Slashdot Mirror
MS Has Free Software Removed From U.N. Paper
linumax writes "Microsoft asked for references to free software to be removed from a document presented at last week's UN World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) conference, the software giant admitted on Friday. The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is unhappy that the document was changed and claims that even though it was on the panel discussing the document, it was not made aware of Microsoft's changes. The document (2.8MB PDF), known as the Vienna Conclusions, discusses issues around IT and creativity. The original draft of the document discussed how the free software model is changing the way people do business."
Like, are we supposed to act surprised here? Bill and Steve and crew continue to bully the planet. Film at eleven.
Warren
Well the paper might have originally described how free software works but what was done clearly shows how commercial software works.
did you just see that? Microsoft's crew just served FSFE crew.
'Go for the eyes, Boo, go for the eyes, aaarrrrrrrr!' -- Minsc
MS is trying to stop the sea with its hands as they say, all it will manage to do is perhaps to slow it a bit, but everybody knows that nothing will stop the revolution. In a certain way this is pathetic.
How exactly are you going to "play dirty" with Microsoft?
And will your "playing dirty" result in better open source software? I doubt it. That's why it is probably best for the community to just continue producing superior products, and eventually people will migrate the to the best (and likely open source) products.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
It's just so absurd, they walk around, flash some cash and get what they want done. This all after the whole european antitrust thing... I find it shocking they CAN have this removed. I wonder this isn't classed as attempted monopolisation, they are, after all trying to lock out other competitors from publicity.
~HTP~ Hug that tux
..is that for every token gesture they make to try and make the open source and free software movements warm to them and like them (opening up the next document formats in Office, etc), there is this kind of shit going on.
Sorry Microsoft.. you've earned your reptuation as underhanded, dirty, cheating assholes - and stupid stunts like this just continue to prove that you can't teach an old dog new tricks.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
I am sure Microsoft was just doing whatever was in our best interest. :)
MS knows they cannot compete with open source software...... why else do they lie every chance they get, about it?
..... and they are very persistant about it.
Recently there was an article regarding a clone researcher being looked upon as being bad, when the fact of teh matter is that he only tried to hide the dishonesty of his associates upon his finding out they had lied regarding their donorship.
Now that's a case of one level disconnection from the initial deception. And consider what happened to him for it.
This MS constant lying is first degree deception, outright intentional
So why are they still in business?
Or is this only more proof that they are not genuine researchers or innovators, just used car salesmen selling the research and innovation others outside of them have done, as their own?
Its ok to lie, if you are a salesperson, but not a genuine researcher..... right?
References to free software and Linux were removed from a UN document after Microsoft claimed that such software aims to 'make it impossible to make any income on software as a commercial product'
Hello, Microsoft! Welcome to the post-GPL economy, where software income is based on services!
This is the same UN that should run the DNS root servers since they would be more independent than ICANN?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Stands to reason (at least in M$'s eyes). It just illustrates the concerns about how OO software has sufficient quality to exceed 99% of the users needs.
Who needs free-software, when we have Microsoft.
/. is good for you.
Guess the "ignore us" and "laugh at us" phases are officially over.
got changed to this:
These are U.N. peole (think University board members - only more useless) who play with words for a living.
"Nothing to see here, move along."
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
...reason why I believe the UN is powerless in a world where it's purpose is to envoke change and to stick up for those recieving abuse. It has been seen that the UN has failed in it's mission to protect those in the undeveloped worlds from harsh conditions. The US itself sticks its thumb against it's nose and wiggles it's fingers in the UN's direction. Now yes, the UN does alot of good, but as long as it has support from one of the big guys in the world. We see it's failure to work due to a 'big guy' once again with this, and I must say I am quite ashamed of it.
do.what.promptcmds
Don't be fooled by those "market power should not be used to dominate and restrict the free exchange of ideas", this phrase can mean of anyone but established content providers.
Immediately followed by...
ICT x Monopolies = Digital Divide This document is moronic and it's authors are nothing but paying lip service to their sponsors, Corporate America.
First of all Microsoft is the largest private sponsor for the SMSI, the simple fact that they where allowed to do this is allready damning.
(of course they will be able to say that it is just the tunisian government that asked them, and they are just being nice, and it is even true that of course the tunisian government is clueless enough to do this, but the UN should have refused, but then probably the US representatives would have claimed that the UN is against free market, and unfair to nice US corporations.)
Second the fact that the redactors accepted to remove the mention can be due to incompetence or corruption, or both, the strengh of M$ in developping countries is tremendous, for no really good reason, except that they have the money needed to pay nice "study trips".
Finally most probably the paper will not be corrected, and in a year or two what will be used as a base for policy setting will be the "simplified for easy reading" paper.
And the current protestation will be forgotten.
And it's also yet anothing silent but glaring admission my Microsoft that they are VERY concerned about what is happening in the Free/Open software world. Perhaps they realize that there are several fronts they can't compete on with FOSS and would rather expunge it from view instead of, oh I don't know... COMPETING? Personally, I think competition is overrated and would rather see a more centralized system of forced cooperation by a world government. But that's just me... ;p Since a lot of you yahoos here are into "competition", what do you have to say for your capitalist masters Microsoft? (BTW... I'm not a commie either) And one last thing. Bill Gates... fuck you yet again.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
However, living in a world of new digital economy does not mean that one can break all business rules. ... The rights of creators and the protection of their intellectual property require permission and compensations ... Quality contents should pay back their creators; and not just the intermediaries. They ought not to be nor should they be seen as being available for free. Such appearances are demeaning to creators and producers, authors and developers, and they deny them the fruits of their efforts and work.
/. too smart to fall for that little diversion, aren't we?
This was extracted from the document under discussion. I would have expected this forum to be much more upset about this transparent advocacy of DRM than it would be about some trifling changes regarding free software. If I didn't know better I might think the disclosure that Microsoft had the "free software" language stricken from the document was done deliberately to draw attention away from it's other content. But we in
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
M$ has been playing dirty since the days Bill posed for "Teen Beat" magazine http://blog.monkeymethods.org/2005/01/bill-gates-s trikes-pose-for-teen-beat.html
This sig is inappropriate in a post-9/11 world.
This sig is inappropriate in a post-9/11 world.
"Microsoft asked for references to free software to be removed from a document presented at last week's UN World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) conference, the software giant admitted on Friday"
Which was worse? The fact that Microsoft askef for it to be removed or the fact that the UN happily agreed to it?
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
Digital Rights*cof*Restrictions*cof* Management sys$Digital Rights*cof*Restrictions*cof* Management
...point them at this story.
If the UN were "communist", or any other relative or variant of socialism, they wouldn't allow one of the world's most famous capitalist entities to push them around.
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
In a linked article in the article, Charles mentions that Linux is for "dorks".
Every time I read that "Linux is behind, incapable" or whatever, I take note that they don't understand shit. First off, Linux is a small part of the Desktop setup. The other thing I note is I'm sitting here just happy on my Desktop running Gentoo. It does everything I want [which is more than WinXP can deliver anyways] and it didn't cost me a dime other than time to set it up.
It's good that people are catching MSFT in their lies and poor behaviour but for every MSFT person saying "Linux is bad" there is just another person using an OSS kernel with OSS userland tools scratching their heads. And in the end it's really just that. Some MSFT guy saying something. Sure there are people who buy it without question but there are still more that are aware of it and people taking action on it.
It's just far far far too late. I mean all the negative press in the world won't make the millions of OSS users switch. And as long as there is 1 OSS user out there, it won't die.
So go ahead MSFT, act all desperate marketting and FUD'ing against OSS. You could be better served by actually delivering stuff of value. It sucks that an OS has lost "value" [in light of Linux or BSD + OSS userland] but that's it. No clever amount of marketting will make something that has no value all of a sudden have value.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
You are quit correct. MS is far better at playing dirty than any of us will ever be.
What if you are a government official?
Well, you might form a panel which includes forces in the technology sector, like MS and the FSF. Seems reasonable.
How does this not resemble exactly what is described?
Microsoft didn't "censor" anything, they made a comment fair and unbiased. The original contributioned pinned one example and the correction made a more general statement that was more true. Nothing wrong with that; but this is /. where everything Microsoft does is wrong and evil.
-everphilski-
So where is the original draft? Why doesn't some unhappy person release it on the web with a side-by-side comparison to the final draft? Done this way it should truly embarass someone.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
That's odd... My friend BitTorrent tells me most of Microsoft's software is free, too. I wonder why they'd act against their own interests like this?
A free verse rap-off between Steve Balmer and Richard Stallman?
No.
If companies like Microsoft can change an official U.N. paper so easily, there is no way ordinary (non-geek) people will even know about Open Source alternatives. And everything that is propagated as "free" (either as in speech or as in beer) is considered "dangerous" (like: "there is no way software can be free, it MUST contain spyware or some other malicious threat. Microsoft says so!")
Really, I hear these things every damned day. I have a really hard time telling people that installing Win XP instead of Win 2k on their PII-233 is NOT making their PC run faster, so no one on earth is going to convince these people to use or trust OSS (unless you can teach them the difference between OSS and Freeware).
There are two options left, both have their problems: play dirty (DDoS-ing windows.com, releasing viri that attack Win-XP boxen etc) and decent marketing (some money-problems there...). Firefox is doing great using the latter technique, But I'll confess that I feal attracted to the first on days like this.
I really think the OSS-movement needs one body with some serious money that play the marketing trick on the world. And I also think that is not going to happen if "we" can't settle debates like "vi vs emacs", "GPL vs BSD", "KDE vs GNOME" and "linux vs BSD".
Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
And yet people continue to buy the latest offerings from M$ while this type of thing continues. Jesus, if you care about free software and the philosophy behind it all, STOP FEEDING the monster you so despise! There's a reason people like Gandhi are so few and so famous, because most people are too chicken shit to stand up for something worthwhile, something larger than themselves. They would much rather blow off steam by typing a few words of hate online about a company before sitting down to play with a gadget offered from the same company they claim to hate! What we need to rock the boat are television commercials and newspaper ads (like the Firefox NYT ad for example) about the virtues of FOSS. People volunteering to set up booths/tables near high foot traffic areas to hand out informational materials and Linux install/live CDs would also go a long way to spreading the word. Wikis are useful and cool but if more effort was devoted to pushing the FOSS philosophy out in the real world, maybe so many people wouldn't be brainwashed into one corporation's way of thinking.
The US government gives 0 credibility to the UN, I know some other governments do give it more attention, but really, is a bureaucratic body where you want to look for advice? You will get the least common denominator that offends nobody, watered down BS.
No one here gets out alive
He who controls the past, controls the future;
he who controls the present, controls the past
And he who can have reports and news stories edited on a whim, controls the present.
For those of you who are interested in the entire story and its background, here are the links:
The best overall analysis and description of the situation so far was written by Germanys largest IT news provider, the Heise Verlag. They have the story online in both English and German.
9. Refer all charity organizations and any group strapped for cash to Linux. Every year when my kid's school does parent-teacher conferences, I never fail to bring up open-source after the teachers mention school budget cutbacks. (there's always a good opportunity to work that in when the teachers apologize for not getting the reports printed out because XP crashed - again!)
8. Drop IE-compatibility from your websites. Use this: http://www.stopie.com/stopie/home/ which will refer viewers to download Firefox. Aren't you tired of having to make your website botched up just to work for the lamest browser on the web, anyway?
7. Earn money by referring people to Firefox with Google toolbar while you're at it: http://downhillbattle.org/node/view/554 Who *says* there's no money in free software?
6. Go to the Ubuntu site - the page where you can order an Ubuntu disk sent to you for free - and fill in RANDOM ADDRESSES. Mystery gifts from the software fairy.
5. Anybody with a CD burner and a Linux fetish will have old Linux CDs they don't use anymore - like when you've updated to the new version. Take these CDs with you to the library, and tuck them into the Windows books in the computer books section.
4. While you're in the library, be sure to fill out those request/suggestion forms for new books to buy with the latest Linux books you're just dying to check out - and hasn't "DOS for Dummies" and "Windows 3.1 - the complete reference" gotten old, anyway?
3. Never pass a computer store without walking in and asking for software titles that run on Linux. The idea is to make them aware that Linux users *would* spend *some* money, if only anybody cared to do business with us.
2. Teach your kids Linux. This is the easiest - kids will absorb Linux like little sponges, all you have to do is install it and stand back.
1. Go to second-hand stores such as Salvation Army and Goodwill. Find a used computer on sale plugged in and running. Stick Knoppix on it. Reboot it. Walk away whistling. Trust me, I've spoken to employee and customer alike at these places - nobody would ever know the difference!
The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is unhappy that the document was changed and claims that even though it was on the panel discussing the document, it was not made aware of Microsoft's changes
I may just be being cynical here, but if the FSFE were on the panel, and didn't notice that the document had references to "free software" removed, it strikes me that a) they weren't doing a very good job, b) the free software mentions weren't important enough to be noticed anyway.
Nothing of what he discuss "from the article" is part of the article. Most of it is just usual Microsoft propagande, but not mentioned in any of the links.
Do the math:
Amount of campaign contributions made by FSF: $0
Amount of campaign contributions made by Microsoft: > $0
We elect our leaders and they appoint people who make decisions. Why do you continue to expect them to benefit you, who contributed $0 to the winning party, if the opposite decisions are desired by people/entities that contributed?
Think of it this way: politicians and those they appoint want to keep their jobs. They will help those that contribute to them keeping their jobs instead of strangers who didn't contribute at all.
What is your goal? To remain poor and whine about injustices? Or to get rich and use your wealth to fight injustices?
Right now, our world is ruled by wealthy campaign contributors that are addicted to entitlements that are not available to the general public. Remember the good ole days when we were focused on cutting welfare for lazy poor people? Why the heck aren't we focused on cutting welfare for the wealthy? If most jobs are created by small businesses, why are most of the tax breaks going to a handful of large multi-national corporations?
You know the answer. The small handful are well-organized, well-funded, and highly focused on helping politicians get elected while the general public is distracted by abortion, religion, gays and other matters. We are distracted while they attempt to rape social security which we EARNED and PAID INTO.
If you want to change the world, objectively look at how the game is played and do something effective instead of whining. Focus on getting rich first (fix up your own damned life first), then use your wealth to make a difference. To remain poor out of laziness or out of a desire to feel self-righteous is extremely selfish if you live in a country where wealth-creation is available to anyone who focuses on that goal.
An entitlement-addicted society was annoying when those who received entitlements were dirt poor--when those receiving entitlements are filthy rich, it is absolutely disgusting. Do something about it by getting rich and getting the right people elected. You can't do this if your own life is a mess.
Probably the best, most concise comment I have read on /. all year. :o)
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
Free software is commercial software.
Perhaps you meant to say proprietary software instead of "commercial" software.
Digital Citizen
Hey now, microsoft doesn't suck all the time
But seriously though, googling for "Microsoft doesn't suck" on Slashdot brings up three results, of which two are the same.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
The saddest thing about the U.N. at the moment though is the fall from grace of the once eminent Kofi Annan.
Wow, the guys at microsoft are really scared so much that they're becoming irrational:
Just a question, how many of you have ever written free software explicitly to put a company (say, MS) out of business?
Maybe you wrote a program after seeing a commercial implementation, but probably only because you wanted to improve on it or make it available for your favourite os. OS software is written because there is a need for it, not to push others out of business.
Yes there are other companies using open source as a business strategy. A strategy that works well against competitors like microsoft, but clearly has its own pitfalls as well...
so please Bill, keep your paranoia at home and stop messing with politics
The only way to fight a rabid dog is to put it down. Use a gun!
But Atticus Finch, who used the gun, was a really a lawyer. The reversed symbolism here is killing me. Can somebody please bring in an English Lit professor from the EFF to clear this up?
calc
-everphilski-
Yet another attempt of Microsoft to screw over the Nigerian school kids which they've allegedly helped over the past decade. If you recall earlier this year, M$ said they would gladly give away computers to Nigerian school children if they paid for the version of the Windows operating system that was loaded.
Now if some of the students are fortunate enought to pay for the operating system, M$ comes back and wants to tell them that there is no open-source alternative that is less expensive.
I suppose the next step for Microsoft is to start marketing it's own brand of "Vichy water".
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
That sounds like a very reasonable thing to do. It means that Microsoft can put forward a solid, well though out and reasoned debate. In essence, what Microsoft are saying is this:
"Nyeh, nyeh, nyeh - I can't hear you, I can't hear you!"
write some NASTY windoze viruses.
every time a spyware or spread-only worm gets loose modify and re-release with a drive scrambling or drive encrypting timebomb
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
I would be very interested in having a reference of all negative things Microsoft has done. Is there such a thing? I've googled around for a few minutes, but have not yet found anything that lists it all.
Only problem about finding the computer books at the library, and sticking Knoppix, Damn Small Linux, Gnoppix, etc. live cd's in them, is that there are not that many books on the subject at my library. I did donate one,
"basic basic" or some such title. (did not include a cd)
The chances of a grandma actually checking out one of those books and making off with a Knoppix cd, and figuring out what it is for, going home and booting it up successfully are slim.
Here is another idea: make up a bunch of copies, and stick them in mailboxes, together with a short card of instructions. Is that legal? Would most of the people have "AOL" boxes, that only have "winmodems" in them? Or do we target broadband neighborhoods...
Another idea: stick them on windshields in shopping centers alongside the $5.00 Pizza and Vinyl Siding flyers.
I am open to more ideas. Anyone?
Rapidweather's Linux Screenshots.
Too bad I don't have mod points today.
---
"Man, when the day comes, count me in with the robot smashers." - Anonymous Coward
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
What do you expect....
From a company that claims your stealing from them when you buy a white-box (naked PC) computer. Even though you might be putting linux, OS/2, or a older version of Windows that you own on the box.
From a company you have to ask permission to install the software that you purchased.
That the software can disable itself once you change your computer seems to be of no big deal to people other than myself.
From a company who wants to install DRM to limit the DVD quality of your movies.
From a company who won't fix previous versions of thier software just so that you have to purchase something newer.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
Really it seems a bit shallow to start speculating on what's happened here. Claiming that "The UN happily agreed to it" is synonymous to claiming that the "US government" happily agreed to every tiny thing promoted by any and every employee or official associated with it. Clearly Microsoft got their way, but it's unclear just how involved the UN as an entity actually was. It could just as easily have been an accidentally flawed process that would have been stopped if anyone further up had realised what was going on.
The UN is an organisation like any other -- it's made up of its members. Its primary function, above anything else, is to provide a structure so that countries can communicate and cooperate with each other. Things don't happen spontaneously to achieve this, though. They happen because its members make them happen.
If you or anyone else want to change how the UN deals with Microsoft, perhaps its time to rally your nation's government, as your most direct UN representative, to speak out against the influence that Microsoft appears to've had in this case and actually make a difference. Point out and make a big thing of the FSF's complaints.
Of course, if you're from the US, I doubt you're likely to get the US Government speaking out against Microsoft in any shape or form. Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar company that brings billions of dollars into the US economy every year, and consuming almost no limited resources to achieve this. If free software put and end to Microsoft, it would also take a noticible amount of money from the US economy. Personally I think that the real problem is just as much to do with the systems in the US that allow Microsoft to act the way it does in the first place.
Yeah, see "Top Ten way to "play dirty" against Microsoft. If for no other reason than because you'll be one of the few who *get* it.
Then moved the AOL CDs to the gay/lesbian community periodicals.
You really should be kinder to the gay/lesbian community. A better idea would be to move it to the Business section.
Anonymous Coward
From about.com: "The 5 stages of Grief"
{begin quote}
Definition: Elisabeth Kübler-Ross M.D. developed the five-stage grief model that we use today. It is a guide to the stages that a dying or grieving person goes through while accepting death.
The five stages are:
Denial
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance
{end quote}
Microsoft in the Denial stage: "Get the facts"
Microdoft in the Anger stage: Microsoft sues Taxachusetts, Finland, etc. - large customers who begin to seek alternatives
Microsoft in the Bargaining stage: Microsoft offers the Office XML format as a standard, submits it to committees
Microsoft in the Depression stage: I don't know what they'll do but you'll see their stock tank and Ballmer lose his hair (oops, too late!)!
Microsoft in the Acceptance stage: Microsoft offers Windows under a dual-licensing scheme: Commercial and GPL. Continues plans to port to a Linux-like kernel and proclaims that open source is the best thing since sliced bread. Continues to exist through consulting, support, and related services. Microsoft is now the Good Guy!
(note to n00b mods: this is a funny, not a troll. If you don't get it, or you disagree, just ignore and move past. If you get it, chuckle. If you agree, chuckle. This is merely an attempt at humor and not an attempt to ignite a flame war. Thank you for your kind understanding, and use your mod points wisely!)
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Of course you would [most of you anyways] and yet you're complaining here
The difference is most of us would remove anything that points to wishes of some company, that stands against FOSS directly or generally, that praises drm or gives some advantage for any company against some other. This document is not a businness contract, no corporation should be let to interfere into its contents, but as things stand american buy-everything style is not something anyone can stop. And if I seem biased, yes I am biased, since I'm not exactly pro-american regarding some businness and political style coming from that direction.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
I think that the "pragmatic approach" that you seem to like in proprietary software companies in many cases amounts to bribing decision makers in order to make them select the proprietary product that offered the higher bribe.
Of course until free software proponents begin implementing these same practices (which seems rather unlikely due to the voluntary nature of most free software projects) they will be regarded as "a group of eccentrics on a religious crusade" by those corrupt decision makers.
"The US has three (1,3,4),"
"1: Putting nation or race above the individual"
Really? I just don't see that. There is racism every where but it is decreasing and more the acts of individuals not government as a whole.
"3: Utilization of government force to suppress dissent"
Suppress dissent? That is why we have people with anti bush bumper stickers and famous people calling for him to impeached? I don't really think you know what "suppress dissent" means.
"4: Economic and social controls"
Again every government has these. Social controls are called laws. Economic controls are things like taxes and regulations. To compare the US or the UK to a fascist dictatorship is so out there that it is actually insulting to those that have suffered and opposed true totalitarian governments.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Where'd the file go? Link's dead now. Either it's /.dead or they pulled it.
You will need alternative, or else Microsoft would double the price of Microsoft Office/Windows next time.
the UN isn't about power, it's about compromise. I'm always amazed when people think of the UN as some organization with powers that will solve every problem on earth. We solve problems by finding common ground, not by walking around with a big stick threatning to invade everyone (hitler)
did you forget to take your meds?
Amazing how far M$ will go. It incenses me. I was at WSIS in Tokyo as well as some other similar congresses (for example the Science and Technology in Society Forum - stsforum.org - a year ago). I can tell you that free software is a major topic and at the WSIS Japan leg it was not just one person who picked it up either. One thing of interest is that while it is obvious that free software is useful, it is not a be all and end all if you talk to people from Africa, at least a man from Nigeria mentioned problems like firewood and brain drain to cities was a major problem and IT is not the sole solution.
Also a big topic is things like the open courseware initiative from MIT for free education. At any rate while I was not myself involved in the intensive editing by committees to create the documents which ended up being reeditted and mulched by more talks in Geneva and I guess Vienna, I'm not clear on how important the document itself is. That is, to me producing a document is I'm sorry not that exciting. The process I saw did indeed include some pretty sharp people and seemed quite professional. But I think the people who are implementing solutions will use free software if they can and if it makes sense. It is unfortunate that the very strong pro- free software slant that came out of our conference was massacred by Microsoft, but there are lots of other things the free software community can do, including I would imagine contacting the people who make the real decisions - not the people talking about what to do for years - and finding out more about their real needs so you can tell the rest of the free software community about it and get software created. So there is a point where your motivation, dedication and strategy can make negate this move of Microsoft's or even take advantage of it, for example by making an end run and talking to governments of less well off countries and showing how Microsoft is working against them. On the other hand if they really want M$ lock-in so they can be equally locked in as the first world, then this might be a way to reduce that price. So I am hoping this M$ act of supreme self-interest and cynicism will end up biting their own backside, hard.
Of course until free software proponents begin implementing these same practices (which seems rather unlikely due to the voluntary nature of most free software projects)
Make no mistake: most successful and mainstream open source projects have large financial interests behind them, either directly or indirectly.
That doesn't mean they're bribing people, but it does mean someone's commercial agenda is being served. F/OSS taking over commercial software from the proprietary vendors doesn't mean less money will be paid in this industry, it just changes who will be making the money, and how.
-Stu
It only makes glorified typewriters. By contrast, UN is supposed to be the last, impartial arbiter between two countries before the bombs start falling. Or a force to prevent a new holocaust, stop exploitation of children and so on. If they bow to pressure from a mere software company so easy, one has to wonder what kind of changes in UN resolutions were made by Saddam Hussein, US, Iraq or Russia before the bombs really started falling. Or say, oil companies and Nike. Unless we want World War III to be someday started by a typewriter or sneaker company, UN must be indeed disbanded and replaced by an organization that can command some respect.
You can find a somewhat more indepth article in English on this topic here:
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/66619
It is a translation of this German article
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/66530
Due to translation and re-translation, some of the quotes are not 100% original.
Think about it: communism doesn't work, it never did. History has shown time and time again that it doesn't work. Nobody is happier. The one system that has brought the most prosperity to the greatest number of people is the American capitalist system. Both for production and protection (see WWII).
So if capitalism is shown to work and communism is shown not to work, what can be the only object of communism? Reducing YOUR freedom, because that is the ONLY think that it has shown it can do effectively.
So, back to China, it is giving up the parts of communism that don't work (the economy part) and keeping the parts that DO work (destroying human freedom). So is China to be congratulated on its great strides towards freedom? I don't know.
Anyway, I guess the similarities between socialism and communism (the synonymity of their names, their end goal of more and more government control, etc.) make me think that the only REAL difference between communism and socialism is patience. They will both end up in the same place in the end, no?
In the odd chance that someone actually reads this 4th-level post, if you can point out another real difference between socialism and communism, I would seriously like to hear it.
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
If the government should take more upon itself by fixing levees, etc., would that make the public reliance on government increase, thus demanding they take care of other problems?
I don't know if the government should take care of levees or not. That's not what I'm arguing here, I am trying to explore whether or not this sort of thing begets more of the same.
Where will it end? Has Canadian moderate socialism reached its goal, or will it keep going on?
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.