forked from coop-cloud/docs.coopcloud.tech
536 lines
26 KiB
Markdown
536 lines
26 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
title: Ford foundation
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Ford foundation
|
||
|
||
> Status: **pending**
|
||
|
||
* [Previous material](https://notes.bonfire.cafe/nlnet-bonfire-coopcloud-hosting)
|
||
* [Application](https://fordfoundation.forms.fm/2023-digital-infrastructure-insights-fund-rfp/forms/9724)
|
||
|
||
## Is this concept note primarily focused on research or implementation?
|
||
|
||
- Implementation
|
||
|
||
## What is your research question? (30 words)
|
||
|
||
How can an open co-operative ecosystem foster a sustainable, resilient
|
||
infrastructure for FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source software) development,
|
||
hosting, and tech support, while enhancing data ownnership, transparency and
|
||
co-operation?
|
||
|
||
## Why is this question important to answer and how does it relate to our fund? (500 words)
|
||
|
||
This is a challenge of paramount importance as it aims to design and test a
|
||
model for a sustainable, resilient open co-operative ecosystem amidst a digital
|
||
landscape overshadowed by large centralized profit-driven entities.
|
||
|
||
The hegemony of a few colossal platforms has led to myriad challenges
|
||
including, but not limited to, data privacy infringements, misinformation
|
||
dissemination, and a significant digital divide. Such challenges thwart the
|
||
internet's potential to act as a public commons and hinder the growth of a
|
||
democratic, open, and inclusive digital infrastructure.
|
||
|
||
The envisioned open co-operative ecosystem is a step towards remedying the
|
||
prevalent issues of centralization and lack of inclusivity in the digital
|
||
domain. It proposes a holistic approach encompassing technical innovation,
|
||
co-operative economics, and community-centric governance - where software,
|
||
infrastructure and communities are not isolated entities, but are part of a
|
||
common ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
This aligns profoundly with this fund's objective of exploring and remedying
|
||
the issues of under-maintenance and occasional undermining of FLOSS. The
|
||
proposed self-sustaining economic model is aimed at ensuring the longevity and
|
||
resilience of both the open co-operative ecosystem and all the actors involved:
|
||
FLOSS developers and designers, sysadmins and hosting providers, and all the
|
||
other figures that struggle to reach sustainability by working in and for the
|
||
FLOSS sector.
|
||
|
||
Furthermore, the proposed project is not merely a technical endeavor but a
|
||
multi-dimensional initiative aimed at fostering a digital infrastructure that
|
||
is equitable, sustainable, secure, and entrenched in the public interest.
|
||
|
||
Our proposed integration aims to simplify the setup, hosting and operating of
|
||
FLOSS software, through an open dashboard that automates the whole software
|
||
life cycle. This dashboard will act as a gateway to an ecosystem of developers
|
||
and hosting providers, which will work together to provide users and
|
||
communities with:
|
||
|
||
- Openness: Designers, developers, and sysadmins can join the ecosystem to
|
||
provide services and receive compensation;
|
||
|
||
- Mutualism: Projects and communities that meet specific criteria may exchange
|
||
services in-kind, or benefit from special rates;
|
||
|
||
- Flexibility: From a personal instance to a large community, the open
|
||
ecosystem will guide the user based on their specific needs and budget;
|
||
|
||
- Inclusivity: Users and communities can collectively shape the ecosystem's
|
||
roadmaps, by co-designing and funding desired features.
|
||
|
||
From the other side, the dashboard will also operate as an economic network to
|
||
track each contribution and distribute the available funds according to value
|
||
equation formulas as democratically defined by the ecosystem stakeholders.
|
||
|
||
## What research methods will you use to answer this question? (Please describe the methodologies and scope of your proposed research (500 words))
|
||
|
||
To comprehensively address the research question, a blend of interdisciplinary
|
||
methods will be employed to ensure a thorough analysis, development, and
|
||
evaluation of the proposed integrated Bonfire and Co-op Cloud ecosystem. The
|
||
methodologies are outlined as follows:
|
||
|
||
- Literature Review:
|
||
|
||
An extensive literature review will be conducted to gather insights on existing
|
||
models of open co-operative ecosystems, challenges and best practices in FLOSS
|
||
development, hosting, and funding, and the impact of decentralized digital
|
||
infrastructures on promoting inclusivity and co-operation.
|
||
|
||
- Surveys & Interviews:
|
||
|
||
By using mixed methods we aim to gather insights from relevant parties such as
|
||
instance administrators, app maintainers, and FOSS contributors.
|
||
|
||
- User-Centered Design (UCD):
|
||
|
||
Utilizing UCD principles, we will engage potential users and stakeholders in
|
||
the design and development process. This will include conducting surveys,
|
||
interviews, and usability testing to gather user requirements, preferences, and
|
||
feedback on prototype iterations.
|
||
|
||
- Technical Development and Prototyping:
|
||
|
||
The core of the research involves the technical development and prototyping of
|
||
the integrated dashboard that facilitates the setup, hosting, and operation of
|
||
custom Bonfire instances (the first FOSS application to be integrated in the
|
||
open dashboard). Agile development methodologies, including iterative design
|
||
and development cycles, will be employed to ensure a user-centric approach and
|
||
to allow for continuous feedback and improvement.
|
||
|
||
- Case Studies:
|
||
|
||
Detailed case studies of relevant initiatives will be conducted to glean
|
||
insights into best practices, challenges, and success factors. Comparative
|
||
analysis will help in understanding the potential impact and sustainability of
|
||
the proposed ecosystem. We already have communities willing to participate in
|
||
these case studies, that span from citizen science projects
|
||
(https://niboe.info), hacker spaces (https://www.facebook.com/Zer081),
|
||
bioregional communities (driftless area), and more...
|
||
|
||
- Economic Modeling:
|
||
|
||
Economic modeling will be employed to devise a transparent value equation for
|
||
revenue distribution among stakeholders. This will also involve exploring
|
||
sustainable funding models that ensure the longevity and resilience of the
|
||
proposed ecosystem. We will make use of the ValueFlows protocol to test several
|
||
value equations: https://www.valueflo.ws/algorithms/equations/
|
||
|
||
- Policy and Legal Analysis:
|
||
|
||
An examination of the policy and legal frameworks that could impact, or be
|
||
impacted by, the proposed ecosystem will be conducted. This includes analyzing
|
||
data privacy laws, open-source licensing, and cooperative economic regulations.
|
||
|
||
- Dissemination and Feedback:
|
||
|
||
Sharing the findings and prototypes with the broader community through various
|
||
channels including conferences, blog posts, social media, and project websites
|
||
for feedback and further refinement.
|
||
|
||
## What data or other resources will you use to answer the question? (500 words)
|
||
|
||
- Domain Experts and Stakeholder Interviews:
|
||
|
||
Insights from domain experts in FLOSS development, digital co-operatives,
|
||
hosting solutions, and decentralized digital infrastructures. Interviews with
|
||
stakeholders including developers, hosting providers, and potential users of
|
||
the proposed ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
- Economic Models and Financial Data:
|
||
|
||
Economic models pertinent to revenue distribution, funding, and sustainability
|
||
of open cooperative ecosystems. Financial data of similar initiatives to
|
||
understand their economic sustainability and impact.
|
||
|
||
- Legal and Policy Documents:
|
||
|
||
Legal documents, open-source licenses, and policy frameworks relevant to data
|
||
privacy, digital rights, and co-operative economic structures.
|
||
|
||
- Technical Documentation:
|
||
|
||
Technical documentation of Bonfire, Co-op Cloud, and other open-source projects
|
||
pertinent to the research. Documentation on protocols, standards, and best
|
||
practices in FLOSS development, hosting, and support.
|
||
|
||
- Open Source Software Repositories:
|
||
|
||
Access to open-source software repositories to study existing solutions,
|
||
libraries, and frameworks that could be leveraged for the technical development
|
||
of the proposed ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
- Prototyping Tools and Development Platforms:
|
||
|
||
Utilization of prototyping tools and development platforms for designing,
|
||
developing, and testing the integrated dashboard and associated features.
|
||
|
||
## If applicable: What is the research finding that you are moving into practice? (500 words)
|
||
|
||
The findings we are acting upon highlight the pressing necessity for a digital
|
||
ecosystem that prioritizes sustainability, decentralization, and cooperation
|
||
while advancing open-source software development, hosting, support, and
|
||
funding.
|
||
|
||
Existing research and case studies have highlighted the challenges posed by the
|
||
large centralized and profit-driven digital platforms, which often compromise
|
||
data privacy, inclusivity, and the democratic ethos of the digital realm.
|
||
|
||
Noteworthy findings from prior researches that underpin our project include:
|
||
|
||
- Co-operative Ecosystems:
|
||
|
||
Research on co-operative models -- notably "Proposal for a Cooperative Model
|
||
for Digital Infrastructure and Recommendations to Adopt It" by Tierra Comun in
|
||
2022 -- has revealed the potential for fostering sustainable and equitable
|
||
digital ecosystems. Co-operative structures, grounded in principles of
|
||
mutualism and collective governance, have shown promise in promoting economic
|
||
sustainability and community-centric development.
|
||
|
||
- Need for Decentralization:
|
||
|
||
Studies have underscored the benefits of decentralized digital infrastructures
|
||
in promoting data sovereignty, reducing censorship, and fostering innovation
|
||
through open standards and interoperability as well as ("Accounting and Billing
|
||
for Federated Cloud Infrastructures", Elmroth et al., 2009 Eighth International
|
||
Conference on Grid and Cooperative Computing) the specific challenges in
|
||
tracking and distributing financial costs across these decentralized networks.
|
||
|
||
- Open Source as a Public Good:
|
||
|
||
The literature has extensively documented the value of FLOSS as a public good,
|
||
which can drive down costs, promote technical innovation, and foster a shared
|
||
digital commons.
|
||
|
||
- Challenges in FLOSS Sustainability:
|
||
|
||
Several reports (e.g. "Roads and Bridges: The Unseen Labor Behind Our Digital
|
||
Infrastructure", Nadia Eghbal, "The labor of maintaining and scaling free and
|
||
open-source software projects", Geiger et al, Proceedings of the ACM on
|
||
human-computer interaction 5.CSCW1, and "The coproduction of open source
|
||
software by volunteers and big tech firms", O'Neil et al., News and Media
|
||
Research Centre, 2021) have highlighted the challenges in sustaining open
|
||
source projects, often due to lack of funding, technical support, and a viable
|
||
economic model.
|
||
|
||
- User-Centric Design:
|
||
|
||
The importance of user-centric design in the development of digital platforms
|
||
to ensure accessibility, usability, and adoption has been well-documented.
|
||
|
||
- Community Engagement:
|
||
|
||
Engaging communities in design, development, and governance of platforms has
|
||
been found to promote inclusivity, trust, and long-term sustainability.
|
||
|
||
Moving these findings into practice, our proposal outlines a collaborative
|
||
endeavor between Bonfire and Co-op Cloud to develop an integrated open
|
||
dashboard that automates the setup, hosting, and operation of custom Bonfire
|
||
instances.
|
||
|
||
Practical implementations include:
|
||
|
||
- Developing a technical infrastructure that facilitates decentralized hosting
|
||
and operation of digital platforms, reducing reliance on centralized
|
||
entities.
|
||
|
||
- Establishing a co-operative economic model to ensure the financial
|
||
sustainability of the ecosystem, based on a transparent value equation for
|
||
revenue distribution among stakeholders.
|
||
|
||
- Engaging the community and potential users in the design and development
|
||
process to ensure the ecosystem meets their needs and preferences.
|
||
|
||
- Fostering a collaborative environment where developers, hosting providers,
|
||
and users can mutually benefit from the shared digital infrastructure.
|
||
|
||
- Implementing user-centric design principles to ensure the accessibility and
|
||
usability of the open dashboard, thus promoting broader adoption.
|
||
|
||
- Disseminating the developed prototypes and findings to the broader community
|
||
for feedback, further refinement, and adoption.
|
||
|
||
## What is the specific context / project / community that will be targeted with your research or its implementation - and why is it needed? (600 words)
|
||
|
||
RESEARCH (Phase 1):
|
||
|
||
A study on "Understanding the Open Infrastructure Ecosystem, with a Focus on
|
||
Federation," will set about comprehensively exploring practices and challenges
|
||
within the Federated ("Fediverse") and FOSS communities, It will investigate
|
||
co-design and development, documentation and onboarding, hosting,
|
||
configuration, maintenance, tech support, continuous integration, deployment
|
||
and upgrades, backups, community feedback and bug reporting, and governance.
|
||
|
||
This vital research addresses the centralization and monopolization of
|
||
platforms, barriers to entry, sustainability challenges, community empowerment,
|
||
knowledge sharing, and resilience and longevity of FOSS projects, to provide a
|
||
holistic understanding of the open infrastructure ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
We hope to identify common challenges faced by these communities, exploring
|
||
motivations for contributing or maintaining infrastructure, uncovering best
|
||
practices and potential solutions.
|
||
|
||
IMPLEMENTATION (Phase 2):
|
||
|
||
This above study will inform the development of a federated and cooperative
|
||
hosting ecosystem, helping to better align with the specific needs of instance
|
||
administrators, app maintainers and FOSS contributors. By initially focusing on
|
||
federated platforms and progresstively expanding to the broader ecosystem of
|
||
open infrastructure, the ecosystem can foster collaboration, enhance community
|
||
support, and contribute to the overall growth and sustainability of the
|
||
Fediverse and FOSS communities.
|
||
|
||
The implementation will start with Co-op Cloud, a software stack that
|
||
simplifies the hosting of FOSS applications, and Bonfire, a federated social
|
||
networking toolkit. These projects represent a microcosm of the broader open
|
||
source and cooperative ecosystem, and can serve as the initial building blocks
|
||
for user-friendly solutions and transparent, cooperative economic models,
|
||
ensuring accessibility and autonomy for all users.
|
||
|
||
This phase serves as a pragmatic step towards addressing identified needs, like
|
||
reducing technical barriers, fostering sustainability, and empowering
|
||
communities. It embodies a proactive shift towards a more decentralized,
|
||
cooperative, and equitable digital landscape, in response to the pressing
|
||
challenges and unmet needs within the FLOSS community and the broader digital
|
||
realm, and actively combats the issues of centralization, data control, and
|
||
sustainable revenue models, benefiting open source projects and communities
|
||
alike.
|
||
|
||
The integration of Bonfire and Co-op Cloud via a user-friendly dashboard will
|
||
significantly lower the technical barrier to entry, allowing a broader spectrum
|
||
of users to set up, host, and operate their own instances. Engaging their
|
||
communities, as well as the broader FLOSS community, in the design,
|
||
development, and governance of the proposed ecosystem to ensure it meets the
|
||
diverse needs and preferences of its stakeholders.
|
||
|
||
We'll also craft transparent value equations and economic models to foster a
|
||
sustainable, co-operative economic ecosystem where revenues are fairly
|
||
distributed among developers, hosting providers, and others.
|
||
|
||
DISSEMINATION (Phase 3):
|
||
|
||
Research findings will be compiled into a comprehensive report, offering
|
||
valuable insights to guide the evolution of the hosting ecosystem and
|
||
contribute to the knowledge base of open infrastructure practices and
|
||
challenges. This knowledge will be shared with the FOSS community and beyond,
|
||
promoting wider dialogue, feedback, and collaboration. This approach aligns
|
||
with the need for alternative economic models, transparency, and equitable
|
||
value distribution, and addresses the challenges of the current digital
|
||
landscape by advocating for decentralized, cooperative, and equitable
|
||
alternatives.
|
||
|
||
## Please summarize your proposed work and the key activities that you will undertake (500 words)
|
||
|
||
- Resarch study:
|
||
|
||
A study "Understanding the Open Infrastructure Ecosystem, with a Focus on
|
||
Federation" will be conducted as detailed above.
|
||
|
||
- Federation design & development:
|
||
|
||
We'll write an ecosystem federation proposal and resources to help others build
|
||
their own. A "start your federation cookbook" with analysis from a technical,
|
||
economic, legal, and governance perspective.
|
||
|
||
- Pilots:
|
||
|
||
We will work with several pilot users and organisations to provide feedback and
|
||
test our designs and solutions at every stage of the process. The various
|
||
pilots will help co-designing and test the open dashboard, by setupping custom
|
||
bonfire instances
|
||
|
||
- Capacity building and Architecture of Participation:
|
||
|
||
The capacity building activity will discover together with pilots and
|
||
participants how to draft a good governance and economic model to make all of
|
||
this work nicely.
|
||
|
||
- Protocol and platform integration:
|
||
|
||
Defining libre, reusable methods and systems for automatic DNS (across various
|
||
domain name registrars / DNS hosts) and server hosting provisioning (using e.g.
|
||
https://capsul.org), automated software installation and updates (using Co-op
|
||
Cloud's command-line tool Abra: https://docs.coopcloud.tech/abra/), backup and
|
||
data migrations (e.g. using http://tahoe-lafs.org/), user resource usage
|
||
measurement, payment integration, and dashboard UIs.
|
||
|
||
- Dissemination and communication:
|
||
|
||
This activity will focus on communicating with the world about our work, and
|
||
disseminate project outcomes and results through various channels, including
|
||
articles, conferences, social media, and project websites.
|
||
|
||
All the code produced will be documented, and publicly available with an open
|
||
source license. We will continue our outreach through our respective activity
|
||
on federated social media platforms including Bonfire itself, Mastodon,
|
||
Scuttlebutt, and Matrix.
|
||
|
||
## What partnerships and programs are critical to this work and how do you envision outreach activities? (400 words)
|
||
|
||
The proposed integration of Bonfire and Co-op Cloud is significantly enriched
|
||
by forming strategic partnerships with key entities in the open-source and
|
||
cooperative digital ecosystem. Here's how these partnerships are critical and
|
||
the envisioned outreach activities:
|
||
|
||
- Co-op Cloud Federation: partnership significance: Co-op Cloud Federation is
|
||
crucial for implementing the hosting and management of FOSS apps. This
|
||
partnership brings in vital technical expertise, hosting solutions, and the
|
||
potential for scaling the initiative across a federated network of service
|
||
providers. Outreach: Promoting the integrated solution through Co-op Cloud's
|
||
federated network, collaborating on joint marketing campaigns, and leveraging
|
||
the federation's channels to spread awareness and drive adoption.
|
||
|
||
- Bonfire Networks: partnership significance: Bonfire Networks provides the
|
||
foundational social networking toolkit that will be integrated with Co-op
|
||
Cloud. This partnership ensures technical synergy and collaborative
|
||
development, fostering an environment conducive to innovation and
|
||
user-centric design. Outreach: Engaging the existing community around Bonfire
|
||
Networks in workshops, webinars, and forums to introduce the integrated
|
||
solution, gather feedback, and foster active participation in its development
|
||
and utilization.
|
||
|
||
- Servers Co-op: partnership Significance: Servers.coop can play a key role as
|
||
a hosting provider within the ecosystem, offering reliable and cooperative
|
||
hosting solutions to users. Their involvement can help establish a network of
|
||
trustworthy hosting providers committed to cooperative principles. Outreach:
|
||
Joint campaigns promoting the benefits of cooperative hosting, showcasing
|
||
success stories, and educating communities on the advantages of
|
||
decentralized, cooperative digital infrastructures.
|
||
|
||
- Co-operative Computer: partnership Significance: Cooperative Computer can
|
||
provide valuable insights, technical expertise, and support in promoting
|
||
cooperative digital practices. This partnership can foster a shared learning
|
||
environment and potentially lead to collaborative projects enhancing the
|
||
integrated solution and actively participating in the open coop ecosystem.
|
||
Outreach: Hosting joint educational events, technical workshops, and online
|
||
discussions to explore cooperative computing models and their application in
|
||
the proposed ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
## What is your vision of success and what impact might it have? (400 words)
|
||
|
||
The vision of success for this initiative revolves around the establishment of
|
||
a self-sustaining, decentralized, and co-operative digital ecosystem that
|
||
significantly enhances the accessibility, usability, and economic
|
||
sustainability of FLOSS for all stakeholders.
|
||
|
||
The following are the key indicators of success and the potential impact of
|
||
this initiative:
|
||
|
||
- Ease of Access and Usability:
|
||
|
||
A successful implementation of the integrated dashboard that simplifies the
|
||
setup, hosting, and management of Bonfire instances, enabling a broader
|
||
spectrum of users, including those with limited technical skills, to leverage
|
||
FLOSS solutions effortlessly and in a trusted ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
- Economic Sustainability:
|
||
|
||
Establishment of a transparent and equitable economic model that ensures fair
|
||
revenue distribution among developers, hosting providers, and other
|
||
stakeholders, fostering financial sustainability and continued growth of the
|
||
Bonfire and Co-op Cloud ecosystems.
|
||
|
||
- Community Engagement and Governance:
|
||
|
||
Active engagement of the community in the decision-making processes,
|
||
development, and governance of the ecosystem, reflecting a vibrant,
|
||
participatory, and democratic digital co-operative environment.
|
||
|
||
- Increased Adoption and Experimentation:
|
||
|
||
A noticeable increase in the adoption of Bonfire and Co-op Cloud solutions,
|
||
alongside a proliferation of innovative projects and experiments emanating from
|
||
the co-operative ecosystem, contributing to a richer and more diverse digital
|
||
commons.
|
||
|
||
- Knowledge Sharing and Collaboration:
|
||
|
||
A thriving culture of knowledge sharing, collaborative development, and mutual
|
||
support within the ecosystem, facilitating continuous learning, innovation, and
|
||
problem-solving.
|
||
|
||
- Resilience and Longevity:
|
||
|
||
Demonstrated resilience of the co-operative digital ecosystem to evolving
|
||
economic, technical, and social challenges, ensuring its longevity and ongoing
|
||
relevance.
|
||
|
||
- Dissemination and Replication:
|
||
|
||
Effective dissemination of the insights, learnings, and models developed
|
||
through this initiative to the broader FLOSS community, encouraging replication
|
||
and adaptation of the co-operative model in other contexts.
|
||
|
||
In a broader sense, the success of this initiative could significantly
|
||
contribute to the reimagining and reshaping of the digital landscape in
|
||
alignment with the principles of openness, co-operation, and community-centric
|
||
development, echoing the core values and aspirations of the FLOSS community.
|
||
|
||
## Tell us more about the project team and collaborators (500 words)
|
||
|
||
The project is a multi-team effort between different stakeholders in the FLOSS
|
||
ecosystem. The project will be developed by a collaboration between two
|
||
projects: Bonfire and Co-op Cloud.
|
||
|
||
* Bonfire (https://bonfirenetworks.org) is an extensible open source federated
|
||
social networking toolkit, that empowers communities easily configure their
|
||
spaces from the ground up, according to a variety of needs and visions.
|
||
Bonfire envisions a web of independent but interconnected social networks
|
||
(using a wide definition, since we consider the social compoments of
|
||
activities in the economic, educational, and political spheres as well) -
|
||
able to speak and transfer information among each other, according to their
|
||
own boundaries and preferences.
|
||
|
||
* Co-op Cloud (https://coopcloud.tech/) is federation of democratic collectives
|
||
(including worker-owned co-operatives, an international radical art
|
||
collective, a labor union, and representatives from FLOSS software projects).
|
||
The federation is centred around a software stack that aims to make hosting
|
||
libre software applications simpler, aimed at organisations wanting to manage
|
||
their own infrastracture, as well as small service providers such as tech
|
||
co-operatives who are looking to standardise around an open, transparent and
|
||
scalable infrastructure -- but is also developing as community of practice
|
||
around these themes, beyond the specific technology stack.
|
||
|
||
## In which cost tier do you expect this work to sit?
|
||
|
||
- [ ] Between 50 and 75
|
||
- [ ] Between 75 and 100
|
||
- [x] Between 100 and 125
|
||
|
||
## How many months do you expect this work to take?
|
||
|
||
- 12 months
|
||
- more than 12 months (exception goes up to 18 months for part-time projects)
|
||
|
||
## Extras
|
||
|
||
### Research links
|
||
|
||
* https://apo.org.au/node/312607 - O’Neil, Mathieu, et al. The coproduction of open source software by volunteers and big tech firms. News and Media Research Centre, 2021.
|
||
|
||
* https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3449249 - Geiger, R. Stuart, Dorothy Howard, and Lilly Irani. "The labor of maintaining and scaling free and open-source software projects." Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction 5.CSCW1 (2021): 1-28.
|
||
|
||
* https://www.fordfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/regional-foss-communities_final-report_ahossain-1.pdf - Hossain, Anushah. "Regional Open Source Software Communities: The View From Dhaka, Bangladesh." (2021).
|
||
|
||
* https://digitalinfrastructure.fund/projects/cooperative-model-for-digital-infrastructure/ - Tierra Comun, Mexico, 2022
|
||
|
||
* https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/5279594 - E. Elmroth, F. G. Marquez, D. Henriksson and D. P. Ferrera, "Accounting and Billing for Federated Cloud Infrastructures," 2009 Eighth International Conference on Grid and Cooperative Computing, Lanzhou, China, 2009
|
||
|
||
* https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7523331 - K. Chard and K. Bubendorfer, "Co-Operative Resource Allocation: Building an Open Cloud Market Using Shared Infrastructure," in IEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing, 2019
|
||
|
||
* https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6253530 - F. Paraiso, N. Haderer, P. Merle, R. Rouvoy and L. Seinturier, "A Federated Multi-cloud PaaS Infrastructure," 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Cloud Computing, Honolulu, HI, USA, 2012
|
||
|
||
* https://www.proquest.com/openview/d0bb1812450db201b4b67c84eca8cc50/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y - Amini, Lisa D. "Models and algorithms for resource management in distributed computing cooperatives," Columbia University, 2004
|
||
|
||
* https://hal.science/hal-03177060/document - Sébastien Broca, Laura Aufrère, Philippe Eynaud, Cynthia Srnec et Corinne Vercher-Chaptal, "Framasoft : de la plateforme à l’archipel", 2021
|