Slashdot Mirror
Free Software Day Around The World
depechemodem writes "In a follow-up to Microsoft Leaves U.N. Standards Group, it appears that it may have been in reaction to the UN's sponsorship of the 1st annual Software Freedom Day in which its International Open Source Network (IOSN) will educate Asian users on the benefits
of Free and Open source Software (FOSS). FOSS promotes several high-profile applications including OpenOffice, Mozilla, MySQL, and Apache." An anonymous reader says of the U.N. effort, "Events will be organised in Bangladesh, Brunei, India, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam on Saturday, August 28th." According to another anonymous reader, "Go Open Source, funded by the Shuttleworth Foundation and HP, expects up to 10,000 visitors at the various Linux install-fests around South Africa this Saturday, says the Mail & Guardian."
Join us now and share the software;
You'll be free, hackers, you'll be free.
x2
Hoarders may get piles of money,
That is true, hackers, that is true.
But they cannot help their neighbors;
That's not good, hackers, that's not good.
When we have enough free software
At our call, hackers, at our call,
We'll throw out those dirty licenses
Ever more, hackers, ever more.
Join us now and share the software;
You'll be free, hackers, you'll be free.
x2
I instinctively cringe whenever I see something like this:
1st annual software Freedom Day
It might end up being a total flop, and not be bothered with again.
(I do of course hope its a success)
Next year I would be willing to consider it the 2nd Annual software freedom day, but lets get past the first one ummmmm first.
Its just one example of illogical phrases.
liqbase
Sorry... early morning thought.
What would happen if other things in the world were free? What if budding designers and contractors demostrated their skills by building free pubic buildings?
Musicians and artists already use the free model to start their careers.
AC
The fact that Microsoft hasn't seen the future just shows that they resemble the record industry in the most simple ways. Both MS and the record industry don't want to understand that soon they may have to change their buissness model, so they're trying to fight tooth and nail to keep the old one, they don't care about the cost to consumers or the economy.
Just more proof that if you don't adapt you die.
(PS: First Post)
When will anyone at slashdot start to check even the most basic stuff?!
actually here: http://softwarefreedomday.org/
there will be an Indonesia Goes Open Source Award (IGOS) 2004.
-- budi
One name is especially missing - Singapore, the country with the second fastest technological adaptation in the world, close seconds to the United States and Japan.
And that's the problem - everything in Singapore runs on Microsoft (our "world's first" automated train system [blue screen...!], traffic surveillance, etc etc). Nobody has a plausible explanation, but as a citizen I'm sorely disappointed.
Isn't it great to see people like Mark Shuttleworth (second space tourist, and the First African in Space) investing in these kinds of worthy programmes?
Now if only someone can convince the SA government that cheap internet is VERY important to the economy. At the moment communication in South Africa is controlled by Telkom, a monopoly. They charge more than R800 (about US$120) per month for ADSL, and they cap your bandwidth to 3 gig a MONTH. There's a good reason for the so called "digital divide" in South Africa, it's the prohibitive cost. There's a great site highlighting the grievances against Telkom, called Hellkom.
I hate to say it, but with BitTorrent and other various programs, every day is "Free Software Day".
Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
GO GO SOURCE RANGERS, MIGHTY COMPILIN' SOURCE RANGERS!
wouldn't that be us gentoo users? not mandrake ones?
damn lameness filter!!!! from hells heart i stab at thee!
It amazes me to no end how many people talk about "Linux apps" and Linux. We have the BSDs (which aren't encumbered by the GPL), we have other OSs like Syllable, NewOS, OpenBeOS, ReactOS. But it's always GNU/Linux that gets all the hype and press notes.
Mike Bouma, Amiga, Inc.
Dudes, no! That article is in error and the people in charge of IOSN have been desperately trying to correct them before it got into really wide circulation. They are giving publicity to Software Freedom Day which is the brainchild of someone else and can be found here:
www.softwarefreedomday.org
Note that there are no interviews with the staff of the IOSN or the UN in the article. No direct quotes. Some reporter just looked at the web site and jumped to the wrong conclusion.
Don't believe me? Email the IOSN people. They can be reached at sunil [at] iosn.net or khairil [at] iosn.net. They are the current torch bearers at the IOSN.
The UN is not "sponsoring" this. That implies far too much and is too dangerous a position to take. You can't imagine the UN would take such a controversial stance would you? However, the Free and Open Source Software section of the UN can widely publicize FOSS so long as they do not claim it is the UN's official position.
A new release just came out (2 CD-ROM's)
on 12 August 2004.
The idea is to give folks a chance to "try"
free software that's made for Windows...
Once they see how much better it is, they
just might give a free OS a try, later.
"Don't cause pain, give pleasure!"
How about a /. sponsored free software day, where we try to get all those /. readers still using *cough* windows *cough* to switch to something more open?
Novell (Suse Linux) India (Including other counties like Hong Kong and Australia), recently announces latest strategic and technical information seminar on Open Source and Linux technologies for enterprise computing.IBM also sponsors this seminar. What's more participants can win latest Linux based Motorola A760 mobile phone :)
The important thing is not to stop questioning --Albert Einstein.
'A United Nations-funded organization has produced a Linux desktop manual for novice PC users as part of an effort to encourage developing countries to use open-source software.' - ZDNet (http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5322002.html)
--- Yx3 = Delilah ---
OK, somebody PLEASE tell me how these things are connected. Seriously, this is a pretty pathetic attempt to spin a news story. This is a follow-up how? Are these two events connected in any way? If not, then please just report the stories. Or perhaps the tagline should be changed to "Speculation for Nerds".
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Perhaps I misunderstand, but my impression was that one of the main points behind the whole free (speech) software movement is that most other forms of information already are free.
That is to say: Software is in quite an unusual situation, because the machine instructions are not nearly as useful as the source code from which they were derived. This is not the same as something like a book or a song, because even though there may be copyright restrictions on the distribution, those who do get it can still see and manipulate the actual building blocks of the information once they have it... at the very least for their own personal use.
What the GPL and "free" software movement does among other things is to make sure that if someone distributes the software, then they must distribute the source version at the very least, to ensure that the person getting it has all the same rights and abilities that they would normally have with other types of information.
An architect or builder probably won't build a free building as you've suggested, because a building isn't information in the traditional sense. (At least if they do, we're talking about something on a fundamentally different level.) But if an architect were to design plans for a building and sell them to a developer, the developer would naturally be able to adjust and perhaps continue re-distribute those plans... at which point whoever gets them can continue to do the same. Something like this isn't automatically possible with software, because it can be distributed in a form that can be used but not easily changed.
Similarly, some artists are giving their work away under a variety of free licenses, but those licenses aren't revolutionary to art in the same way that the GPL is revolutionary to software... (although perhaps they are in other ways). With or without those licenses, it's still naturally possible (legal or not) to obtain a song or an artwork, and derive something else from it. This is not so easy with closed source software.
I think the difference is that software information is directly used by computers whereas other blocks of information (at least those that are normally associated with distribution and trading) are directly used by people. You have to understand the words in a book to make use of it, but you don't have to understand the machine instructions in a software application... so the readable edition can be held back. Many software developers/businesses take advantage of the extra control-by-obscurity over the information that this technicality gives them. If we all had logic brains and could easily understand and manipulate the compiled software that was bought off the shelves, it wouldn't be as much of an issue. Among other things, the GPL attempts to remove that technicality and make software like most other types of information.
I'm not exactly a strong advocate of free software besides using it for most things. If anyone thinks I've missed something important, please elaborate.
in which its International Open Source Network (IOSN) will educate Asian users on the benefits of Free and Open source Software
That's kinda funny. From what I hear, Microsoft products are all "free" (as in beer) in many parts of Asia.
You'd think that Microsoft would be thrilled to replace its products with FOSS ones on Chinese computers, for example. With a piracy rate over 90% in China, Microsoft must be "losing" billions of dollars there every year. If Chinese users simply switch over to Linux, they'll instantly become legitimate, fully licensed users instead of software pirates, Microsoft will no longer "lose" billions! What enterprising business wouldn't like to stick its rival with a market where piracy is rampant?
Erm, no, I guess that won't work. Chinese users switching to Linux means Microsoft suddenly loses control of the largest emerging market in the world, and the only thing it'll actually lose is the opportunity to wring as much money out of China as it can. And since you can't lose what you don't have, Microsoft doesn't actually lose money in China, it just doesn't realize all the potential sales. Microsoft would likely lose more sales in China if users there rampantly copied someone else's product than it does now with users rampantly copying Microsoft products.
The story is wrong, wrong, wrong and needs corrections.
I know the founder of Software Freedom Day, it is not the IOSN, they are simply supporting and organizing several teams. The correct site for Software Freedom Day is here:
www.softwarefreedomday.org
Also, please provide a source for the speculation that Microsoft withdrew because of this or retract the article. I think it is simply unhealthy speculation.
Software should be free because of its availibility and no-existant costs of production. I am considering production to be separate from development. Production is nothing more then running the ftp server so poeple can download it. Software is so cheep to manufacture it really should be gratis. Development on the other hand costs time and money. Licensing it is and always will be a stupid scheme because its always going to be pirated and or you will not at some point be able to compete with your previous versions. People simply won't want to pay to upgrade any more.
FOSS has done alot of great things but the gratest projects were born out of need and then generously gifted to the rest of society so that others can enjoy the work.
So what if your business is software and as such you have few specific needs? Then create your own market. Other industries have figured this out. For example: Make an inexpensive cartoon show, that can't likely sell enough advertizing time at first for you to break even. Get people hooked for a little while. Start selling card games and books, and posters related to the cartoon. Profit!
Software firms should be able to do the same. Make a hopefully killer app. Give it away create installed user base. Let companies and individuals pay $$$ you to implement feature X or customization y for them. Wait a release or two an d fold those features into the mainline(you have to get your userbase to upgrade so you not stuck maintaining really old trees). Repete above untill interest in the product dies off, then start on something new. Being open source can't individuals and companies implement stuff on their own and leave you out of the loop. Sure but if your app is of good quality and is substantial enough to be "commercial quality" chances are nobody can do a better job as quickly or cheaply as you can. The other reality is that if some third party does create a valuable patch you can fold it into your mainline imediately, takeing away any third party market for forprofit development on your product insuring you will have a monopoly withing the sphear of your own product.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
However,
In fact, they have, for long. For one thing you have the FSF/UNESCO Free Software Directory, and UNESCO has had a Free Software Portal, AFAIK for many years. Full with gnus and penguins. There are many people who really Get It in UNESCO, who realize that Free Software is all about promotion of Education, Science and Culture, and proprietary software is not.Furthermore, they (I think it was the UNESCO, couldn't find the link), issued a very critical report on DRM, exposing it for the pending cultural disaster it is.
Unfortunately, this understanding doesn't penetrate throughout the UN. On the other extreme, you have WIPO, which is completely dominated by a *cough*superpower*cough*, takes their orders from entities like USPTO, is not open to debate and works tirelessly to strip away the rights you thought you had to participate in the cultural and scientific advancements of society.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
Maybe the UN should sponsor their own Linux distribution. They could call it "UN-ix".
Oh, wait a minute...
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
I know this is a bit off topic, but why is it that MySQL gets attention that PostgreSQL doesn't? MySQL, as a database, sucks ass compared to postgres.
I'm sure there are lots of other examples like this. Does it have to do with the fact that there's a more commercially oriented company behind the MySQL development? If this is the case, what does this bode for the future of FOSS projects that don't have some commercial backing?
Beware of geeks bearing formulas.
Sometime in the 1940's, Nestle Corp approach Mrs. Ruth Wakefield, and purchased her famous 'Toll House Cookie' recipe. They named it the 'Nestle TollHouse Cookie."
Even though they paid handsomly for the recipe, they started printing it on the bag of chocolate chips, and giving it away. Why would Nestle do this?
Nestle does not make money by selling cookies, and they do not make money selling cookbooks. they make money by (among other things) selling Chocolate Chips.
By giving away the recipe, people not had a reason to buy their chips. They made money, indirectly, by purchasing that recipe and giving it away.
In a very real sense, they 'open sourced' this recipe. Since recipes are not patentable, all they could do was 'trademark' the name 'TollHouse'. If you look at a bag of Hershey's chips, Ghiardelli chips, etc, they all have the same recipe, just named differently.
You can use this recipe with no obligation... you could break up your own favorite chocolate bar, and not have to buy any chips. You could leave the chips out entirely, and add M&Ms if you want. If you can make your own cookie for about 15 cents, why would you go to a store in a mall about pay a dollar for a cookie (US Currency)? You are paying for convenience, labor, expertise, etc.
This is how Open Source makes money.
Now, information is fundamentally different than tangible property. With tangible property, you don't have it once you give it to someone. Information is not like that. So how does this change the equation?
Lets say I'm building a house. I may have to pay for the bricks and mortar, but how much does that really cost compared to the price of the house? The material for an individual brick is cheap (but not free). BUT, it takes labor, time, and expetrise to move it to where it needs to be, and assemble many of them into a structure. THIS is the majority of the cost. If I were to own the brick factory AND be the bricklayer, it might be 'worth it' for me to give away the bricks in order to charge for my time.
Open Source philosophies are not new... they just seem to be thought of as new because of the impact they are having in a relatively new marketplace.
-db