to review and the user makes a meaningful manifestation of assent. Given this reality, it is crucial to address an issue that scholars have thus far ignored: what can be done to make licensing more “user-friendly?” Specifically, what can be done to help people better understand the terms and conditions of EULAs, and what can be done to encourage software publishers to craft simpler, fairer, more understandable licenses? Part I of the article summarizes the heated debate about the use of mass market licenses in software transactions. Part II describes the typical contract-drafting process that leads to the creation of an unfriendly EULA. Part III argues that although software users and publishers share an interest in user-friendly licenses, serious obstacles get in the way. Parts IV through X then explore a series of ways to overcome these obstacles. First, the article explores the ways that lawyers and the software publishers that they work for can craft more readable EULAs. Second, it addresses the positive role that law school education could play in training lawyers to craft more user-friendly EULAs. Third, it describes how technology such as “shopbots” and XML can make EULAs more user-friendly by helping software purchasers find EULAs with the terms they want. Fourth, it comments on the advisability of applying “plain language” legislation to EULAs as a way of inducing software publishers to improve EULAs. The article concludes that the most powerful way to improve the userfriendliness of licensing is through new public interest non-government organizations (“EULA NGOs”) which use the mass communications capabilities of the World Wide Web.10 Using the Web, a EULA NGO could provide objective, expert, easy-to-read commentary on the pros and cons of particular EULAs to assist users in their purchasing decisions. A EULA NGO could also provide constructive feedback to software publishers about how to improve their licenses and describe and promote licensing best practices. Moreover, a EULA NGO’s commentary would create a valuable record of public comment about individual EULAs. This record could be used by a court in the event a user challenges or a software publisher attempts to uphold the enforceability of a EULA. The very existence and easy availability of this public record will provide a strong incentive for software publishers to improve the friendliness of their licensing

Exclusionary and Diffusionary Levers in Patent Law

The patent system is built on the premise that exclusion leads to innovation. But a mounting body of evidence calls into question the assumption that “innovation by exclusion” – innovation based on excluding rivals– is the only, or even primary, way innovation happens today: nearly 50% of manufacturers got the idea for their most important new product from an outside source that shared it with them, 45-60% of patentees acquire patents to access the technology of others, and over 1,300 companies, including five of the ten top holders of patents, have pledged to share their patents with others. But because of the patent system’s traditional focus on exclusion, policymakers have paid less attention to how patents can better support the diffusion of technology through mechanisms such as disclosure, transfer, waiver, and the pursuit of freedom to operate. This paper addresses this gap by exploring in depth the way that the patent system can encourage the diffusion of technology between rivals and innovators, revealing a surprising number of overlooked levers within the patent system for encouraging innovation. For example, making it easier to place inventions in the public domain through effective defensive publication, encouraging greater disclosure of patent-product relationships through the marking requirement, and changing the default for provisional applications to being open rather than closed, and for utility applications to publish upon filing, rather than after an 18-month delay, but with the right of inventors to opt-out of this default, would enhance patent disclosure by enabling technical information and permissions to use them to be available earlier to the world. Improving reporting and discovery of patent information, including ownership, availability for licensing, licensing status in the case of publicly funded inventions in accordance with existing law, patent licenses, and standards commitments, could boost markets for technology. Making it easier to waive patent rights and rely on waivers of patent rights, through the creation of a government registry of patent rights, and creating, e.g. an “open” or “defensive only” option that allows patentees to pay discounted maintenance fees in exchange for promising to use their patents only defensively, or to give up certain rights, akin to “license of right” schemes in the UK and Germany, would increase freedom to operate. As innovation increasingly takes place in open and closed modes, and often both, the patent system, by offering more ways for patentees to decide the fate of their inventions, can increase its relevance to “all of the above” types of innovation