Slashdot Mirror
Venezuela Goes Open Source
Odinson sent in this news blurb from LinuxToday, reporting that Venezuela has adopted a policy for the use of Open Source software in government wherever possible. Apparently they have practical rather than philosophical motivations: keeping cash in the country and promoting local software development.
When there's an earthquake in the deep ocean it is seen as only a ripple on the surface.
But as it approaches shallower waters that little ripple can become hundreds of feet tall, decimating everything that stands against it in its path.
I do believe we have seen the first ripples of a slow moving wave....
*grin*
Is there enough open source software development going on in Venezuela to keep the govt going? I would think they will have to look outside their borders for the majority of their needs.
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,
Could this be the beginning of the end (of domination) for microsoft? First Peru, then the UK looking at OS solutions, now Venezuala (Did I see something somewhere about an American state going the same way?). The largest avalanches start with but one snowflake...
These could be examples for others to look to when deciding policy. The more that say no to Microsoft, the more likely that others will also say no.
The only worry I have is what the response from Microsoft will be...how much money will they throw at Venezuala to persuade them to change their minds?
demon
-----
Nothing is ever a total loss; it can always serve as a bad example.
Rough edges are to a large extent kind of a catch-22. Not too many office/business types USE linux so there's not much call for quickly polishing the rough edges. My experience has been us techie types don't mind needing to know how to make something work.
At the same time, office/business types probably won't use linux till they can see at least most of the edges are starting to be polished - they might not require perfection but they will require serious improvement over needing to know linux command line to do basic tasks, whether those tasks are opening an office app, creating files/directories or just system maintenance.
Big account, small account. It doesn't matter. Microsoft cannot have any country pass one of these laws and have it work. Fear of change is what keeps these governments coming back to Microsoft. Having a working example with real numbers on cost savings will devastate this argument.
Their fear is a good old 50's style domino effect. First Venezuela, then Costa Rica, then Mexico. Pretty soon, Peru ignore's Bill's gift horse and converts as well. Before you know it, all of Latin America will be running Linux. I don't think this will happen, but I bet Microsoft thinks it could.
I wonder why they wanted to limit it just to GPL? That's what the article clearly says anyway. Considering they are planning to for example make commercial closed source and open source systems co-exist, I see some practical reasons why something the original BSD license or atleast LGPL would be much more suitable in some cases. So, WHY did they name only GPL and not for example the whole OSI suite - - - or does the article contain rotten details :)
Microsoft cannot allow Venezuela to do this. If any country switches to Open Source, and it is a success, Microsoft is in deep shit. Other countries would follow the lead, and soon Microsoft would be forced to implement huge price cuts just to have any chance at all.
If this is a success in Venezuela, I believe that in the near future the US Govt will be one of the very few running any version of Windows. Billy and Steve will throw however much money it takes at Washington to keep things that way.
But can they buy off the whole world?
Don't throw your computer out the window, throw the Windows out of your computer!
TO: THE TROOPS
RE: GET MOVING ON VENEZUELA DONATIONS
Hey kids. Just got my desktop machine working again after that last service pack (what a bitch that was, huh?). And what did I see in my daily Linux Encroachment report? Apparently some piss-ant country that we could buy and sell like it was a stick of bubble gum is mandating open source software in government. How did we miss this one? Peru, Venezulela, I get them all mixed up anyway. But you know what this means! Pack your bags, it's time for a field trip!
I figure 10,000 brand new PCs for the schools, pre-loaded with Windows XP and Word, plus a nice plaque and a fruit basket, that should be enough to get them to drop this stupid idea.
And this time, let's be sure that the blue screens start coming up in about 8 months. I think Venezuala will be able to afford the Win2K upgrades we'll offer them to fix the problem.
Get moving! This one should be even easier than ol' Meheeko was.
xoxox,
BillG
Yes but in California and Washington State they use the same currency US dollars so in the end there is no end effect on the country issuing the currency. For Venezula it is different situation since they have no control over issuing USD dollars. So by not buying US technology they stregthen there own econmony.
How is this good for the country? It is Government's duty to keep public information public and freely accesible, ensure that it's always available, and be able to select service providers instead of "product" providers. Usage of open and free standards combined with open source applications guarantee this, which is a citizen's right. Notice that the Government is acting as a customer, setting the rules for the kind of products it wants to buy or fund; in this case, as a customer, it has a mandate to act in the best interest of the People.
By funding only GPL software it ensures that information systems are not only State's property, but also long lived and in a constant state of evolution and refinement, as a consequence of the nature of the free software development schema. This also ensures that Government money (that, in the end, comes from its citizens) goes back to the Citizens that are able to program, customize, install, configure, support and/or teach open source/free software.
Of course that training (for technical and non-technical targets), migration plans from propietary to free software and analysis of the many issues surrounding this decision have been taken into account. And members of academia are also involved as advisors. Many of Mr. Villanueva's ideas have been studied and changed accordingly, in this case it looks like is way past the "proposal" stage.
Hope I had shed a bit of light on the subject.
PS: roblimo, I'm the obnoxious venezuelan guy you met on Atlanta two years ago... these were the news I was talking about.
--
I'm neither pro-Chavez nor anti-Chavez.
I'm just pro freedom and anti stupidity, that's why I only use free software.
In any case, software developed with tax money ought to be available for EVERYONE. GPL software is not.
Yes it is available to EVERYONE.
It is not available to everyone for every PURPOSE, but that isn't the same thing.
I could use a bunch of real-world analogies, like how the village bicycle isn't available to be taken and stored in your home forever, or how a freeway being free doesn't mean you can set up your own toll booths on it... But these all involve the physical-scarcity concept. They may help convey some principles, but they fall short.
So instead let me say it without analogy thusly: just because you can't use GPL software to form a proprietary, non-free package for you to sell at prices inflated by artificial scarcity, doesn't mean it isn't available to you.
The enemies of Democracy are