Slashdot Mirror
Quebec Govt Sued For Ignoring Free Software
Mathieu Lutfy writes "The CBC is reporting that 'Quebec's open-source software association is suing the provincial government, saying it is giving preferential treatment to Microsoft Corp. by buying the company's products rather than using free alternatives. ... Government buyers are using an exception in provincial law that allows them to buy directly from a proprietary vendor when there are no options available, but Facil said that loophole is being abused and goes against other legal requirements to buy locally.' The group also has a press release in English."
What the hell is the big deal? Why can't you be satisfied with the whole country learning both French and English, such that all of your children are bilingual (and thus have a leg up on monolingual countries like the US)? No one is out to "attack you." No one is out to deny you the right to speak French. Why the hell do you fucking Quebecois have to be such a bunch of fucking whiners? OHHHH, POOR US, WE ARE "FORCED" TO BE PART OF A COUNTRY WITH ONE OF THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF LIVING IN THE WESTERN WORLD, OOH LA LA, EH?
Jackasses.
If Canada has some form of democracy, then don't they elect officials, and then those officials make decisions to use Microsoft. So if they elect other officials, that will make decisions to use Linux... then doesn't that mean they should be suing themselves voter negligence?
Oh, like the hundreds of thousands of lines of code (add-ins, scripting) layered on top of MS Office that customize it for a plethora of specific purposes?
BTW, I visited your journal and very much enjoyed reading it. I especially liked the paragraph that begins with the sentence "If you are poor it's YOUR fault!" because it very precisely validated something I recently came to realize. I have often wondered what it is that makes one a "conservative" versus a "liberal". And after many years of reading, listening, and thinking, I stumbled across what I think is the fundamental difference. Conservatives believe that personal success is mostly dependent upon how hard you work. They believe that if you follow the rules and work hard you can achieve your goals. Liberals believe that most people who are successful got there either by cheating, by somehow exploiting loopholes in the system, through inheritance or through good-old-boy connections. Now clearly both world views are not universally true -- there are obviously many real world(tm) examples that prove and disprove both philosophies, which is why both world-views can co-exist. What is particularly interesting to me, however, is to then extrapolate behavior based on these core beliefs. If one honestly believes (as you stated so eloquently in the above-cited paragraph) that successful people must have cheated or inherited their success, then it becomes OK, even expected, that you cheat as well. Conversely, if you believe that hard work and following the rules will be rewarded, then that is the path you will most likely follow. BTW, I would have posted this comment on your journal, but it is archived so no new comments can be made.
One more thing. I noticed you ignored my comment about potholes. The truth hurts, doesn't it?
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.