Slashdot Mirror
Brazilian Government Continues Push For Free Software
rmello writes "The 'Legislative Free Software Week' in Brazil ended last week, drawing 2,000 people, including 3 ministers and presidents of congress and senate. Computerworld reports (in Portuguese, translation by submitter), among other things, that 1) House of Representatives will NOT renew MS-Office licenses, but is looking at free software alternatives, 2) The free software parliamentary front was announced in congress, 3) The e-mail system of the house of representatives is being replaced by a free software one, 4) The federal government is looking at concrete measures to stimulate free software as means of saving money and stimulating the national software industry.
Looks like free software is here to stay in Brazil. Kudos to the many Brazilian free software groups working to make such victories a reality."
I'm be interested to see how Microsoft react to this. E.g. Counter offers, as per the City of Munich decision to go with Linux desktops: Munich spurns Ballmer's rebates
You always have interest groups pushing for one solution or another. In the case of free software, it's tens of thousands of people who will have jobs they wouldn't have otherwise.
Switching systems like this requires more people (more jobs) for training and support. And even though the cost for the governament doesn't dramatically shrink, the money, not only stays in Brazil, but also creates thousands of new jobs.
It's about time the politicians of the world understand that important part of using free software!
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
> The most important is changing the deviant
> desires of rob malda for young boys, not only
> approving pro-free software laws
C'mon, can't you even READ it before moderating?
*sigh*
See you, space cowboy...
OK heres about brazil:
Rich and poor, very defined. Kids huffing gas, and police squads killing kids.
Big celebrations and they are fun.
Free software supporting.
Hospitals going defunct, and leaving medical equipment that is radioactive on the streets up for grabs. No one knowing any better putting stuff in thier mouths cause it looks cool.
Free software supporting.
Hmm. I hope it saves them some money, then I hope they help thier people.
Anyone from Brazil please weigh in on this.
Its interesting that it says "not renewing" in regards to the MS office licenses..
That's the standard term. What else are they supposed to say?
does that mean that until they decide to go with open source alternatives (or not), that they will be illegally using the software?
No. Existing licenses don't expire prematurely just because someone publicly announces that they won't be renewing.
I think it's pretty clear what they are saying: they aren't going to give Microsoft any more money, and they intend to be using an open source before the issue comes up.
This is the start of a changing of how third world countries will act.
Seriously, lets see "PAY LICENSES" or "FEED PEOPLE"
Ok the argument is not always about feeding the people. Paying license fees is not what third world countries want to do. I mention this as a start because it will shift to other things other than software, eg Drugs Patents, Copyrights, etc. The West better be paying attention, because people like the RIAA say, "Why do you need bread when you can eat cake!"
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
So German government stated they were making the switch in 2001, China is making a switch, who's next. Could spell big trouble for MS' revenue considering China, and Brazil are just HUGE. This could be a break for Sun Microsystems though if they would do something with Solaris under x86 ala Linux or BSD. (freely downloadable I meant to say).
3) The e-mail system of the house of representatives is being replaced by a free software one,
Damnit, with the mention of another hole found in Sendmail I hope it wasn't that.
4) The federal government is looking at concrete measures to stimulate free software as means of saving money and stimulating the national software industry.
rants page): Let's say that OS #1 costs a small company $499.99 for about 10 licenses, we'll call this company Foobar Incorporated. Foobar incorporated is now getting pounded with about 20 virii per year, and it takes their administrators about 20 minutes per machine to update the operating system every time something new causes chaos on the network.
Either way you decide to do the math, it is going to be costly. Place 2 administrators in Foobar Inc., and have them patch up the system at a total cost of 100 minutes per person for the update. 20 minutes per machine multiplied by 10 machines divided by two administrators, we'll now give these administrators $10.00 per hour and the cost for this one instance is $33.33 for this one instance. $666.66 per year, for this one company. So how many small companies are there? Should we be generous and say 10 million? $6,666,660,000.00 in lost revenue.
These figures are only on viruses, not program crashes, not system downtime, strictly salary. Sure I know some geek wizard is going to scrutinize this be my guest... There are pros and cons to free software being you won't necessarily receive great tech support for it as opposed to some (note I said some*) companies tech support.
Now before someone unloads the holy grail of follow ups, I said *some* tech support. We all know that certain unnamed companies blow when it comes to tech support, but remember not everyone is going to browse through sites like kernel.org, nor jump on IRC for support. Many endusers still prefer pretty to geek.
</rant>
MoFscker
Here is how I think it may stimulate the economy a bit. Brazil's population was 155.82 million in 1995 according to their Embassy's stats, so for argument's sake let's say it still is 155 million. Let's take one percent and say that they buy software. This would be 1,550,000 buying say MS at a very low price of 50.00 (US). That would equal $77,500,000.00
Now what if instead of spending that money on MS bs, they took that money and opened up research labs to develop products of their own. Wouldn't you say somewhere down the line, they would be better off if they could make revenue by saving on software as opposed to throwing it out the window. So how does it stimulate the economy? Well money could be shifted elsewhere that's how, it doesn't necessarily have to be using some notion that free software itself is going to generate revenue now. It sure does however make sense to make the switch. Maybe your sense of perception isn't on a business level who knows.
MoFscker
Some pics from the event:
http://www.gulms.org/fotos/SL_congresso/.
They can use the money they planned on licensing from Microsoft to support their own IT-staff, including programmers. They can afford to build and extend on Free Software where necessary. It's all about mindshare, thousands of people surrounding the government will also install Free Software, and contribute when they get educated about FSF/Open Source and have an itch to scratch. This means fewer people locked into the abusive monopoly behemoth that is Microsoft.
You should rather ask yourself: Why am I so negative?
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
You're quite right. I think that Brazil is actually counting on those private developers. I think that their plan is to contract out the software projects that they need done while using Linux, and other free software as a basis for those projects.
Farming out developement of other software has got to be cheaper than paying M$ obscene liscensing fees. Furthermore, when you hire contractors, you can get a solution which fits better than an out of the package software-suite. At the beginning, they may have to send some of that work overseas, but they will probably find local talent pretty quickly.
http://yetanotherpoliticalrant.blogspot.com
Someone asked "Why so happy?". Well now there will be many people working in parallel to use open source software in a large enterprise environment, and don't tell me you have to speak English to be a (good) hacker. People will solve problems, submit patches and improvements (if welcomed), and develop new software which we can use and leverage too.
Also it should divert money that would have gone to the richest man in the world, to pay programmers, and to encourage young people to study programming, starting with open source as a given not as an eccentricism. It is entirely possible that you will get an environment in Brazil in which Windows becomes a minority. Could you imagine what kind of things would be possible when the magnifying power of open source is combined with even a small budget? I'm looking forward to hearing stories about Brazil in the future where it becomes famous for a "can-do" attitude (and they actually do it!), when solutions are shared by many and developers are able to enjoy exponential successes.
If this can be documented and nurtured it just might suggest that there is another path for human development in general - capitalism is great but for some sociological or economic reason it hasn't done well in Brazil. Maybe open source can be used in programming and many other fields to codify knowledge and give Brazilians a boost so the money they do spend is most effectively disposed.
I think this goes beyond the general idea that the network is stronger the more nodes it has. We are talking about people who are going to be getting tools put in their hands, the equivalent of an investment of millions or billions of dollars worth of software, and they are going to attack problems and solve them by both tapping into support from the world at an individual level and by recognizing that problems can indeed be solved. The only things I would like to add are that food, sanitation, safety, machines, and free telecom are prerequisites for this. If the government has anybody with a clue (sounds like they do!) they will figure out a way to provide free highspeed internet connectivity. Conceivably this could be done around libraries or community centers, perhaps someone from Brazil or other countries with such experiences can provide some ideas. I am very interested in hearing what the result of this would be if started from Brazilian values, perhaps it could be refreshing.
One thing I can tell you is that one mature person educated in the world can make a difference. A journalist friend of mine has been able to build a hospital, orphanage, newspaper, and a hundred schools in Cambodia from donations around the world. I would guess that Brazil is far, far ahead of Cambodia, at least they have still got their brainpower among the living! Let's help them!
Using and promoting free software stimulates local know-how and will generate many jobs.
This is just one more sign that by electing their president Lula, the Brazilian people got the government they deserve (in a positive sense).
Let's see on september 1 (the vote on the Software Patents Directive) if we Europeans can we be equally happy with our Parliament...
You are thinking too narrow -- you only see the wealth created by the sale of the license to use the software, not the wealth created from the users of the software.
I know several companies in the Seattle area (still suffering high unemployment and economic recession) that are successful *because* they use free software. They are able to adopt a piece of software, extend it to incorporate the features they need in their particular situation, and then add enough value to their company that they are turning healthy profits while all their competitors are flailing.
Let's take one piece of software -- the Apache web server. Even though acquiring the software requires little or no capital expenditure, deploying the software is pretty easy, and extending the software is only slightly more difficult, it is the foundation for several companies. Without that particular piece of software, they could not have built their business. Just having the software available to people creates wealth and value.
When Brazil unleashes a couple of million dollars from its IT spending and turns it into the pockets of Brazilian developers, testers, and documentators, it is going to begin the process of adding value to Free Software in Brazil. The companies and businesses will be able to utilize this software in their organizations, and add a bit of their own as well. The increased value of having the whole country united behind free software will bring such wealth that the previous revenue that licensing would've created would be seen as a drop in the bucket.
You have to view software from a holistic economic approach.
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
t is. However I wonder how much of OSS uptake is due to the poor state a lot of world economies are in because of the World Bank?
Possibly, but more likely it is due to the fact that when a government spends money on Microsoft software the money goes to Microsoft which does nothing to stimulate the local economy. Even if it costs them twice as much to switch to free software they still come out ahead in the end because the money spent can be spent paying people who are far more likely than Microsoft to buy other Brazillian products and services.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Chances are though that Brazillian officials are much more likely to spend their embezzled money in Brazil than Microsoft programmers are.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
In portuguese, we have TWO words to mean FREE. Simply the translation doesn't help. The "software livre" and "software gratis".
That's the catch: the original article has "livre" which means "freedom", as in speech.
eliphas
However, the shrinkwrap applications that are in common use account for a disproportionate amount of software spending, and by encouraging the use of open source one would free up huge amounts of money otherwise spent on license fees that could be spent on hiring people to adapt various software packages to your specific conditions.
For Brazil that would be hugely beneficial, as most money for shrinkwrap software end up in the US, while software engineers hired to add features to open source software would be more likely to be local.
But even though the US stand to lose short term, it too stand to lose longer term as open source over time reduce the cost to develop software (because of the increasing amount of software that can be used as building blocks free of charge). Looking at the history of software development, this is unlikely to reduce the number of available jobs for software engineers overall - in fact it is likely to make more jobs available, as cheaper software development means significantly more projects become cost effective.
It's like car manufacturing - Ford massively automated the process, but that didn't put people making cars out of work, it massively grew the industry since the lower cost lead to lower prices, which led to a huge increase in demand.
Thus, a healthy European software industrie based on OSS is needed in order to be independent of the US.
I truly hope that our parliaments will realize this before it is too late.
I agree. It's a complete waste of money to send license-money to the USA for programs that could be better and cheaper made at home.
Take Germany as an example. There's around 80 million people, and around 50 million computers. The average cost for Windows and Office alone is something like 400.
If you assume the average user buys a new version of software from MS every 3 years on the average, then this works out as 6.6 billion a year.
For this money you could hire about 130.000 full time programmers permanently. Read that again.
It gets worse: Even if you *did* need 130.000 programmers permanently to keep Linux and OpenOffice competitive for the tasks you need, it would *still* be preferable to hire them, rather than buy the software from MS.
You see, those programmers would pay taxes. They would also do most of their shopping in Germany, paying VAT. They'd hire german carpenters and electricians to build them houses etc etc.
In reality, it'd probably be cheaper and better for the local economy of Germany to hire a quarter million coders permanently instead of buying the software from MS.
Something to think about indeed.
As a supporter of capitalism, answer these:
How many profitable, wealth-creating, job-creating companies use software?
How many profitable, wealth-creating, job-creating companies sell software?
If software becomes much cheaper, because more software can work from public free code bases, how many companies do better and how many companies do worse?
As an application programmer for, say, a bank, what is the effect of cheaper infrastructure software on my job security? If the projects being considered for me to work on become cheaper does that make them more likely or less likely to be approved?
If you work for Microsoft, you have my sympathy, but there are more of us than there are of you. Capitalism isn't about producing products, it's about producing products for customers, and when something else comes along that's better for the customer, his benefit outweighs the loss to the producer whose product no longer meets the need.
Microsoft really screwed the pooch on this one.
Whether this is an example of third world brilliance outthinking their arrogant American counterparts (getting Microsoft to effectively subsidize their move to free software by selling them such inexpensive, limited time licenses, thereby decreasing their costs of transition dramatically), or just countries getting incredibly lucky as a result of Redmond's panic, I don't know. Probably a combination (not to mention examples of outright corruption, with corrupt politicians being replaced by less corrupt ones who revive these initiatives, examples of short sighted politicans balking when it comes time to pay the piper and renew licenses, instead renewing the free software initiatives they tabled earlier, and who knows how many other variations on this theme).
In any event, the irony is delicious. We as a community lamented the short sightedness of so many third world countries selling out to Microsoft in exchange for cheap licenses that would expire in a few years, when in fact Microsoft was being far too clever for their own good, helping to underwrite all these nations' transition to freeer platforms. They squandered their last chance to get licensing fees from these nations, and effectively did nothing to prevent them from transitioning away from their product anyway.
Or at least some of these nations, like Thailand and Brazil. Who knows how it will play out elsewhere, but for now I'm chortling with delicious glee.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Even if it costs them twice as much to switch to free software they still come out ahead in the end because the money spent can be spent paying people who are far more likely than Microsoft to buy other Brazillian products and services.
Moreso than that, they are investing in the education and development of the IT staff, who are part of Brazil's evolving economy.
They will most likely be boosting the local IT development by educating people to use and to contribute to the free software projects that benefit them. In the long run they will be saving millions of US dollars which can be better spent on Brazil. From a software perspective, the only money they'll be spending will be an investment on their staff and software that they have control over.
All the high TCO crap that comes out of bogus reports (slightly trollish, but true) has been seen through by the Brazilian politicians, who see this as an opportunity to invest Government money in Brazillian people and hence keep it in Brazil. No more upgrade fees. No more expensive support contracts but instead real computer admins and programmers on site who are part of Brazil's evolving economy.
Most of us here have long known the realities of TCO and Microsoft. The only big cost with free software is in retraining staff. And retraining can be done for free - give a hungry man a can of food and he'll find a way to open it.
I guess with all the economic trouble in South America of late, governments such as that of Brazil are being forced to recognise that reality. Microsoft can probably no longer buy their way into Government contracts with 'discounts' and whatever other tactics they might use.
When you're poor you gotta stop paying for convenience and doing things for yourself. Why have an automatic dishwasher when you can wash your dishes by hand.
Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary