Iraq's Open Source Possibilities

An anonymous reader writes "In a Linux Journal article, Iraq's 2 person LUG describes the software consumer market in Iraq today, and their hopes for educating the masses about open-source software: 'Iraq is now a blank, unformatted hard disk and can be loaded with anything. Everything is open in Iraq right now. There are no regimented standards or massive expenditure in a particular monopoly's software'."

Comments

As much as I would like to see...

[Kethinov]

As much as I would like to see O/S everywhere in the world, I think that what Iraq needs before anything else at the moment is a stable government.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[Anonymous Coward]

How about electricity, food, and running water?

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[Kethinov]

Obviously, but you don't get electricity, food, running water, open source software, and the internet without a stable government.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[setzman]

Not saying we (the US) is doing a good job, but do you really think armed rebels would set up a fair democratic election? That would be the day

Wouldn't the American colonists who would later rebel fit into this category? They were armed rebels against a foreign occupier (Great Britain), correct? Or perhaps I'm just a history major who knows nothing about history. Yes, not all of our elections have been fair, but for you to say that this is impossible is totally incorrect.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[poolmousenyc]

as long as terrorists keep the iraqi people in the dark, they'll be able to brainwish them. allow these people internet access and risk losing the ability to get them to blow themselves up for your own purposes. i don't see it happening. terrorists have nothing to gain and everything to lose by allowing people access to the truth. poolmousenyc

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[Anonymous Coward]

But they weren't armed rebels claiming to be fighting for the previously deposed tyrannical dictator.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[cheezedawg]

That's most likely why they're attacking the occupying forces whenever possible

For the most part, they aren't attacking us. The attacks are coming from a minority of Saddam loyalists or foreign Islamic terrorists.

Of course most right-wing appologists will tell you that the Iraqis are backward people who are not capable of carrying out a democratic election by themselves

Bull crap. In fact, we are turning control over to an Iraqi government at midnight on June 30th next year to do just that.

Bush's appointment wasn't without scandal.

I think the word you are looking for is controversy, not scandal. Any close election is going to be controversial.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[jc42]

... what Iraq needs before anything else at the moment is a stable government.

Well, one way not to get stability is to turn over the computing infrastructure to another big American corporation that made big contributions to Bush's election campaign. It doesn't take a deep understanding of politics to realize where that approach leads.

Guess which big computer corporation was a big contributor ...

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[GreyWolf3000]

Well, one way not to get stability is to turn over the computing infrastructure to another big American corporation that made big contributions to Bush's election campaign. It doesn't take a deep understanding of politics to realize where that approach leads.

I'm gonna call you on that. I don't believe MS is a huge contributor of the Bush campaign, and I don't believe that by using Microsoft software, Iraq forfeits their chance at a stable government.

This seems to be more corporate-demonizing hogwash that gets modded up here at /. Honestly, even if MS did make unusually large contributions to the Bush campaign, I fail (in my shallow understanding of politics) to see how that translates to an unstable government in Iraq. Please enlighten me.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[child_of_mercy]

government's themselves can be unstable without causing amjor problems.

Many European parliament's see several Governments in a year as parliamnetary majorities shift and collapse without a break in the provision of essential services.

strong independent intitutions and the rule of law might be what you're looking for.

the point is that a hell of a lot of things are needed to make what we'd view as a decent society.

A starting list for mine would be (in rough order of importance):

Agricultural Surplus,
Freedom (expression, speech, religion, assembly, association),
Accountability,
Transparency,
Rule of Law
Strong independent institutions (within the Rule of Law)
Democracy

Once you have all those then free markets can flourish and people can buy what they want.

But careful who you say that to.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[nihilogos]

Their rebels are fighting because they hate us, or they want Saddam back. ie, they want a government based on power back, not one that is benificial for the people.

How the hell do you know what they're fighting for? Did CNN tell you?

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[frdmfghtr]

This seems to be more corporate-demonizing hogwash that gets modded up here at /. Honestly, even if MS did make unusually large contributions to the Bush campaign, I fail (in my shallow understanding of politics) to see how that translates to an unstable government in Iraq. Please enlighten me.

Directly, you are correct--it does not translate to an unstable government. Indirectly, it could give Microsoft an edge on the building of the technology/information infrastructure. It would be yet another big American corporation sinking its meathooks into the money pot that is being used to rebuild Iraq, leaving the Iraqi brain pool out of the picture.

Consider this example. American firms estimated that it would take many months and millions of dollars to rebuild Iraqi cement factories, which are crucial to the rebuilding effort. Intrepid Iraqis did it in a few months for less than $100k. How? They didn't set lofty goals for state-of-the-art equipment and facilities. They cannibalized parts from remaining production lines to get at at least one production facility operating. This facility can, in turn, generate revenue through the sale of cement for use in the reconstruction (as opposed to expensive imports) and put that revenue into the factory and workers' salaries.

Likewise, why should we as taxpayers spend millions of dollars to import the labor and material into Iraq when there exists local talent to do the same job? If they're not as skilled, fine. TRAIN them to do the job, don't do it for them. Teach a man to fish and all that...

In short--use local resources (material and talent) to do the work as much as possible, and bring in outside talent and material only if needed. Iraq is NOT a feeding frenzy for big corporations looking to get a big government check (even if it looks like it is turning into that); the money should be a resource to help the Iraqi people rebuild their own country.

As a taxpayer, I'd much prefer to see my tax dollars spent to help the IRAQIS rebuild Iraq, not Halliburton, Microsoft, etc. as nauseum.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[aled]

So much wisdom and so little knowledge of geography.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[vandan]

For the most part, they aren't attacking us. The attacks are coming from a minority of Saddam loyalists or foreign Islamic terrorists.

You've been watching too much Fox news. There are no Saddam loyalists. The freedom fighters are just that - fighting for control of their own country. You can't dismiss as everyone who is anti-US as an Islamic terrorist, because you'd be branding practically the rest of the world as Islamic terrorists. And remember: one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[dasmegabyte]

So...you're saying that the revolutionaries fighting American oppression of their nation in Iraq don't have the ability to debate or hold land? What are you basing this on -- first hand experience, or wild guesses?

I'd have to say that thoughtful people with a stake in independence would be the first to fight against an enemy only interested in filling its own pockets and proving its supremacy to a world that doesn't care. Cowards who didn't care about their nation would have given up when their power structure was disassembled and their leader drugged and captured. And the power hungry wouldn't be wasting their resources on a fool's battle...they'd be fleecing a position in the New Regime.

No...I'm fairly sure the "insurgents" are fighting for the same reason we are: they think they are right, and that this is the only way to protect their way of life. Such a shame we're both wrong...a shame that 2 American soldiers and 30+ Iraqis have to die because neither group can lighten up and accept that there's always going to be some worrisome uncertainty in life -- something most of us learned in middle school.

Re:As much as I would like to see...

[1iar_parad0x]

This discussion reminds me about the fall of the Soviet Union. The communist hard-liners attempted to shut down the media. Unfortunately, these men were so out of date; they didn't realize that the media was still able to communicate via fax machine. (This link [cato.org] points to a book review of a popular book on the subject.) That ability allowed reporters to communicate to the outside despite the crackdown of the Soviet government. Those communications ignited the entire country. All the eyes of Russia, and the world, were focused on Moscow. They were specifically focused on Boris Yeltsin. Modern technology enabled this communication. The Iraqis need information about as much as they need water. Imagine if every day of your life, you've learned to live in fear. You've been taught to keep your mouth shut, you're eyes turned away, and you allegiance sworn to a mad dictator. Add to the fact that even if you do heed all these warnings, you may still be randomly charged with treason.

The Iraqis who wish to be free need to organize and communicate. They need to learn about the outside world. Heck, even Saddam was shocked when he saw how openly we as Americans criticize our President. He was under the belief, that our government suppressed dissent (especially unflattering satire) like he did. Frankly, the Internet is probably the best, low-cost method to promote open communication. Take a look at countries like Brazil or India. They're IT is run on Linux (except the most high-end). They still use many low-end PCs. OSS fanaticism aside; I think in this case OSS can be quite useful. Isn't the free flow of information what true hacking is about?

On a slightly (perhaps greatly) off-topic, but related note:

I know we complain about "fascism" in this country. That's a joke. The Iraqis have quite a few problems ahead. They're fighting real fascism. They don't have Thomas Jefferson or George Washington. They don't have a slow progression and long history of open dissent. What they do have is a sudden vacuum of power, arguing radical religious factions, and a severe lack of resources.

Drugs, sex, and Iraq
Why Iraq's neighbors want to see democracy fail
The rise of crime and vigilates

Unfortunately, I can't hunt down the specific article I wanted to link to. It discussed the sudden increase of crime [especially prostitution] (see articles above) in Iraq. It also discussed the rise of a radical Islamic movement looking to cleanse Iraqi society. They argue these vices/sins have been "unleashed"/"unchecked" by the Americans. I hate to say it, but this whole war is FAR from over.

would

[Anonymous Coward]

be nice to see linux there but m$ will probably make some big ass sponsoring deal...
---------
Beers and Boobies in a Game?

Re:would

[Capsaicin]

"be nice to see linux there but m$ will probably ..."

You can bank on m$ getting what it wants for Iraq. They didn't go in to Iraq to let some pinko Finnish free software take that market that rightfully belongs to a friendly megacorp.

wait, you want to *not* sell them something?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ya, we'll give them something for free instead of taking there money/oil for something we tell them they must have. Sure, that will happen.
-Anonymous American.

Re:wait, you want to *not* sell them something?

[WasterDave]

Exactly. Were you not paying attention? The whole point of invading Iraq was to give contracts for it's rebuilding to American companies.

Do you see a German cellphone provider? Hmmm?
How about a French railway system going in?

Exactly. The yoosay and their allies invaded Iraq, the yoosay claims the prize. And as for giving it away? Pah! Hippies!

Dave

Re:wait, you want to *not* sell them something?

[aled]

Nobody forced US to start the war. Preventive war isn't a good argument else.

Re:wait, you want to *not* sell them something?

[1u3hr]

No, of course it isn't. It's much better to wait until the enemy attacks you first and causes massive casualties to both civilians and military

That's all true; but has nothing to do with Iraq. Saddam only wanted to kill Kurds, dissidents, and maybe some neighbours like Iran and Kuwait. Despite all Bush's propaganda, Saddam didn't support terrorists like bin Laden except in a token way, because he knew, as a basically secular leader, he was a prime target of religious fundamentalists, who want to rule the Middle East and who attack the US not as a prelude for invasion but to make them back off from meddling in their part of the world. There's a good case that bin Laden's strategy was to push the US into a massive retaliation against the Muslim world, which would destroy the credibility of moderates and US allies, allowing his cronies to take power. And similarly, that Cheney et al have wanted a big military presence in the ME, to keep pressure on the Saudis. But basing more troops in Saudi Arabia would make the royals (more) unpopular, so having them nearby in a client state is even better.

open source versus capitalism

[h4x0r-3l337]

Given that the US is already excluding foreign nations from lucrative rebuilding contracts in Iraq, I would expect the Bush Administration to frown upon this possible move to open source, and start pushing Microsoft and friends instead.

Re:open source versus capitalism

[pheared]

Given that the US is already excluding foreign nations who did not support the US led war from lucrative rebuilding contracts in Iraq

Granted I think it's a stupid policy move too, but those nations sound a little hypocritical now. We don't want you to go to war, and we'll blast you for it, but it's not fair that we can't profit from it.

Additionally, it's not the Bush Administration who would push M$, but rather the gigantic corporations that they will be giving the contracts to.

The whole thing is rotten.

Re:open source versus capitalism

[Knunov]

Given that those lucrative rebuilding contracts are funded by the U.S., they can restrict who gets to bid all they like.

It's U.S. taxpayer money, and as such, why the fuck shouldn't the U.S. get to choose to receives it?

You think if France (or Germany or ANY OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH) dumped $18.6BN into rebuilding a country they would just open it up to foreigners for the taking?

Jackass.

Re:open source versus capitalism

[cheezedawg]

Given that the US is already excluding foreign nations from lucrative rebuilding contracts in Iraq

Um, no they aren't. They are excluding nations that obstructed any action in Iraq, but the more than 60 countries in the coalition are more than welcome to bid on the contracts.

If France and Germany had had their way, there wouldn't be ANY contracts to award in Iraq, so I don't know why they think they are entitled to some now.

Re:open source versus capitalism

[Coneasfast]

Given that those lucrative rebuilding contracts are funded by the U.S., they can restrict who gets to bid all they like.

you are missing the point, these countries France, Germany, etc) are complaining because this is not what is best for the iraqi people, but only benefits those who did not oppose the war

if this was about contracts for USA only, i don't think these countries would complain as much

Re:open source versus capitalism

[child_of_mercy]

It's not about the best option.

You know little about computers but you've been landed the job giving out contracts.

note: your job is not to build a decent IT infrastructure, it's to hand out a contract to get someone else to build it.

There's that nice guy from a Microsoft based systems integrator.

You met him at a party at the embassy last month, you've played a round of golf with him.

he's invited you out to lunch somewhere nice today to discuss what his great big corporation, who your bosses also feel secure about, can do.

or you can take a risk, organise things yourself, get a bunch of smaller providers in on the job, take up the integration yourself.

You will probably deliver a better solution for the people of iraq.

you will also:

Not get invited to any more nice lunches
Hand back a big pile of cash that no-one would have objected if you spent it.
Live through a lot of sleepless nights as you hope your solution which no-one in your organisation has ever heard of, works.

This isn't about american government.

All large bureaucracies think this way.

(That's why it's the job of parliaments and CEO's to tell give their people direction and certainty)

Re:open source versus capitalism

[Trogre]

Only the three that armed Iraq

What, they're excluding themselves?

Re:open source versus capitalism

[Guppy06]

"Given that the US is already excluding foreign nations from lucrative rebuilding contracts in Iraq,"

Ah, the hazards of only getting your news from Slashdot. The DoD more or less backpedalled on that mere hours after that announcement (by putting the bidding on hold for "further review"), and there's been enough of a reverse on that policy that France and Germany are forgiving huge chunks of the Iraqi debt. Most of the media (including the ones who would be the last to believe the administration could be this shrewd or subtle) now seem to believe that the whole thing was a staged event to give James Baker a carrot to offer to the Paris Club, getting a promise to reduce Iraq's debt by giving them back something they never really lost to begin with.

You really should get out of the house every once in a while.

Potential!

[man_ls]

Perhaps a Linux vendor will spot free licenses and support and consultants, if the Iraqui provisional government agrees to purchase hardware from them.

Or, free on-site setup or something, if they agree to buy a support package.

Or, free everything, and then they'd get a lucrative governemnt contract.

Bidding

[Christoff84]

This mainly depends on which company wins the contract to re-build their IT/Communications systems. If a pro-microsoft company wins, then Iraq will be locked into proprietary software.

Iraq's OSS needs...

[Eberlin]

can wait a bit longer. The kind of stability they need right now isn't in a computer operating system, it's in a governing system. They also need stability in what we consider basic utilities -- electricity, running water, etc. It also helps not to have to worry about car bombs, suicide bombers, and other daily attacks.

If you look through Maslow's heirarchy of needs, a good, cheap, stable, tweakable operating system doesn't make it in the radar quite yet.

Time to help

[Anonymous Coward]

Whichever side of the political divide we stand on over Iraq, I don't think anyone could disagree now that if we can help here then it will do good for them.

We don't have to wait for a stable government, we can work on multiple fronts at the same time.

At least with Open Source we're not asking for anything and we're not just blindly giving, we're sharing. They have an equal right to be able to contribute to open source.

For those in the US, please also lobby your government to remove the restrictions that stop you sending Linux (and presumably *BSD) to Iraq whilst allowing MS, etc, to sell proprietory systems.

Chris down under

Proof of how simplistic most /.'ers are

[ShatteredDream]

Iraq doesn't have a stable government, economy or military and it is caught between Islamist/Islamofascist guerrillas and an international occupation force. Iraq needs political and economic stability more than anything else. We need to educate them on the benefits of non-violent and non-coercive political debate and discourse, not open source software. We need to educate them how to become a modern industrial country with an economy that isn't dependent on one industry. We need to train an army that is loyal to the country's constitution, not leaders.

Re:Proof of how simplistic most /.'ers are

[Atzanteol]

Can't a country do more than one thing at a time though? They need a *lot* of things. An internet infrastructure will be one of those. It's become a major part of doing business these days.

During the U.S. war for independence, the U.S. government fell into disarray as well (it didn't spring up over-night with all it's power and laws you know). And yet people still pursued other things during this 10-20 years. These two guys are doing what they *can* at this point.

Re:Proof of how simplistic most /.'ers are

[Jerf]

We need to educate them on the benefits of non-violent and non-coercive political debate and discourse, not open source software.

What do you think Open Source software is?

Think about it.

Fat chance

[JoeShmoe]

Wasn't ex-RIAA head Hillary Rosen consulting with the Iraqi Governing Council on how to write the copyright section of the Iraqi constitution?

Why not just write a mandate for Trusted Computing to guarantee the security of any imported US content and guarantee a RIAA-type organization can end up in control of whatever Iraqi culture blooms?

Iraq presents an opportunity for a democracy to form that gains all the advantages of hindsight. It would be the chance to correct all of the mistakes that were made with Amercian democracy (such as ignorance of money's impact on all three branches or the constant war of state vs federal rights). Unfortunately, now that corporate American wields such control, it seems highly unlikely that any new "democracy" we spawn would follow noble, altruistic ideals but instead follow capitalist whatever-makes-trade-for-US-companies ideals.

Futher proof that there is no room for democratic ideals in Iraqi is that the Shiite majority would easily control any democratic system that was implemented, something that I'm sure the US will not tolerate.

- JoeShmoe
.

Multitasking

[Infonaut]

Is it impossible for Iraqis to do more than one thing at once?

I'm just guessing here, but I doubt that trying to bring Open Source tools into a developing technology infrastructure would sap the effort to create a stable government.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Uh-oh, I think you're skipping a step or two

[iamdrscience]

It's supposed to go like this:

1. Get everybody food and water
2. Get everybody feeling reasonably secure in their safety.
3. Setup a stable, fair and working government.
4. Decide whether Iraqi cellphones will use GSM or CDMA
5. Decide which operating system to use.

I think we're stuck around #2 or #3, but these people are already jumping up to 5 (and other people to 4).

Misleading...

[Tailhook]

It doesn't help your cause to attempt to mislead people. Your statement...

...excluding foreign nations...

...is a lie by omission. The US is excluding specific foreign nations for specific reasons, which is very different from your implication. Also, the exclusion applies to only part of the total available funds.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

nice idea, bad timing

[martin-boundary]

This all sounds nice and all, but given that Halliburton is selling oil in Iraq for $1.59 per gallon, excluding extra company fees, when they could be doing it locally for about 15 cents per gallon, I somehow doubt that the Iraq is going to be rebuilt on open source. Microsoft's rock bottom software prices are way more capitalist friendly, if you know what I mean.

this argument misses one important point

[wrinkledshirt]

It's worth noting that many nations who opposed the war in Iraq did take up an increased responsibility in Afghanistan so that American troops could be rotated over to Iraq. They didn't participate directly in Iraq, but without their help sharing part of the burden in other parts of the war on terror, the United States would have had a harder going.

I won't go so far as to call you a jackass in retalliation, but I will say it's worth informing yourself more before resorting to insult.

An unformatted drive ?

[cinnamon colbert]

First of all, Iraq is, or at least was until years of US/UN sanctions crippled the economy, a fairly sophisticated country. I am sure there are many intellegint, well educated Iraqi geeks and computer scientists and power users who are quite capable of deciding for them selves what Iraq needs. Second, there is this HUGE gulf between what we think and what appears to be thought, based on news accounts, in the Arab world. The clearest example is the widespread anger at the fall of Hussein as a humiliation, a view that I would wager is alien to most americans. People in the Mideast are just as smart as we are, and they are fully entitled to their opinions; if we don't like them, acting like a big bully, and telling people to shutup and do as we think is not going to help. I think there is a tinge of this in the post, we know best and you (children) will do what we want (unspoken or else)...

Re:US needs to allow Munition like Linux to be exp

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if you are not American? Sorry, but the US doesn't run the entire planet. Yet.

Leave capitalism out of this!

[Cajun Hell]

Your post would make a lot more sense if you had left "capitalism" out of it, because capitalism is not the enemy nor does it conflict with Open Source or Free Software in any way.

The conflict is value (possibly implemented using open source) vs corruption (probably implemented by lock-in, a.k.a. The Microsoft Legacy).

THe only question is: who donated more money to the Bush campaign in 2000, and will likely donate more in 2004: Microsoft or their competitors? That's how you predict who will win.

Iraq is a disk?

[Uplore]

"Iraq is now a blank, unformatted hard disk and can be loaded with anything." It's an interesting comparison, but Irag is hardly blank. There is residue from the old regime all through the country. Some of the old ministers for the state are still in power, being left there by the US because they have the widest knowledge of the system. None of those who are in power now are being charged with war crimes of course. Iraq is unformatted however, and at the moment any attempt to bring formation is met with terrorist activity. Water and power installations are being blown up by small pockets of rebels. Iraq needs to be loaded with some anti-virus software before proper utility programs can be loaded sucessfully.

Computers play integral role

[failedlogic]

Computers will be instrumental in the rebuilding of Iraq.

At *some* point the 'new' Iraqi governemnt will need to build infrastructure. On an immediate basis this would include electrical, water, and communications factilities. Most of these systems are in desparate need of repair and upgrades.

Whatever problems will happen with the government. there is no denying that such upgrades are needed. Computers are needed to run these systems (wheter Linux or Windows boxes run the actual systems is debatable) but employees will most likely need computers for day-to-day tasks. If they were to use say OpenOffice on the computers then as the gov't rebuilds it would make 'sense' to use the same software.

speaking of lies by omission...

[wrinkledshirt]

That use of "specific reasons" seems to suggest that there's a validity in the fact that countries were excluded for their anti-invasion stance.

It's worth noting that many nations who opposed the war in Iraq did take up an increased responsibility in Afghanistan so that American troops could be rotated over to Iraq. They didn't participate directly in Iraq, but without their help sharing part of the burden in other parts of the war on terror, the United States would have had a harder going.

Open Source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bunch of stupid, slashdot, idiot children.

The Iraqi people are being slaughtered, have no food or electricity and you sorry ass hippies want to get them to use open source?

Stupid assholes.

Take a look here and see what is happening to them...

http://www.infowars.com/
http://www.information clearinghouse.info/

Stop getting your "news" from Dan Rather comander turd.

Pitiful idiots.

USA-bashers, please take note

[Anonymous Coward]

...of what a public radio employee (read: liberal, just like you) had to say in the article. (You did RTFA before you started up with your anti-Bush, no-blood-for-oil rant, right?)

Life is tough here in Baghdad, no question. But Iraqis have plenty of food and not that many people have been physically injured. What delights many Iraqis most right now is that they can, for the first time in a lifetime, learn about the outside world. They can read whatever books they want, watch satellite TV, and, most exciting of all, get on the Internet and see things they never have: open political criticism, chat rooms, naked people, news from everywhere. There are dozens and dozens of new internet cafes all over Iraq which, with their slow, lousy satellite connections, are filled all the time.
Sana'a Street, the main computer store strip in Baghdad, is overflowing with quite up-to-date computers, cheaper than you'll find in the US, with everything you could ask for.

Oh, the humanity! How could we have done this to them when they were so happy being tortured, raped, and killed? We've subjected them to slow satellite connections and pr0n. We are heartless bastards. Read on...

Certainly, Iraq is a country that needs all sorts of immediate material support. But the US government and countless NGOs are about to pour countless billions to that effort.

Oh, those greedy Americans.

Put up or shut up.

Re:USA-bashers, please take note

[WildBeast]

You obviously never lived in a country who got occupied did you? Oh the ignorance. You think money is gonna take away the fact that they're occupied?

You should've seen those anti-occupation demonstrators getting shot at like dogs. You do watch the news don't you?

Israli's support is good for Iraq

[Anonymous Coward]

Something that many people might not understand is that Israel working more and more towards linux, also means that that same works benefits arab users of open source. The two languages are pracically identical in terms of the problems presented in linux.

*) i18n
*) Unicode/UTF-8
*) Descent font rendering of the wierd charecters
*) RTL Text support!!!
*) Consolse support
*) Weird hebrew & arabic encoding support in web browsers/email clients
*) Support for propriatery for the (horrible) Windows type hebrew, and the (non-exsistent, beyond what unix provides) Mac type hebrew.

Forgetting one important thing

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you guys think stuff like water and electricity is managed by. Yep, computers. And what do those computers run? Beats me, but I'd sure like to give open source at least a chance here. All those water pumps, electrical power stations, sewage sumps, etc can be managed by open source. Most infrastructure is managed by computer. Anyone bidding on this would most likely win as there is no way to beat free. That is, unless the US writes the contract requests in such a way as to exclude open source.

Re:Arabic support?

[chunkwhite86]

Israel just picked up linux for language support reasons... does Windows/Office support Arabic well? If not, I'm assuming Linux would, and therefore would have a leg to stand on at least.

I'm a native arabic speaker and avid Linux user. Linux's support for Arabic is dismal at best. Besides only a small amount of translations having been done, the Arabic character set is poorly supported (at least as of redhat 8).

The problem stems from the fact that Arabic, as a written language, is written in a flowing script - much like "cursive" english. Unlike cursive english however, there is no "plain text" counterpart in which the letters are seperated. Therein lies the problem. All the menus and documentation for Linux that I've seen in arabic is written such that each letter is seperate from the others, which is entirely unreadable.

c a n y o u r e a d t h i s s e n t e n c e m a y b e y o u c a n b u t i t i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t

This is the best comparison I can think of using english. As you can see, it is entirely unusable and would make for a very unpleasant computing experience.

If anyone has any insight on how to get decent Arabic support under Linux, please let me know!

Check yourself.

[Chris Burke]

Hey, pal. We didn't send our soldiers off to get killed for cell phones and railways either.

Or at least we better fucking not have sent them over for cell phones and railways, or to pour money into Halliburton's coffers. But that's what I see them doing, and I'm more than a little bit pissed about it.

Re:Iraq was not originally a desert.

[geekoid]

Plus, It's not like all people have the skills to focus entirely on details of the government.
So people whose passion is government, can help with governmenr.
People whose passion is agriculture, and help with agriculture
and people whose passion is OS, can help get OS running.