Slashdot Mirror
Free Software for Developing Countries
Mindphunk writes "I just stumbled across
this paper which "makes the political and ethical case for the adoption of free software by Community Aid Abroad and other members of Oxfam International". Some really good content including that UNESCO is handing out Linux in Latin America. There's some interesting comparisons - especially like the "baby milk" and GM [genetically manipulated] food analogies."
You obviously didnt catch my sarcasm.
The point (though maybe not obvious) was the people who are in dire need of help arent the ones who need computing power. The upper class of people don't the kind of programs that the world agencies are trying to promote. The are already well off.
I get the impression that these programs are being promoted as helping the "poor" not the already "rich" in the 3rd world.
Check your facts before you post.
The only reason all cover-ups appear to fail is that you never hear about the ones that succeed.
Here is a little time line for history impared induhviduals.
3000 BC Abacus is used in Asia.
1620 Edmund Gunter invents the slide rule.
1642 Blaise Pascal designs mechanical calculator which remains in use til the 1950's
1694 Gottfried Leibniz builds first binary calculating machine.
1832 Charles Babbage designs the first computer driven by external instructions. It is never built due to lack of funds.
1854 Gearge Boole writes a publication on symbolic Logic. This is the basis of all computer science.
1857 Sir Charles Wheatstone designs the first tape drive to store and read data using a paper tape.
1897 Karl Braun develops the cathode ray tube.
1937 John Atanasoff begins building first electronic digital computer, but doesn't patent any of his work.
1938 Konrad Zuse produces the first computer that uses binary code.
1939 Georges Stibitz and Samuel Williams build the Complex Number computer which has 400 telephone relays.
1946 University of Pittsburg builds ENIAC, the first general purpose electronic computer.
1947 Bell Labs invents the transistor.
1949 John Mauchly invents first highlevel programming language.
1951 Mauchly and Eckert build UNIVAC I, the first comercial electronic computer which is installed at the US Census Bureau.
1956 IBM develops the first hard drive and FORTRAN. MANIAC 1 becomes the first computer to beat a human opponent at chess.
1958 Texas Instruments builds the first IC. Modems are invented.
1959 Using an abacus Lee Kaichen, a Chinese professor, performs calculations faster than computers in Seatle, New York and Taipei.
1960 DEC builds the PDP-1
1961 John Kelly programs a computer to sing "Daisy Bell" (wasn't this the song HAL sang in 2001?)
1962 First ATM is installed.
1963 Douglas Engelbart invents the mouse.
1964 ASCII adopted as the standard code for data transfer.
1965 DEC builds first mini computer. BASIC is developed.
1969 ARPAnet is first introduced.
1970 Floppy disk is introduced.
1972 Ray Tomlinson invents e-mail.
1975 The Altair 8800 is introduced. Bob Metclfe at Xerox develops ethernet. First word processor is introduced (The Electric Pencil) IBM introduces the LASER printer. Microsoft achieves sales of $16,000.
1976 Gary Kildall develops CP/M. IBM develops the ink jet printer. Apple is formed.
1977 Microsoft is formed. Apple releases the Apple II. Tandy and Commodore release PC's with built in monitors.
1978 Wordstar is released.
1981 IBM-PC is released. Immeadiate sells more than Apple II does this year.
1982 IBM Clones appear.
1983 Apple Lisa appears.
Hopefully you know the rest.
As you can clearly see we have been working towards electronic digital computers for many hundreds of years. The machines that were built for war time use were hardly computers, they had to be rewired in order for them to do anyother task. They were merely single use calculating machines that were implemented electronically merely to make them work faster.
The first programmable computer wasn't even built until the year after the war and was bought for the US Census.
My girlfriend has been in Gautemala for the past two weeks doing aid work. In most small towns of guatemala, all that is available are community phones. Now, without an internet connection, I personally wouldnt get a lot of use out of my computer. A major driving force behind computer use is the ability to communicate with others. Without the ability to communicate with other people outside of their town (that they'd be able to do normally) i dont see the availability of computers as being a big help to them. Now, in cities where phones are available, and business is done, computers could help. But i think that until more sparsely populated areas are provided the appropriate facilities, computers there will be rather useless :)
so very true. one thing though, you can't just blame libertarians. it's the capitalist system that creates these problems. how to stop that, i don't know, destroying capitalism does not seem to be a feasible option (yet).
Why do you think the rest of the world makes a big deal about what the US does? It's because everyone has high hopes, and high expectations.
<ANALOGY type="NBA Baskteball">
When the US fails to pay heed to the UN, it's in a sense like Shaquille O'Neal's failure to make 75% of his free throws.
</ANALOGY>
It doesn't matter how much you do, because when you're the best out there, all the people watching you will find something to fault you with.
The US's critics will always find it easy to neglect how much money the US does give to people and organisations worldwide (remember to look beyond government as well), how many US troops are stationed worldwide, and how many foreign students the US educates each year. All they'll do is whine about how "stupid" or "ignorant" or "arrogant" the Americans are.
Oh, and regarding open source supremacy.. keep in mind that
1) Red Hat is a US corporation
2) Linus Torvalds has made his home in the US
3) Richard Stallman has made his home in the US for some time.
There are a lot of university trained computer scientists in third world counties that don't own computers because they can't afford the computer and all the software to develop applications. (Total cost would be over $1000 for the machine, OS, applications and compilers.)
But if a company was to sell an integrated computer that could hook to a TV or a monitor and had a built-in keyboard and pointer for a low price then they could make a lot of money on volume alone. And they would be selling the computers to highly trained people ready to learn more on their own.
These first buyers could setup support and training for others and act as consultants for the hospitals and government agencies that need more computers to handle their accounting and customer information.
Even if you only made $1 profit on each sale you would be worth several hundred million dollars in the next ten years.
Develop an integrated computer with acceptable graphics, sound, video, processor and memory. Allow the memory to be upgraded.
The power supply should be very rugged and supply power long enough for the computer to shut down if there is a power outage. Large capacitors and a watchdog board should do the trick.
Memory prices are pushing the price of a low end box up about $40 right now. I would be suprised to see a functional box for less than $300 right now, but having to pay for an OS, applications and development tools would add at least $700 on top of this cost.
If every school in all the developing countries had just one of these computers, running Linux, they could really fire the imagination of their students, without taking all the money out of the school budget that year.
My school in SE Ohio had only one computer when I went there. A teacher bought a TSR-80 Model III and left it in her classroom for anyone to use. A group of about ten of us would play with this computer everyday writing small programs to bounce a ball around the screen, or typing in programs from magazines to learn how to program.
If there were a million schools in the world and just one child a year learned how to program then in a 10 years there would be 10,000,000 people in the world that could program computers and would be contributing back to the open source movement and they would be available to work with the governments and business in these countries to build the information infrastructures to bring the entire world up even in the next century.
I think that it is great that Linux is able to be customized to actually use other languages. It would be a tragety if we wiped out whole cultures just because we were too lazy to allow people to adapt the computer to their own culture and way of doing things.
Diversity is good!!!
Plus I think that we can sell a billion computers to the third world and the solar collectors that are needed to run them without causing a huge environmental impact. Selling a billion cars to the third world would result in a global catastrophy of biblical proportions...
Some scary stuff. Something else to read on this subject: http://www.stratfor.com/CIS/specialreports/special 10.htm http://www.stratfor.com/CIS/countries/Russia/russi a2000/russsia2000.htm There is some very weird stuff going on in Asia right now.
One point that seems implicitly obvious here but hasn't yet been explicitly stated is that having the source code not only empowers developing nations to use software but it actually empowers them to better understand and become involved in the development process. I have personally found that this is of great personal benefit as I am a young college student and before I found out about open source I had no idea what a "real" large scale software system was "supposed" to look like. Where else would I have learned to write "clean modular code" if it hadn't been for the GNU coding standards?read-read-read other peoples' source...isn't that the best way to learn?If someone in a third world country were very dedicated all they might need is a an old 386, the linux source and maybe the kernel hacking howto and... *voila*...suddenly a new kernel hacker is born! Even if they never became anything like a hacker guru it'd be better than a life making low grade wing nuts by hand.
This is one of the less mentioned benefits of open source software; the increase in the speed of education. People can not only NOT reinvent the proverbial wheel several times but they can also study that wheel and learn how it works for themselves...eventually building better-faster-smoother-running wheels and sharing the resultant technological growth with the rest of the world.
The very nature of the open source movement allows developing nations to enter the software arena without having to overcome the heavy initial investment already made by the technological terrors of the wealthy west. Don't sell OSS short; having that source code available doesn't just mean we'll have better software than MS; it means we'll actually understand software better than MS. It means we know more than they do. This has got to be the way for third world countries to claim a share in the future.
Knowledge is power.
Hooray for sharing information.
whats wrong with communism?
What a coincidence - our church helped send a mission to Indonesia last year to help with their Y2K readiness among other computery things
The US has long thumbed its nose at the UN and international laws. Because of American dominance of the world economy the rest of the world could never do much about this. That is starting to change, not because America is losing it's lead, but rather because you can only bully someone for so long before they snap. The Anti-UN sentiment in America is largely associated with right-wing types, Republicans opposed to world government out of irrational fears based on silly superstitions (Christianity). A lot of these sentiments are spread through mainstream media, which contrary to stereotype is FAR from liberal.
What a coincidence - our church helped send a mission to Indonesia last year to help with their Y2K readiness among other computery things she was back today to tell us about it.
:)
./ didn't like my semicolons so I had to strip 'em and post again.
I had donated my Winduhs CD to the cause she'd thought she might need such things. It turned out they could get pirate copies of just about anything the governmental corruption and general poverty makes copyrights a practical joke. In other words, OSS doesn't appeal because of its price.
BTW she's also very frustrated with Winduhs' quality and antisocial behaviour to non-M$ software and wishes her work would let her use Linux
PS: speaking of quality,
If the costs of internet access are a sign of a third world country, then count Australia in. A lot of ISPs have stopped offering any kind of unlimited access because of the telco costs they have to pay.
:-P
Just when I thought the internet situation in this country was getting better, down the toilet it goes
Hmmm. I am a student and my computer cost about a year's salary for my parents. Just the Hardware mind u. Can I afford MS-Office? That would be another 2 months of my parents salary. U get the idea, I hope unless of course, u r a Micro$oftie. In that case, I give up trying to explain.
"Wake up, you dumb Libertarians. I'm sick of reading your ignorant crap."
I couldn't have said it better. Thank you.
-slams
-slams
I'm working with at-risk kids in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. We're running free basic computer courses, using donated 386 and 486 computers (that's all we can afford).
Of course, the problem is that Linux + a usable GUI can't run on that sort of hardware configuration. I don't have the money - or the desire - to buy Windows-whatever for these machines, or to pirate it (piracy here can - at least in theory - give 6 months to 2 years prison).
Anyway, the solution I found last year to this problem was to develop some software in Visual BASIC for DOS which incorporates the basics about a certain common User Interface (complete with Start button and desktop icons). It's worked - we're finishing the first batch of courses and will have around 20 kids graduating with a working knowledge of PC operation.
It is interesting to note that the UN is reported to be working with the Brazilian government to translate NewDeal (a commercial product) for use in situations such as ours, ie educational use on low-spec machines within Brazil. That sounds like a dumb move to me, as that will effectively lock NGOs and schools into commercial software, a lá Nestlé and Microsoft.
Maybe a better alternate would be to put some serious development work into GEM, now that it has been GPLed. I've been using it here on an experimental basis and believe it has potential to be useful in this situation (for more details see http://freegem.homepage.com).
-well...that's not very bright of them. sure they manage to get them "addicted" to theirs company's closed platform, but they can't control it.
- by small % only. if you try it the first time and got really sick when using it, you probably won't use it again. you just follows your peers. if you are currently use DOS, and most of your friend use plan 9, think who gonna change?
--
You're a cartoon of rebel! You're all like exaggerated version of yourself! - Gerard Jones
...is a computer that doesn't need a mains electricity supply, much like the Bayliss radio.
This wouldn't be too hard to do. Hook up a battery (or batteries) with the handcrank to charge them up, and then you could use APM or something so that the computer could tell you to get off your ass and start cranking again... (This is where you need a gullible but physically strong friend)
This would help the adoption of technology in the areas that otherwise just wouldn't get it.
--
Peter
I think more people should work on donating to schools. I don't care if it is where you are or overseas. I personally am working on a project to give old computers to people in Thailand. They have to provide monitor, keyboard and speakers themself. I provide computer, P75 or higher. I promote Linux but they can provide alternet OS themself. I wish more people would help others. There are a lot of people who need education and want it. Why deprive them when there are others who waste their future. Rob
I would prefre laptops in the long run.
> Lacking proper electricity supply, working
> telephone lines, not to mention computers
These and other barriers will disappear rapidly if technology continues to improve at historical rates.
The cost of a general purpose computer can be driven almost arbitrarily low. Right now I see two major issues. Good solid state storage (disks) doesn't scale down well (disk costs $10/GB, but try buying 100MB for a dollar). Various new technologies look likely to fix that, e.g. probe storage*. (Probe storage is one example of why ICs are so wonderful --- they scale down really well.) The other problem is displays. There is a need for a very cheap, passively lit display. The "electronic paper" work might fit the bill.
Likewise, power consumption can go way down. A passively lit screen will really help. It should be reasonable to run a device from solar or muscle power.
The hardest problem is connectivity. Obviously it has to be wireless, at least locally. Then a big problem is that transmission fundamentally requires a lot of power. There are some complementary approaches:
-- broadcast content from satellite
-- "ad hoc" networking; individual units cooperate to forward packets, to reduce the required range
-- some central wired infrastructure serving base stations
-- sneakernet with batched data
I'm confident the hardware will appear. Perhaps a tougher problem is to produce software and content to make these things useful. We're going to have to redefine "ease of use". I'm sure we can at least produce a useful library (with video for the illiterate).
Hey, IPO zillionaires! Here's a chance to do something good AND cool!
Rob
> Having suitably-equipped machines with access to
> the Net is one. Cheap unmetered Net usage is
> another. And of course these two conditions
> predicate a whole slew of others, such as
> telephone infrastructure, electricity and water
> access, and so forth.
See my post above. Also, computers don't need water.
> What was that quote from the Unix-Haters'
> Handbook? 'Linux is only free if your spare time
> is worthless.' I think this statement is
> probably even more applicable to other countries
> than it is to the West.
The quote was from Jamie Zawinski. Your last statement is completely backwards if we're thinking in finanicial terms; if you're poor, it's much more worthwhile to spend an hour figuring out a problem than to spend money on another product.
As I remember, Lucent Technology and some other concern will be wiring Africa to provide high speed internet.
My love goes out to my brothers and sisters of Eritrea. I miss you.
photosMy Photostream
The basic problem with your response is that it misinterprets the quandary. You are right when you say that IMF loans are being used incorrectly. However, they most certainly are *not* being used to further 'Keynesian' policies - how many of these loans support generalised welfare? Shelter? Unemployment insurance? The problem is that IMF and World Bank (you might as well throw the EBRD for good measure) both act to entrench *monetarist* and *classical liberal* policies (cf. Milton Friedman - and an aside to /. editors: It's not 'Friendman!').
I would agree that the imposition of Western labour laws *without* additional cultural memes (democratic practices and freedoms, a civil society amongst others) would be a mistake. But if you suggest that the US government is solely power-politics-oriented and does not pay much attention to economic affairs, then I would say you've made a gross oversimplification that doesn't hold together at all. I would argue that if anything corporations are much more indirectly dangerous than governments are - they're subtle fuckers, and they love a good scam when they see one.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
Anyone catch the "NSA Secret OS Hooks" reference?
:)
:)
I wonder if the author knows something we don't, or if he's quoting the same speculation on slashdot earlier. Anyhow, he's right that real Free Software doesn't have that problem. (above and beyond regular ol' Obfuscated C.
And yes, having the Operating System, a significant percentage of the cost of a PC, costing nothing is definitely a good start. Being able to use donated or refurbished PC's is also good. IIRC, ELKS has this as one of its project goals. (since there are x86 computers 386 still being used in the rest of the world, get them to run something sorta like Linux)
Of course, I hope this is changing nowadays, but a computer is still a computer, and I'd much rather have a Commodore 64 than no computer at all.
---
pb Reply or e-mail rather than vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Let's see, privatization has done such a great job in Russia. Since adopting the economic policies that the IMF forced on them, the Russia's economy has shrunk to a third of the size it was ten years ago.
Privatization has done such a great job in Mexico. What a wonderful way for a corrupt government to give away its taxpayers' assets to its cronies and get accolades from the international community. Gee, I wish I thought of that, but then again I'm not a third world despot propped up by Wall Street interests so I guess it wouldn't matter if I had.
And yes, those $1/day jobs are so good for Indonesia, now that forcing their economy open to global corporations has destroyed small farmers and manufacturers. A $1/day job is better than no job at all, but its the IMF's policies and a corrupt, U.S./Wall Street supported government that destroyed the local economic systems.
Corporations aren't the problem, you say. But it's the corporations who want all this stuff. The notion that Corporate America wants a free market OR a fair market (which IMHO aren't necessarily the same things) is the naivete of someone who's just read Atlas Shrugged. The US Government is evil? Who do you think runs the US government? The corporations! They have for years. Now put down your copy of Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (it's not worth reading anyhow) and take a good long look at who funds our elections and who pays for lobbyists.
Wake up, you dumb Libertarians. I'm sick of reading your ignorant crap. The people who you want to run this country are already running it (and the world) and they're obviously doing a piss poor job of it.
Hi people. I've just poured hot grits down my pants !!!
'Computers don't need water' - Yeah, I know. I was extrapolating outwards: computers need people to operate them; if people are going to operate them they'll need (thinking prosaically here) to use toilets every so often... ;)
As far as JWZ's statement goes, I didn't mean it in financial terms at all. You're right about the time spent aspect. And you're correct, I should have clarified this statement much more than I did.
What I meant was to implicitly ask the question, 'How much training on how to use Linux is being doled out together with the CD-ROMs?' Granted, NGOs and UNESCO are not likely to just donate software and then just walk away. But using the OS can't be taught all that quickly, no?
Thanks, roca =) You helped me to clear up some confusing bits.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
I would assume the cities with more people in them would tend to have better communications (and thus more people :), so you can help a large amount of the population initially, and worry about the rural areas after.
its somewhat like dsl/cable modems, if you imagine the providers are altruistic rather than capitialistic.... they will roll out in the centers of large population to help the most people first, then go to the rural areas.
also other people have mentioned wireless net, which doesn't effect the necessary electricity issues, but would help with communication
Need a Catering Connection
Thats the same system that works in the West or so I have been led to believe. Michael Dell makes billions, and I get a cool computer. Everybody is happy. Same principle here. The rich benefit more but the effects 'trickle down'(Yes, its Reagan) to the rest of society. Capitalism at its finest.
The only reason all cover-ups appear to fail is that you never hear about the ones that succeed.
Yoursis one of the least informed posts ever to appear on /. Did you know that, in China, birth control is not an option, it's the law.
If they Linux they could use old computers like 486/Pentiums, if you buy 486/old Pentium and Office+Windows to it, cost of software would me more than the cost of hardware.
20 pentiums? You can run linux on a 386, much less a 486. You dont need pentiums to teach people concepts. You only need pentiums run winblows or to sell on Ebay. Organizations that welcome donations of computers (as long as theyre new and fast and worth cash) are a crock. Organizations that truly use the equipment to help the so called needy would be happy with 386 4mb systems, and thrilled with 486-8mbs. Requestinging only pentiums means theres somethign else going on. Admittedly, a p100-16mb is needed to run windows while typing in word. But windows and word are not particuarly useful in teaching fundamentals. I learned unix on a 386 with vi. Thats STILL all thats needed to teach what the Anonymous Coward claims is his goal. Anything less would NOT be uncivilized, it would be overkill. He's a beggar looking to get a few hundred bucks from selling them on ebay.
For those who argue that Open source = Communism, I can only answer that since coersive force is not used, the coders are free to do as they will. If a free (wo)man decides to write code and give it away, with restrictions on it's further use(GPL), that is her/his own decision.
As far as "from each according to their abilities" if you toss in "if they wanna" then, I have no problem with it. As far as "to each according to their need" toss in "if someone is willing to help, on their own initiative, and without taking from those who choose not to participate" then we got a workable, if less catchy slogan.
I'm a different AC, but according to the official stories (yeah I know too, but if they're here on a work visa, they're supposed to have the "official" reasons) they're paid at least as well as US citizens (see disclaimer above). Official rates are at $60,000 USD /yr. Standards of living vary from country to country. Obviously we cant live on $100 a month here. But they're not being paid $100/month here, they're being paid that there. YEs wages are lower, but costs are far lower as well. Lacking a specific product index, we'll have to use the oldest profession as a comparison. Yes prostitution. Now $1 usd = 43 rupees, officially. A non-crack head, but also non-top-of-the-line hooker goes for about $50-100 for a "basic" - I base that on news reports and the rather lurid "escort" ads in your (non-) finer local papers. The same news stories mention that similar "pros" in India are from 3-10 rupees. So that indian programmer can afford ten hookers a month, without repeat customer discounts. Comparing averages in that "product/service" index yields the ratio of, $75usd=5 rupees. That works out to 100 ruppees/month has similar buying power as $18,000 USD a year. If you live outside of a major market in the US, thats pretty good money (small town costs are usually 1/3rd of a city slicker's like mine, monthly rent here is about $5 a square foot a month). Again, since to be here they officially have to have a $60,000 a year or so job, they can easily send half their earnings home unless they decide to live it up here. Take half their cash, tax free since its a donation, or $30,000 and buy 486s. You can get them for about $50 on ebay and the like. So each Indian programmer here could send 600 computers a year home. THATS how they can exert leverage and help out in their homeland. Since you DID ask. I for one am glad to live in country, where despite the fact that our rights are being taken away (see www.aclu.org), one can still get up in the morning, type a rant (though logical) and get a Sausage McMuffin with Egg for breakfast. Let the flamefest begin!
While I normally don't support US foreign aid scams (definition of foreign aid: taking from poor people in US and giving to rich people in other countries. eg, Imelda's shoes) This one was a good deal for the US, if, unfortunately, at India's expense.
We got a damn fine instructor (albeit with heavily accented, gramatically british speach) and India lost a National scholar.
Developing Countries to Benefit From Collaboration Among the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Corel Corporation and Rebel.com
Ottawa, Canada -- August 10, 1999-- Two Canadian information technology (IT) corporations announced today that they are donating computer software, hardware and services worth over a million dollars to UNDP's Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP), an initiative born of the Earth Summit that helps developing countries gain access to information on the environment and sustainable development through local and regional information networks. The donation will help strengthen computer and internet capacity in developing countries where SDNP operates. The two corporations are Corel Corporation, an internationally recognized developer of award-winning graphics and business productivity applications, and Rebel.com, a leading manufacturer of computer appliances and thin servers using Linux, UNIX and Intel platforms. The SDNP supports information networking programmes in some 40 developing countries and trains nationals to operate and participate in them. The contributions by Corel Corporation and Rebel.com will strengthen the information and networking systems in these countries, and expand the contribution SDNP makes at the local level -- whether it be in helping to quickly access information on disaster relief in Honduras in the wake of Hurricane Mitch or finding rare matching blood types to save lives in rural Pakistan. Beginning this month, Rebel.com will provide their Linux-based NetWinder group servers to a number of local SDNP programmes, which will facilitate the use of the Internet and intranets in these countries. "Participation in this initiative reinforces Rebel.com's role in the international field," said Michael Mansfield, president of Rebel.com. "It is also very rewarding to know that our technology is assisting in making a positive impact on sustainable development while we help to provide cutting edge information technology to developing countries. " Corel Corporation will provide Corel® WordPerfect® Suite 8 for Linux® in several languages to the 40 developing countries along with Corel's Linux distribution (presently in development); and the WordPerfect® Office for LINUX® suite, which is expected to be available in early 2000. "It gives us great pleasure to bring our state-of-the-art technology to these developing countries and to aid in their sustainable development efforts," said Dr. Michael Cowpland, president and chief executive officer of Corel Corporation. Eimi Watanabe, Director of UNDP's Bureau for Development Policy, underscored the importance of such partnerships between UNDP and the private sector. "The global challenges we face in promoting development that is sustainable and more equitable are immense," she said. "Access to IT can make a significant difference. This kind of public-private collaboration can trigger mobilization for change at the individual, community, national and international levels."
Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.
The UN has a difficult enough jobs as it is : being the government of the world is not trivial : let's concentrate on stopping bits of the world from fighting each other first.
It's a pretty interesting take on the accuracies / inaccuracies of people's view of technology in S.America, has some points I hadn't thought about before.
S. America is not the entire South (one politicized word I think I'll adopt for now), but many of the things he says probably apply just as much to poor Africa, poor Asia, poor Eastern Europe, poor ex-SovUnion states, etc. (I say poor to distinguish from those parts of these places where relatively free markets have made this sort of topic less necessary, like Singapore, parts of South Africa, etc.)
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
There are tons of smart people in developing countries just trying to get anything done but they are put in a repressive bind by their corrupt governments who are always screwing up the countries economically with bad policies (devaluations, tariffs, hyperinflation, over regulation of capital markets, defaulting on international loans). Now these people can finally, with only a little capital get technologically up to speed and be on the same page with first world nations. The people of the country will be able to worry less about having their whole business destroyed by a devaluation caused by a government default, after which the price of commercial software would be impossible to afford.
I am very happy to see that this idea is in the minds of people. I know that when the founders of computing began to develop the first computers they were not thinking "let's make a buck" I think its safe to assume that they had a much more social concept in mind. It is unfortunate that ideas like these are not standard practice. I may be to big of a dreamer, but computing and development for the sake of mankind is a wonderfull concept and practice. I only wish more people agread.
The Problem With The Gene Pool Is That There Is No Lifeguard.
I think that doing this stuff is a great idea. Giving away a free operating system while promoting technology education in "developing" countries will give a lot of people a chance to be exposed to new ideas.
Check out the new case I made at the homepage url above. Click on computers, then the BookCase!
-=S
Scott Ruttencutter
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
The developing contries have poor infrastructure (this is why they are called developing contries). Lacking proper electricity supply, working telephone lines, not to mention computers. This idea is hardly much help.
It's a nice idea, but that is also all it is.
This is another thing that Linus mentioned during his keynote speach at comdex, the fact that countries not as well off as us are adopting open source. Using open source enables a lot more freedom and less dependance on corperate software. Spreading this kind of technology to people who in the past couldnt afford it helps them to catch up. Another reason why free software is so adoptable to foreign countries is (as Linus mentioned) that there is more support for things like internationalization and seeing as the code is open, anyone can modify it to fit the users needs.
_joshua_
Im glad to hear this is happening. I was wandering if anyone knows of any organizations that donates computers to projects outside of the United States for eductional use. I am looking for computer donations for a rural school in India. This is a nonprofit group that has built an all girls school (mostly for the lower caste) with great facilites and dedicated teachers. The plan is to get about 20 pentium class machines running linux. These girls lack any type of formal education. The goal is for them to learn the basic skills (reading writing math) and also delve into the sciences and hopefully computers (these donated computers would be the first in the town!!). If anyone has any info or could help please email me at vikas98@hotmail.com and I would be happy to send more formal information on the project.
At the UK, at some Universities, we have a thing called the "Milkround", where large companies come and give presentations to persuade you that you want for them. Several Milkround presentations by Nestle have been disrupted by activists protesting about the whole baby milk fiasco.
:-)
Is it possible that, by analogy, in the next few years we'll see geeks staging similar protests at Microsoft presentations to complain about their use of closed standards?
Gerv
You forgot about the rest of the 1 billion people still left in india :(
The parable holds true. The objection to Nestlé's distribution of milk powder is partly that it encourages dilution with polluted water, but mainly that it robs mothers of their self-sufficiency: the ability to breast-feed.
While the distribution of free software may seem misguided, when there are more immediate issues to address in the world's poorest countries, doing so provides people with the means to empower themselves through technology.
The promotion of shared technology is at the heart of most aid agencies' work: the provision of food, clothing and shelter may be more visible, but that's usually a last-ditch attempt to stave off a human disaster. If we're happy to encourage the building of wells and schools, and training in agriculture and manufacture, then why not computers?
Ever notice how 'libertarians' spout such incredible horseshit?
I personally would like to see libertarianism wrested back from the US rabid right. I'm so fucking sick of hearing how we need to liberalise everything under the sun. If these boys had their way they'd sell you the air you breathe, the water you drink... oh wait, that *is* what they do!
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
"Indians get paid very well (IMHO all too well) in the United States.." etc., etc.
Thanks for letting us know about the white hood you wear. Been to any cross burnings lately? I wonder why you posted as an AC?
Do tell, how do naturalized US citizens make "gross government reforms" in India? How do programmers on work visas which ties them to one job at a wage that is at the discretion of the company they work for with little leverage make "gross government reforms" for a government of a billion people?
The New Zealand Digital Library project has been involved in similar projects, for similar reasons.
We have made web-sites, and created CD-ROMs, for collections like the United Nations University documents and the Humanity Development Library (both available at the URL above), and some ongoing work for the FAO. They like our "Greenstone" software because it is GPLed (and excellant, fun-to-hack software, but that's another story).
The GPL means Greenstone is free in both senses: it is available at no cost and can be passed on to people who can't afford to license commercial solutions; and it is free-speech free, which is consistent with the aims of organisations like UNESCO.
Someone mentioned that it is pointless giving software to developing nations, because they have no computers. The real headache is that many people are slightly better off than this - they have computers, but they're lousy 286s running windows 3.0, and your software has to work with *every* version of windows from then on (we develop on Linux, and run on all-sorts). And it's network software - a lot of people lost a lot of sleep over that, let me tell you, before they finally rewrote the early Windows networking... but i digress.
Disclaimer: I work on the NZDL project, but have done little for this software.
I wonder why they're giving away RH5.1? Relatively speaking, it's ancient. Since many apps require newer versions of libraries, etc, I would think it wouldn't be terribly easy to get by with something so old. And since newer versions of RH aren't any more expensive (all they have to do is get a cheapbytes disc for a couple bucks and dupe it - or just buy them all), why can't they by giving away something newer? Don't get me wrong, this is a great idea overall - it just seems a little odd
A move from Belgium to SA.
While down here, I continue my "regular" job. The advantage of the Internet business is that one only needs a phone line to be connected! So I can fairly easily just continue working from here. My intention, however, is to set up a real company in South Africa, that is fully equiped, and where we can offer Internet Services. To this end, I have been conducting negotiations with Telkom (the national, government owned phone company), and some Internet Access Providers. This week, after 9 months of negotiations, I finally got an offer that was very interesting and met my demands.
-"That sounds great" I said, "So when can you install this?" -"Install this? I'm sorry, Sir, but what do you mean 'install this?' Do you mean you actually want that permanent internet connection?" -"Well, of course! Why would i bother asking about it if I didn't want it! Is there a problem?" -"Oh no, Sir, no problem. We can have that installed for you in 2003, Sir."
-"I beg your pardon?" -"You see, Sir, we don't have the infrastructure yet to implement this in the area you are living, as it's mainly a residential area. If you would find some other businesses that need the same, we may be
able to speed things up for you, Sir."
And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
So called software "piracy" is obviously an option for those unable or unwilling to purchase
software, and indeed it is a common choice throughout the South, where copyright law is
often poorly enforced. But this places users at the mercy of the law, increasing their
vulnerability to those rich and powerful enough to use it to their own advantage. Also,
development organisations themselves are vulnerable to enforcement in their home
countries, so they can not support or encourage such practices.
And this is exactly what the software companies are banking on.
If you notice, though companies like Microsoft, do occasionally make some noise about rampant IP abuse in third-world countries, the companies rarely do anything real to try to prevent it. The reason is the same there as it was here ten years ago: let the populace "pirate" the software, get hooked on the company's closed platform, and then when there's a critical mass of addicts who are far enough along that they actually have the money to pay for the software, step in and start enforcing copyright laws. This is the same rationale followed by crack dealers and cigarette manufacturers who give out some amount of product for free at the beginning in order to get an addicted population who is then beholden to them for their fix later.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
I love the way Libertarians complain about how the world 'liberal' was supposedly appropriated from the Classical Liberal types, and yet they do not seem to remember their five-finger discount on acquiring the word "Libertarianism" itself, which originally meant (and in Europe, often still means) "socialism without government".
Now that's Libertarianism I could support. It's funny, I used to be a "Libertarian" in the sense of the U.S. Libertarian Party (I even held a position in the local branch--not hard, I had a pulse), and now I'm older and wiser and still tend to support Libertarianism--only now in the correct, socialist-anarchist meaning of the word! Funny how life has these little ironies.
My, this is way off topic. OK, U.S. so-called "Libertarian" think tanks like the Cato Institute are largely responsible for the neoliberal economic meddling of the IMF. Distributing Linux to the third world may help these people see the productive power of non-hierarchical cooperation among free individuals, and thus act as an antidote to the kind of nonsense they're getting from the industrialized countries. There, I'm on topic again. Whoopee!
Actually, that is NOT an obvious conclusion. Even in the US quite often a user can only afford the hardware but not the software that might go with it. I was in that same position myself originally.
Even in the West, not everyone is born with a silver spoon in their mouth.
Wow- interesting comparison! Actually my point was that in visa situations, if you didn't have a good idea of the living costs in the region you were going to work, then it was easy for your future employer to screw you over. Since you can't just go out and find a new job without going through the visa process again, and you don't usually get raises after just a month or 3 (or 10) of working, then you are stuck until renegotiations. Here in Silicon Valley, the capital of outrageaous cost of living in the U.S., I know people who have gone through this due to HR people not giving very accurate pictures of the living situation.
now all we need to do is wait for some free hardware! How about a Free Hardware Foundation?! :)
I agree, the UN is a long ways off from being the world government. We essentially do have a world government in the WTO/IMF/World Bank though, but it rules primarily economics. It's more of a corporate dictatorship, but it's still a world government. Why is the UN ultimatly becoming a world government so bad? We all live on this planet together, why can't we all have one universal form of government? The UN's mission IS a good thing. Sure it contradicts with US interest sometimes, but if you look at those cases where it does, usually it appears that it's the US who is trying to do bad things. A perfect example is Indonesia, the US was friends with the regime in power and supported them in their invasion of East Timor. When the UN tried to stop them, the US did everything in their power to disrupt the UN's effort. Now with East Timor gaining independence the US is again trying to play things down with the UN, to prevent them from acting effectivly. Why? Because American corporations have a lot of money invested in the country and because the American military has sold the Indonesian regime all of their weapons, trained many of their soldiers, and provided them with intelligence for many years. Why is the UN involved? Because they want to HELP PEOPLE. They want to prevent the Indonesian military from slaughtering more people, they want to assist East Timor in gaining it's freedom. Now the UN does fuck up, a lot really. But that is because it a) needs restructuring to distribute power more evenly, and b) is frequently misdirected or forced into inaction by US disruption.
Sooner than you think. I see it in less than 20 years. If you throw a frog into boiling water, he'll jump out. If you slowly turn up the water on him, he'll burn before he realizes.
The Kyoto environmental accords are a big step. If you remember, they assign "credits" to countries based on their annual pollution output. Industrialized nations, the United States in particular is heavily penalized, while the former Communist and developing 3rd world are exempt from this policy.
Not taxation you say? Ultimately taxation becomes a redistribution of wealth.
For each company that leaves the United States for another, that's fewer jobs, less collected income taxes for the US, less sales tax collected etc.
(a) is generosity inherently communist, or do there exist generous capitalists ?
(b) are you saying that generosity is an inherently bad thing ? Or is it merely a bad thing, because it is "communist", and therefore "bad" ?
What do you expect? You moved to the most back-asswards continent on the planet.
This was all in the pre-linux age, mind you.
It is the position of the UN, the IMF, and the World Bank that software development *for local consumption* is a darn good way to kick start a high-tech econcomy. Some old machines, a GNU development suite, create a market and the direct foreign investment will come with their reams of fibere optic they can't wait to lay.
I mean, this is what South Africa's doing right now. Their economy's still in the shitter, but at least they're getting some cool infrastructure from the outside.
-- r . m o s q u i t o --
As everyone knows, US has been discreetly thumbing its nose at UN. I personally noticed an anti-UN sentiment rise in US public, and I frankly am not surprised -- if US is indeed the superpower it considers itself to be, the gut reaction of many US citizens is "What the fuck do we need UN for?"
Of course, my personal take on this is that ignoring UN will actually lead to steady diminution of US political influence in the world (not that that would be such a bad thing, mind you).
OK, back to the topic. The reason I am saying this, is because I am seeing interesting paralleles between US/UN relationship, and commercial closed source companies and OpenSource. Just like US, if the commecrial software providers don't shape up in terms of their social agenda, they will simply lose relevance, despite the fact that such a move will benefit them in the short run.
Add to this the fact that a huge number of major closed software companies are headquartered in US, and you will suddenly realize that we are living through the major shift of political scenery, an emergence of a New World Order almost -- an order that is based on principles subtly but radically different from dog-eag-dog ones that has been in evidence so far.
Vivat la liberté! (or something like that)
--
--
Victor Danilchenko
I hate it when people make posts like this, because they have the right conclusion for the wrong reason.
I don't think our government should be giving out loans, and it certainly shouldn't be forcing other countries to do damage to their economies to get those loans. In general, the economic politicies of the IMF have done more harm than good, and countries would be better off without IMF "help."
But with that said, I am bewildered why you would be opposed to countries that "deregulate markets, privatize state run industries." This is precisely what these countries need to do if they are to develop economically. History and economics have shown us over and over that state-run industries and regulations are detrimental to the economy.
Furthermore, the idea that corporations are "exploiting" workers in countries with "lax" labor laws is nonsense. You don't want these people to work at those jobs. What alternative woould you suggest. The whole point is that these countries and their people are dirt-poor. How do we help them by denying them the only jobs they can get? If we were to impose US-style labor laws on third world countries, the result would be that it would cripple those countries' economies permanently. The fact is that those countries don't have the resources to provide jobs at US-level wages and in US-level conditions. The reason that these people choose to take these jobs is that they are the best they can get. How would you be helping them if you "protect" them by forcing them back onto the unemployment lists?
"Corporations" are not the problem. The US government is. Certainly, corporations sometimes lobby for some of these actions, but the government is still the ones with the power. What is needed is for our government to stop sticking its nose into every world conflict, to stop propping up dictators and assasinating leaders they dislike, and to stop using IMF loans to impose stupid Keynesian policies on third world economies.
This may come as a surprise to the majority of slashdot readers, but computers can be used for things besides Surfin' the Net and listening to MP3s. They can be used to track inventory, manage financial accounting, design things with CAD, and more! They can be library catalogs, medical records archives, and cash registers.
You know, when the first computers were in use, there was no network of any kind to hook them together, and nobody had even thought of online pr0n sitez. Yet people still had uses for them. Amazing, isn't it?
So I would say that people in the third world could definitely use computers. And if you think every single person in the third world is a dirt farmer who lives in a hut, you need to be smacked around a bit with the clue stick. The third world includes some very large cities with electricity, phones, highways, factories, schools, television, and all the other things that you'd expect in most major cities. These are the people who could use free software.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Miguel de Icaza (of GNOME fame) from Mexico? Granted, Mexico is further along than much of the world, but how many useful free software contributions are we missing out on because talented people haven't been exposed to the technology?
OpenSource has its place, but giving away software is the thin edge of the wedge for communism.
- anonymous coward @ ph
I'm happy to have had the chance to contribute to some useful free software and our business depends a lot on these free software. Also, we get to help the economy by reducing the amount of money spent on "importing" closed source stuff, and spending even more on support contracts, etc. which end up messing up the "balance of payments". The bad part is that the universities are led into partnerships with M$ to lock in their train of thought onto closed-source...
It's also good that some people from "third world countries" like Miguel de Icaza get to lead projects, and yes there are contributors to free software projects from different places around the world, though there is (I think) a lack of original open source projects arising from "third world" places.
- anonymous coward @ ph
What the hell are you talking about.
What % of the indian population lives/works in the US?
Something on the order of 10^5/10^9.
I would like to mention here that developing countries often are disadvantaged both in relative and absolute terms in comparison with the West. This is relevant in that infrastructure is often lacking when considering Third World concerns. I believe that while using free software in this manner is no doubt A Good Thing, you often have to presume a great deal for this method of intellectual diffusion to work.
Having suitably-equipped machines with access to the Net is one. Cheap unmetered Net usage is another. And of course these two conditions predicate a whole slew of others, such as telephone infrastructure, electricity and water access, and so forth.
From what little I remember of my polisci courses, most of the disparity with regards to industrialised countries vs their developing neighbours has historically resulted from the siphoning-off of natural and human resources from the South to the North, under the rubric of imperialism, colonisation, and decolonisation. While the argument has been made in recent decades that 'leapfrogging' intermediate stages of development should be possible by southern nations, it has only been with further integration into the Western-dominated system that some countries have been able to prosper. This argument was perhaps most cogent with the Asian Tigers' hypothesis of ten to fifteen years ago. OK, so far so good.
But, [and you know there has to be a 'but'] this thesis of leapfrogging has a problem. I would argue that as worthy as giving away open source stuff is, it just simply is not enough. Too many things are taken for granted for the statement of 'Giving away software outside of the West is no question a great idea' to be effective. Take everyone's favourite OS. It's not quite there for normal desktop use. Still. In order to get it to normal usage one still has to spend a lot of time figuring out how to use it. What was that quote from the Unix-Haters' Handbook? 'Linux is only free if your spare time is worthless.'
I think this statement is probably even more applicable to other countries than it is to the West.
I would be interested to see what the Association for Progressive Communications would make of all this. They comprise a network of ISPs dedicated to spread and enhance Net-enabled communications between NGOs, ordinary citizens and the UN. They were responsible for handling telecom services during the Rio Summit and other international conferences.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
Ok, so we hand out free software to Third Wrold countries... hasn't anyone considered that the people who can afford computers in these 3rd world countries are also the ones who can afford the software? I'm sure those Somalians would have a difficult choice between food or that nifty copy of MS Office.
-- "Our job is not to make the incredible possible. Our job is to make the impossible credible."- Jerry Olivieri
It is always encouraging to see efforts to improve the conditions of thrid world countries. However, free software by itself, can do very little. I believe one of the most interesting developments (although now very new) is wireless networking.
I know that Pakistani internet users have to pay huge fees (for lower middle class, atleast) just to make voice phone calls. It costs about $15 (last time I checked) to have internet access for 5 hours/A MONTH! Wouldn't a completely wireless network (spread spectrum or whatever), which bypasses POTS dramatically bring down costs and allow more people to use the internet.
If more people have cheap internet, even more will buy computers...a feedback loop of sorts. There is the question of hungry people buying computers. From an economics point of view, easy availability of internet breaks down communication barriers and leads to more effective markets (I know, VERY simplified).
Another big problem is that of local interfaces. for example, ubiquitious internet is not possible unless user interfaces and content in local languages is available. Technically, it is even more difficult for people who have non-roman alphabets (for example, national language of Pakistan, Urdu is written in the opposite direciton of English, has different character shapes depending on where in the word it apprears...etc., tec.).
All in all, there is great potential.
Rather crude analysis but contact me if you are interested in this more: chaudhar@umich.edu