Slashdot Mirror


Software Libre: DoHS Switches, Commerce Slights

An anonymous reader writes "Some excellent Pigdog investigative journalism: Apparently, The state department is trying to block international support of OSS and Free (Libre) Software. See also this InfoWorld article." Contrast that with this NewsForge report of a switch from Windows 2000 to Linux+Oracle at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. They picked a good week for it.

3 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Re:They will fail by urbazewski · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The cold war cost billions of dollars in real resources. It was a huge tax on the populations of all countries involved, contributed to massive environmental damage, and led to military support, arms and training for numerous guerilla organizations that either inflicted suffering on their own people (Honduras and Guatemala) or that turned out to be ill considered allies (like the Taliban).

    While the behavior of those corporations seeking to protect their monopoly/oligopoly is unlikely to lead to wasted resources on the same scale, tremendous inefficiencies can be caused by, and I would argue, have laready been caused by, the strategic actions taken by the producers of proprietary software. It's not just the final outcome that matters.

    --
    foldplay your photos won't know what hit them.
  2. Trade Balance vs local Costs by RichMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All Microsoft software is an export of the US this brings trade $ to the US and profit, employment and tax dollars to the the US. Manufacturing costs are minimal. The US State Department has a mandate to support exports of American products.
    Internally the US government is mandated to support national development and minimize costs. This is best done through an open source solution system and the development and support of many independent local service companies. See the Peru OSS document.

    Thus we have the two faces of government:
    1) attempting to get other nations to buy overpriced, over hyped expensive american products
    2) attempting internally to minimize costs and local development
    Should one be suprised that other governments are also attempting 2. No. But the best thing to do is to pressure them to do 1 and send those $ to the US.

  3. Re:They will fail by vonWoland · · Score: 5, Insightful
    O.K., only if you go to grad. school in economics where the first thing you will be told is to forget all the myths you were taught in Econ 101.

    Yes, a product can sell when people desire it, but that is not the same thing as the product being any good, or anyone needing that product. Don't belive me? Well you may be shocked to hear that ghasp cigarettes sell quite well, though they are neither a good product nor particularly usefull.

    Furthermore, you go to any local coffehouse outside of the Midwest U.S., and see if what they think of your Starbucks coffee. Sure, if all you know is Folgers, it may seem like nectar, but compared to the worst coffee house in say Italy, France, Greece, Turkey, Germany, Spain et c. et c., Starbucks seems much like so much sewage.

    I know, I know it is comfortable to hold on to those free market myths of yours. And you know what, if you actually found a free market, it might not be all complete bull. But find that free market, friend, but meanwhile try to get informed.