Slashdot Mirror
MIT Urges Brazilian Government to Use Linux
sebFlyte writes "MIT's Media Lab has written to the Brazillian government (who is looking into a method to get its citizens cheap, high quality PCs) and has urged them to use Linux. From the article: 'Free software is far better on the dimensions of cost, power and quality...if the source code is proprietary, it is hidden from the general population. This robs them of a tremendous source for learning.'"
It isn't like MIT is going to recommend BSD is it?
if the source code is proprietary, it is hidden from the general population. This robs them of a tremendous source for learning
:)
Incredible: it's the best argument I've heard about it. I don't really like the usage of the words "rob" and how emphatical it sounds but it's right.
Anyway, I learnt on an Acorn RiscPC (closed source OS) which was really ergonomical and it was also good so I sugest he should revise his consideration : open source is good but ergonomy also is and I'm afraid that, because progresses still have to be made, they can't argue much on this point.
Anyway I think the World would be better if the Brazilians heard that argument and accepted the principle.
Hooray for the MIT !
Trolling using another account since 2005.
The title says it all!
The MIT guys just want a reason to be invited to the carnival!
You go guys!
Maybe there even is a tux-at-carnivale department at MIT...
I know that Linux is used widely throughout the government in Brazil for their work, it seems only logical that they would load Linux on the machines they are distributing throughout their country for the poor.
Here in the UK the waste of money in the public sector on MS and other software licences is huge! If only we took such a forward thinking approch.
I found the article very encouraging. I think there's a danger of Linux appearing as something that's a cheap alternative used in the third world because they can't afford "first rate" proprietary software. This is patronizing both to Linux and to third world countries. It's great to see intelligent arguments to choose open source beyond simple cost being made by a government, as in If the source code is proprietary, it is hidden from the general population. This robs them of a tremendous source for learning.
I know you're just kidding, but Half-Life 2 does run on Linux too. :)
Don't call me a cowboy, and don't tell me to slow down!
Don't be so silly - we get excellent value for our IT services - it's a snip, at £48,000,000,000 per year to manage 160,000 government computers - I mean, seriously, that's only £300,00 per computer, per year, which is pretty minimal - and there's no such thing as 'free' software - if there was, microsoft would have told us about it.
Anyway, I'm in charge of government IT purchasing here, and it's just fine, thanks - oh, hang on, gotta go, the kids are playing on my gold plated runway again.
The article does not mention anywhere that ``MIT Urges Brazilian Government to Use Linux'',. MIT seems to suggest to use ``Free software''. I wish people would stop equating the two; there are many, many other free software or open source projects that are not linux, and I believe it's harmful to the overall open source community to continue to enforce the notion that Open Source == Linux (and linux only).
-- "Tradition is the illusion of permanence."
Give them email accounts, and they will quickly fill these bank accounts:
"Dear Sir, Confidential Business Proposal Having consulted with my colleagues and based on the information gathered from the Nigeri^H^HBrazillian Chambers Of Commerce And Industry, I have the privilege to request your assistance to transfer the sum of $47,500,000.00 (forty seven million, five hundred thousand United States dollars) into your accounts. The above sum resulted from an over-invoiced contract, executed, commissioned and paid for about five years (5) ago by a foreign contractor. This action was however intentional and since then the fund has been in a suspense account at The Central Bank Of Nig^H^H^HBrazillian Apex Bank."
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
While that may be true for the vast majority of the population, it's an insult to the minority who will tinker with the code of the OSS they are exposed to, get a taste for it, and go on to develop a home-grown software industry as a result.
How very true! Somewhere out there, in Brazil, or anywhere else, is a kid who wants to learn how an OS works, and wants to try his hand at making it better. Who the hell are Megacorps to deny that kid the right to do that, just because "the majority doesn't need to know".
By the way, Marcello Tossati, maintainer of the 2.4 kernel, is from Brazil. He works for the local Brazilian distro called Connectiva. How could any of this have been possible if the world only had a shoddy Microsoft playpen to play in, with the nicest toys only meant for the privileged few employed by Megacorp to write operating systems?
No kidding. That's always been the least compeeling linux argument for me (and I say this as a user) - it is NOT possible for even a college trained programmer to go in and start playing with even a small OSS project.
Then why was the Brazilian kid Marcelo Tossatti, not even gone to college yet at the time, elected by Linus Torvalds as maintainer of the freakin' LINUX KERNEL (2.4.x)?
The openness doesn't hurt, so if doesn't benefit you, don't whine about it.
Could somebody please explain how this:
"MIT's Media Lab has written to the Brazillian
government (who is looking into a method to get
its citizens cheap, high quality PCs) and has
urged them to use Linux."
Was derived from this:
From the article: 'Free software is far better on
the dimensions of cost, power and quality...if
the source code is proprietary, it is hidden from
the general population. This robs them of a
tremendous source for learning.'"
They said free software, not GPL or GNU/Linux
You could run Hurd or BSD.
Why is it that everyone associates Free == Linux.
Remember when MIT was all about mathematics, science and engineering rather than a international public policy think-tank?
No I don't. MIT has always been influential in areas of policy, especially as it relates to technology, science, linguistics, media, etc. If MIT wasn't a great source of knowledge, nobody would care what they think.
Because I am a big fan of it, I would like to take a moment to plug MIT's OpenCourseWare, where you have access to MIT's entire course catalog, including assignments, videos, and other materials. Want to learn Japanese? Go for it. Or perhaps Electromagnetic Fields, Forces, and Motion is more to your liking. Have at thee.
MIT has shown their dedication to an open academic atmosphere and the benefits for the public of easy access to knowledge. Their endorsement of free software here is completely consistent with their previous actions.
Good for them.
I hate to sound like RMS but you do realize that when most people say Linux they mean more than just the kernel?
All of the software is open. You can go look at the code for ls or the Gimp or whatever you want. Yes only a few hardcore geeks will care about the internals of kernel code but your missing the point.
With all of the software being open you can always look at what is going on. You can always change whatever you want. You can always verify that your code is free of spyware/trojans/whatever.
Having access to the code is not just one thing it's a lot of things and I don't think you really get it.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
No, its like saying that hiding Quantum Physics textbooks from the general public robs them of learning.
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
Saying that hiding the source for an Operating System from the general public robs them of learning is like saying keeping Quantum Physics textbooks away from six year olds robs them of learning.
Worst analogy ever, and inaccurate.
I am a successful software engineer. I started my interest in computers primarily on a system called CDC Plato, and later on the TRS-80, both which had the development environment available and integrated into the OS by default, not unlike most Linux installations. The convenience of being able to tinker with software in varying degrees of involvement without having to acquire extra, expensive tools and exponentially larger learning curves made all the difference.
I really feel sorry for kids today trying to learn programming. There are no IDEs conveniently available within Windows by default. At best, one can hope to master the user interface of a particular version of some proprietary software -- all of which is subject to instant obsoletion upon release of a subsequent version.
Open source software such as Linux, particularly outside the US, is really coming into its own. I had a bit of an epiphany recently that I'd like to share with you. For the longest time we've been obsessing about Linux on the desktop, and watching things like Google Zeitgeist to try to figure out what our market share is and when it's going to finally take that sharp upturn that signals the beginning of the end of the Microsoft monopoly.
But what has happened in the meantime? As Linux users, we find ourselves missing things from the ball-and-chains world less and less. I, for one, haven't needed to use proprietary software for anything in a few years now. What does this mean? It means that the Linux and open source world is now completely self-sustaining. Whether or not we have numbers that compare to Apple's and Microsoft's, we still have numbers big enough that we're here to stay, and there will probably always be enough new, good software to keep us going now. That's a comforting thing to know. (But I still think it'll get bigger.)
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!