Slashdot Mirror
Software Livre, Anyone?
tbray writes "They just had this
huge OSS conference in Brazil. One good write-up by Simon Phipps is here. And hey, down there, OSS and Java play nice together."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Here's a quick babelfish translation.
Finally, 3rd world countries are getting it!
Free / Open Source software is the way to go.
You can't make your country a developed one by importing overrated and overprized propietary technology.
By the way, the brazilian goverment is also doing a good job negotiating FTAA (ALCA), not like most other countries in Latin America, which are desesperatly yielding to "free trade" agreements with the US, which only benefit big bussines and make more restrictive IP regulation, like the DMCA, software patents and extensive pharma patents for their countries.
An interesting tidbit of this article is that they "wants to annually recycle 240 a thousand computers" anually for public telecenters, libraries, and schools. Couldn't tell if they plan to put Open Source OSes onto these computers, but I would assume so. This is a lot better than wasting valuable hardware. Not to mention most schools can function fine with slower processors as opposed to 3Ghz ones, which are substantially more expensive.
"Book" in French. The term "Software Livre" might confuse some of those who speak French.
No data, no cry
No, they just had this huge free software conference in Brazil. Even robotic translation software gets this right. Lots of people around the world understand free software as being distinct from "open source software" (OSS). Not everyone is so eager to back a movement which caters to the percieved needs of businesses.
Digital Citizen
> Microsoft's representative Emilio Umeoka [criticised] the President of Brazil for promoting free software: "I don't know if this is the best way to attract investment into the country. I know this is not the best way to create a base of development from which to export because there's no revenue from something free."
Apparently, the business plan that Microsoft is encouraging Brazil to follow is:
1) Send money to Microsoft.
2) ???
3) Profit!!!
I disagree.
OSS is not being embraced because its zero cost, but because you have the freedom to do what you like with the source.
For example the performance of Oracle in certain situations may be preferable to any of the zero cost DB's, even to the point of justifying the large expenditure, but if there is a bug you *really* need fixed or a feature you want to add, then you are dependent on Oracle to change the codebase - which could be an even bigger cost!
Of course java has the source code available for you to do this. The concern there is that may not always be the case.
From the article:
... he was included with those recognised as leaders of the open source community ... and has been championing the use of the Java platform for open source projects.
Bruno Souza
IIRC, RMS wrote a piece encouraging developers to not use Java, because Sun still wants to keep people under their thumb. That position is now kinda mitigated by GCJ but I still agree with RMS's position... To be truly free [speech] software, your language cannot be under a corporate thumb like that.
I have never seen a Java advocate counted among the champions of free software and this is a very encouraging step.
One of many? How many times have we seen this on slashdot:
Sun is opening Java!
Wait, not yet
No, for real this itme, Sun is opening Java
Well, "real soon now"
etc.
bash: rtfm: command not found
Actually I suspect it's both kinds of free propelling acceptance. Think about it.
Without both I'd likely have never tried linux.
Plus bussiness have to meet a bottom line. The lack of up front cost for the software is attractive for that reason, and fact that they can tailor it more exactly to thier specific needs can improve efficiency and again impact thier bottom line.
Joe sixpack is much less likely to replace windows with something doesn't run moose sniper 9 and let him do that online billing thing if he has to pay out any significant $$ for it.
And of course your local computer geek gets all sorts of toys he can actually play with without having eula's threaten to do evil things if takes it apart and requiring his imortal soul and first born simply to run.
It's a good and altruist a motive to sing the virtues of open source I agree. But not paying $200+ a pop to mearly be able to actually run that nice shiny computer is a pretty nice thing as well.
Mycroft
https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
The razorblade industry. They give away the razors, and charge for the blades. In the software industry, some companies give away the software and charge for the support.
Economics 101.
"So what are we, chopped livre?!"
-- thinkyhead software and media
Also, you say that rights to modify programs can be bought from any company, but you can't find software that costs nothing. Let's take a look at a company almost everyone hates: Micro$oft. They certainly provide some free-as-in-beer software to the public, especially when it bolsters their monopoly. An example is the Visual C++ compiler. What I've never heard of is someone buying the source code to, say, Windows.
Allowing people to get the software for free is one of the many reasons free software can compete with proprietary programs, but that's only a byproduct of the real purpose: to let people actually buy software and do with it as they please, not just a license to use it in the way the author envisioned.
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this theorem that this sig is too small to contain.
Brazil is probably the moste remarkable countries I have encountered during all my travels.
Apart from the many obvious attractions this country has to offer (the Amazon ecosystem, the unbelievable food, the friendliness of its citizens, the great beaches etc.), Brazil is on its way to become the most modern state in South America and setting the pace for the development of the continent in many respects.
The current government seems to have realized that sovereignity and independence are the two most important goals that cannot be achieved by relying on foreign companies in many areas of everyday life. Software is only one part of it, food, beverages, automobiles, clothing, oil and gas are others and Brazil is on its way to create and maintain economic independence in all these areas.
One of the most overlooked facts of the entire matter is the rather weak currency, which makes one copy of Windows XP extremely expensive. Just to give you an idea about the costs of life in Brazil: A dinner for four persons in a 5-Star restaurant in downtown Rio (www.porcao.com.br) with the most amazing variety and quality of food, incredibly attentive waiters, a posh setting and numerous drinks cost me about 90$. Having wined and dined people in similiar surroundings in New York and Chicago, the bill in these places ran well over 300 USD.
Even at reduced prices, Microsoft products are way too expensive for the regular Joe and a government operating on a tight budget. Economically it doesn't make any sense at all to transfer license fees to the USA, when comparable software can be had for free and can be supported from with the country's own resources.
At least it seems the plan:y pe=topN ews&storyID=5340922
:-)
:-)
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t
And if Lula, the President of Brazil, is reelected for more 4 years, you can expect some serious open source trend in Brazil!
Perhaps it will be the biggest country so far to really support open source. And Brazil was a pioneer on the adoption of Electronic Vote Machines, so you can realize that my country is kind of irresponsible in its attitudes!
Be afraid Microsoft! Be very afraid!
I dont know about places like Brazil, but for me, personally, OSS is all about the cost. Sure, I can get a copy of Windows for $0, illegally, but I dont want to pirate (its their product, they can do with it what they like), so I look to Linux/*BSD/etc, where the creators of the code *want* me to use their programs freely, and I wont get junk as in other free-as-in-beer software (for example, it wouldn't be tolerated to put spyware in an OSS application, and if someone did put it in, another person could easily take it out, unlike company-owned freeware such as Kazaa)
:)
To me, being able to hack at the code is nice and all, but the thing that is making me switch from Mac is really the cost. Although someday I'll probably want to hack at that code.
I think you're being a little too sensitive about the term "Third World". Granted, it's developed all sorts of strange connotations over the years and maybe is best avoided, but it might be useful to go back to the original definition before you get all worked up.
Here's what a quick Google turned up.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
"Livre" is Portuguese (the Brazilian national language) for "Free"; "Libre" is the Spanish/French meaning the same thing, but I digress.
Stupidity is an equal opportunity striker.
Fellow slashdotter Bill Dog
Brazil is walking the correct path to be the most advanced free-source country in the whole world, and yes, that includes the US. Why?
Government backing is one factor. We have our own version of GPL (which is partially incompatible with our legal system, but not void), the LPG (rtf file, Portuguese). It was made/rewritten from the GPL by the Brazilian Advocate Union. Yes, it's the single one that every lawyer must abide to and respect. The Creative Commons license is in the process of being translated and becoming an official licensing term, as in government-backed and even encouraged.
Yes, there are projects to yeld tax cuts to people and companies that use/distribute/publish free software.
DMCA is null and void here. Yes, we have to follow international copyright laws but you won't be fined if you hack your cable box or DVD player to learn a bit. Piracy? I can tell, it's pretty much the same as everywhere, with the exception of audio CDs that is rampant around the country. So BMG wants to try out a new content protection scam^H^H^H^Hscheme, well baby it won't work. You have a moral choice, to buy a crippled, legal CD for R$30 (around US$10) or the full monty, "generic" version for R$5 (US$1.70). And don't forget we earn A LOT less than our yankee friends. Allow me to say, I am a doctor and I make less than 1000 US monthly.
Speaking of generic, that's one law that was pretty much shoved down US companies and they hated us for that. But Time magazine once praised Brazilian health treatment to AIDS, citing it as an example to Third World Country. What happens is, any medicine patented prior to 1992 lost the patent. Other pharmaceutical companies are allowed to fabricate and distribute them. This was "bad" for them but the final blow comes next: if there is a strong public health interest, the government may cancel any other medical patent.
Think AIDS.
Yes, AIDS treatment is free around here. Government-backed laboratories reverse-engineer and produce zidovudine, lamivudine, 3TC, protease inhibitors and whatnot. They are given (as in gratis) to registered AIDS patients.
You may say it's a harsh thing to do and laboratories want/need to make a profit, well, they do. But when public health is significantly more important than personal gain the table will turn. You know what? The laboratories whined at first, but now they kinda agree with that. They lost their rings to keep their fingers, as an adage says.
In music/entertainment, I can say for sure that many of the most prominent musicians like Gilberto Gil and Caetano Veloso are strong backers of the "music wants to be free" mindset.
Hey, don't take my word on that. Lawrence Lessig, Creative Commons director, recently told the press that Brazil is becoming the world's epicenter of Free/OSS dicussion.
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
Do you live in the US? I don't agree that the poorest people in the US live better than people in brazilian favelas. Being poor in the US is seen as an individual's fault: you had your opportunity but failed to take advantage of it. The poor are often treated with contempt. That's not the case in Brazil, where there people are more understanding and supportive of the poor.
Whether the extremely poor live better in Brazil or in the US is very questionable.
See charts for twitter trends on Trendistic
I'm a blue collar worker so I am always amazed at the idea that somehow cheaper/freer/more useful tools are somehow bad for the economy. Man, cheap/free/better is GREAT to increase productivity. Like today, I have to go work on a medium sized diesel mower (kubota f2000 to be exact) that has some busted hydraulics. I have to stop my real productivity (mowing in this case),experience unexpected "downtime", the stuff that makes me my real coin, rummage through my tools, hope I have enough of everything I need to get to the busted part, then hope I can fix it without purchasing an entire new part. If there was a way I could replicate what I needed, make a copy, and if I knew I could just go get all the tools I needed for cheap/free, MAN 0 MAN would that be nice. I know I might have to pay a fee for a part, but if it's too much, and they want to charge me for the knowlege of how to deal with that part, and insist I can only use their brand tools to work on it, etc, it starts to slide into the sucky range. There needs a common sense balance here.
Charging through the nose for tools, I mean, say if I had to subscribe to tools, and had to constantly keep paying for tools that never improved much, and kept breaking, etc, would really suck. The REAL productivity would never get much better, I'd be stuck in tool/parts cost expense hell, productivty would keep dropping, not improving, and everyone starts to suffer.. Whenever the cost/price of tools and parts drops, and when the aggregation of the tools and parts (in this case a functioning tractor) increase, I am more productive, make more loot. Less downtime, less hassle, less headaches etc. I'm not out to make the tool companies rich,they can make a few clamss off me but not so much that it makes my job impossible. They have to stay real and keep their tools and parts good enough and cheap enough and functional enough for me to keep going in my real job. There's a symbiosis here that benfits all, but it would never happen if the tools and parts cost more than what the job makes. If it gets to the point that the aggregate is just not worth it, then that's that, it no longer is profitable for ANYONE concerned in the whole deal.
My point is, tools and parts are for the REAL WORK, they, in and of themselves, are NOT the entire real work. That's the major difference in see in the softwarez and IT world between closed/expensive/propietary and cheap(er)/free(er)/ and more open.
My best guess is, for example, the way-just a randomness here, say redhat- is approaching this situation fits closer to a profitable/workable arrangement for all concerned, shifting to non tangible products and tools. It's not perfect, not yet, but getting better and evolving to a happier medium that benefits all concerned. The over all societal benefit in having closer to free/cheap tools and parts, and tools and parts that people are free to modify for a particular purpose (say I need a wrench to fit into a tight spot, I can bend it in a vise to make it fit, no license or permission required, and I can share the design with others and still not suffer), then this is a good thing.
And I HAVE done this in meat space. There's an industry specific tool that's used all over that I designed and had built the first examples of.(It is not relevant the exact tool for this discussion) previous there were a lot of home made widgets that functioned similarily, but I made a professional one that was useful and durable enough that several companies are now producing and making them. I initially made a few bucks on it,and that was it, I recovered my costs basically and still own several of the first run, and have used them in *real* work, which was the original idea. I benefited initially from just borrowing a home made cob job example of the tool, then greatly improving on itwith my meagre 'developer" skills. But the design, etc, I just threw out to the world, no patents, copyrights, nuthin, just dumped it, free, because I understand having better tools is a good idea for the people who use to
I think that countries should be rated by the number of parties, not the number of dollars. In that case, Brazil wins.
If you actually read the line below it says:
If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?
No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.
What that means is that I CAN force you to pay whatever I want you to pay BUT then you can go off and undersell me. That makes it fine for contract work (one or two big payments) etc but not that good for Shrink Wrap as if it's get's popular someone else will try and sell it or give it away. What that means in real life is that if you try and GPL software you tend to sell the product + service which is standard once you get beyond shrinkwrap products. The besta example I can think of is ntop