Matcher interview with Emily Dunham - 2024 Fundraiser
by
on December 19, 2024CC-BY-NA 4.0 Emily Dunham
Next up in our matcher interview series is Emily Dunham (edunham). Having been involved in free software for almost 20 years, her work has spanned all kinds of places from working at Mozilla with the Rust community to being a developer advocate and now being at Okta. Thanks to Emily for the incredible interview!
SFC: Tell us a bit about yourself! Where are you from, what are some of your hobbies?
edunham: I'm from the middle of nowhere, grew up off-grid in a tiny community where I still live and volunteer to this day. I've been working remotely in tech since around 2014, in various ops and automation roles for a series of Californian tech companies. I'm barely aware of how fundamentally this forestry-community upbringing shaped my worldview, except for how it causes the culture shock of bay-area thinkers being okay with planning only a year or a quarter ahead.
I have a rotating portfolio of hobbies where if I share about too many at once, it starts to sound like I'm exaggerating for comedic effect. Right now, in November of 2024, my free time is going to a combination of revisiting Skyrim Special Edition and addressing my backlog of "that seems like a neat idea, but..." topics with the fallible but well-read tutelage and co-thinking of claude.ai and, soon, local more-open models. (Claude is very helpful for bootstrapping into a toolchain to deliver similar benefits while being less at the mercy of some distant corporation choosing to keep offering it as a product, not unlike learning to brake and steer in an automatic vehicle before learning to drive a manual). There are a lot of surprises about AI that each individual who meets it has to have for themself at this moment in history, so I'm working on getting those out of the way without sounding too silly about it, because that seems like a prerequisite for making any useful contribution to our collective thought about and understanding of it. I'm quiet on the socials these days, but that might change as I continue building out the cognitive prosthetics to let me do more of the things I want to. I'm also halfway through a couple baby quilts for friends who are expecting next spring (if you're wondering, AI is unhelpful past the point of uselessness so far with quilting).
SFC: Why do you care about software freedom? How long have you been involved?
edunham: I care because it's good for me -- like I care about my garden because fresh veggies are delicious, or I care about keeping on top of routine maintenance around the house because it's super inconvenient to have to fix things if one lets them get to a point where they break.
I think everyone has their version of Stallman's printer story, and mine is the high school robotics team. We had these huge corporations throwing money and resources, especially "free" licenses for expensive software, at us left and right. This confused me, and I asked "why" enough times to eventually get the picture: They wanted us to build marketable job skills with specific proprietary technology so that we would go to employers and demand that they buy us a license for expensive proprietary software. They wanted us to invest our time in skills that they could then hold for ransom. We have plenty of mythology about the importance of thinking very carefully before entering that kind of contract with a more-powerful-than-human entity, so I thought through it carefully, and declined the offer.
My rule of thumb for investing time in learning a software tool is that I must be able to take that tool with me, online or offline. Software is cognitive prosthetics, and I'm lucky enough to have a choice among many options, unlike physical prosthetics like Karen's augmented heart. The tools I can keep with me through my life, without depending on money or an employer to maintain my access to the skills I've invested my own time in refining, tend to be free software.
SFC: How do you use free software in your life?
edunham: Free software is the invisible infrastructure that facilitates basically every benefit our species derives from computers. We hide it well, because free software often chooses raw power over generic usability -- it's like the logistics areas of an airport rather than the public spaces. But let's say I drive to the store to get some groceries. Maybe the traffic is bad, so I pull up google maps to get its opinion of the fastest route. First, I'm using an Android phone, so there's decades of Linux work underpinning its existence. But even on an iPhone, GPS "just works" and knows where the device is at by receiving signals from satellites and cell towers. How do those signals turn into a location? It's basically because all the devices agree on exactly what time it is, and they do that using the NTP stack and referencing public timeservers. (if you know with enough precision when a signal was sent and when it was received, and you know the speed at which it propagated, you know the distance it traveled. so from there it's just triangulation with multiple satellites or cell towers) Maybe I check my bank balance on my phone as I walk into the store, to make sure I know how much is in the account for the debit card I'll pay with later. My ability to do that safely instead of having my banking details easily stolen relies on encryption that's usually implemented using free software tools. And then the food at the store, from all over the world -- that got into the store through supply chains that use servers, databases, sometimes mainframes, and I'd challenge you to name any one of those systems with no load-bearing free software utility in its creation and maintenance. XKCD 2347 holds true. That's barely scratching the surface, as there's a whole lot more free software and right-to-repair concerns in growing the food before it even touches those systems!
SFC: On the spectrum on developer to end user, where do you lie? And how do you think we could do better bridging that divide?
edunham: The closest tech stereotype to how I relate to development is that of "ops guy". I love automation -- there's something so satisfying and grounded about working in a feedback loop where I am among my own customers. It often sidesteps that philosophical quagmire about what a more distant user's problem "really is" and when it's "really solved".
edunham: I think you could do better at reaching out to people so un-technical that they don't even realize they're the end users. You do targeted outreach to non-technical people in political positions of power, and I'll bet you're learning insights about what works and what doesn't that would scale excellently to the populations who vote for those people as representatives of their way of being. In other words, I suspect that your model of communicating with lawmakers has a lot of room for trying to scale to their constituencies.
SFC: What's got you most excited from the past year of our work?
edunham: Selfishly, you held FOSSY, which was like everything I missed out on by being a rural middle schooler during the early OSCON days. In the bigger picture, your DMCA work is ground-breaking, and the continued focus on right to repair should be of great interest to anyone who likes eating food that comes from farms where farmers wear these amazing mechanical exoskeletons of agricultural equipment to produce produce at a literally superhuman scale.
SFC: Do you think we are doing a good job reaching a wider audience and do you see us at places you expect?
edunham: I'm blissfully unaware of how wide an audience you reach. It's one of those problems where if nobody was successfully dealing with it, I'd feel like I "had to" help out more directly... but that kind of work is definitely not above the fold in my list of ways i'd rather be spending my time, so I'm grateful that you have it handled.
SFC: Have you been involved with any of our member projects in the past?
edunham: I'm doing this interview on an Etherpad as we speak, connecting using hardware running OpeWrt. I use Git on a daily basis to get my work done... Wine gives me games, Selenium gives me automation even when things don't offer a featureful api. I worked at the OSU OSL back in the day and did more direct ops support for some of the projects, but the intersection of my time availability, interests, and skillset doesn't have me contributing directly to any Conservancy projects at the moment.
SFC: How do you see our role amongst the various FLOSS organizations?
edunham: I get the luxury of not caring deeply about who does what role in the FLOSS organization landscape. I categorize you loosely as an organization that focuses on interfacing with the US government and helping it notice and course correct when it accidentally passes legislation that violates the principles on which it was founded. Translating modern tech concepts into "normal" human terms is really hard, especially when the people you're talking to might hold the belief that they already know the things which are worth knowing, so having as many unique approaches as possible to this challenge seems to bring far more value than trying to somehow consolidate them all. It's like by having a lot of organizations which each specialize in a high-impact area of opportunity, we demonstrate the engineering principle of building many simple utilities that excel at their tasks.
SFC: Do you think we do a good job standing up to the organizations with more corporate funding?
edunham: I think you do a good job of standing up to the organizations which are accidentally anti-freedom, and working within their worlds to explain how freedom is good actually. I hope you're not standing up to other software freedom organizations except when absolutely necessary, because the potential impact and good of working together is on a whole other scale from the potential good of infighting about less-important details.
SFC: What other organizations are you supporting this year?
edunham: I'm actually not that into the whole "donate money to charity" thing as a first line of social impact, because I'm uncomfortable with the harmonics of systems where giving money incentivizes asking for more money. I support my community by volunteering as an EMT and firefighter; I support local businesses by spending at them even when it's more expensive or less convenient than buying the same thing online. And I support roads and schools and stuff, along with the other side effects, by paying my taxes. But I happen to work at a larger corporation that offers a holiday giving match, and I strongly believe that corporations should do more to support the FOSS that they rely on, so what better way to combine these beliefs than leveraging their matching funds program to double a donation to Conservancy?
Please email any comments on this entry to info@sfconservancy.org.