It's a known fact that people like what they know. Most people I know who are only now connecting to the Net expect something like TV: they want to know what "channels" are available, then they want to sit back and enjoy the show. When I connected the first Internet-enabled e-mail system in the company I used to work for, people got mad at me when I told them there was no equivalent to the phone directory, no way to readily look anyone up and find their e-mail addresses; they asked me what I intended to do to solve the problem, as if I could do anything about it.
Today every time I connect (as a consultant) a new client to the Net, the first things they want are a) a way to monitor what the employees are doing; b) a way to restrict access to "unnaproved" sites and c) a way to look at every single incoming or outgoing e-mail message in order to screen it.<P> The concept of "portals" was designed to exploit the "TV desire" of newcomers, and it is definitely working. To some people "the Internet" and whatever their software installs as "home" for their browsers are the same thing. This kind of behaviour has the same origins as that in which people doing most of their work on word processors tend to fire up Word, open a document and click "save as", instead of simply copying whatever it is they want copied. Sadly, most people don't like to think and don't like to learn new things.<P> The most recent fad in my country is the popping up of a great number of "free internet providers". All people pay attention to is the word "free" (as in lunch, not as in speech). They don't mind if these providers tie them to a proprietary browser that attaches its own ad banners to every site they visit. They don't care if these providers filter anything from content to entire protocols. They just want to "watch Internet for free", as someone put it to me the other day.<P> It would take a lot of educating these people before things would be different. It just won't happen. Like TV, people will willingly give the power for free to the same media moguls, then just sit back and "enjoy the show" while they pile up fortunes.<P> For myself, I still struggle hard against that kind of complacency, but I think it's a lost cause. People don't want to publish their ideas freely because most of them don't have (or don't think they have) any ideas worth publishing. They want to read the sports page. People don't want to pay for Internet access. They'd rather watch ads. People don't want to think, they prefer watching TV.
That kind of questions, coupled with what the guy finds 'impressive' and 'not impressive', is exactly what I fear most about the future of Linux.
The impression that everything is not organized comes from someone who knows nothing about Unix; I mean, "once I found/etc/inittab".
I understand the need the GUI generation (and most of non-geeks) have for easy to use tools, especially if Linux wants to take over the desktops (which I'm not sure is a good idea anyway), but I really worry about it turning Linux into something it's not, which is difficult to use for the experienced user.
Please be careful with automated tools. To try to put all the Unix miriad configuration files under ONE tool has a huge potential for chaos. It's almost inevitable the thing is going to get out of sync as already happens with linuxconf, unless you refrain from doing any kind of configuration by hand.
My feeling is that half the problems of the Windows family are caused just by that - the GUI and the need to make everything easy.
Maybe if Linux would split into 2 things, one of them being what already exists and the other some distribution for the masses. If something like this does happen, I'll bet anyone the version for the masses will not be nearly as stable and flexible as the original design.
Please, guys, make your install/config tools, but be careful!
The eclipse will be visible from all of the Americas, including Central and South. São Paulo time, it will start at 01:01, reach mid-eclipse at 02:44 and end at 04:25, all AM.
Your use of Occam's razor is perfect; maybe I did not express myself correctly, but that's just what I meant when I ended with the "human nature" thing. Teenagers tend to be arrogant because the time has come for them to carve a niche of their own in their society, and territorial dominance plays a major part in this. That's why I conclude the geeks reaction is bullying. In this case, both geek and bully are teenagers expressing their natural arrogance by the means available to each of them.
By what you say in your comment I deduce you started learning about computers when you were 12, and you consider yourself competent since 14. Obviously, you know the difference between the way you use computers and the net and the way non-geeks do it. You probably fit right in in the society us older geeks built in the net.
I think your reasoning about quick gratification is right on. I didn't take that into account and I should. When I was attracted to computers in the first place, though, the little beasties were anything but quick gratification; thanks for upgradind my view of them.
Again, your reasoning about the jealousy of the sacrifice and commitment is right. I know it affects all of us, not just teenagers, because I still feel it very strong even at my age. Teenagers are not more prone to jealousy, though; they are more prone to reacting violently, which is more to the point.
The fact that you're 17 and your reply is so mature, not to mention the fact that you bothered to compose such a lengthy reply to post # 315, indicates something in favor of us geeks: we tend to mature earlier:)
Everyone considering him/herself a nerd, geek, or whatever you want to call us, should understand this right away. I don't know which is cause and which is effect, but usually a geek gets hostility and violence in real life and finds a "safe harbor" in some kind of activity where his/her capabilities are widely recognized. Lately this activity has been computers, and the net.
No matter if you're beaten up by bullies in high school, if you're left out of any sports you care to practice, if you can't get a date to the prom: in the world of computers you're the master. Recently not only you're the master but you get reconginition and lots of people coming to you for help. You may even get a well paying job years before all those bullies even think about earning their own money, and that feels good. Until very recently, the expertise and command of technical things that was required to access the net was a limiting factor and put geeks in contact with other geeks in a worldwide fashion. It gave us a head start in building the communities, filosophy and rules by which the internet functions.
Then the possibility of getting online with just a few clicks allowed anyone, no matter how stupid (from the point of view of teenage geeks), to "intrude" in our own world. Now not only we are excluded from most social events in real life, the same people want to take over our own private world!
Of course when geeks grow older, and I'm a 34 yo geek, we learn to deal with those issues and end up adjusting; we learn to use whatever capabilities we have in a useful way and we simply outgrow the need to be accepted in some circles - we learn that we usually are well accepted in the circles that really matter.
But can you blame a teen geek, who is probably feeling left out, who gets humiliated every other day, from defending violently his/her perceived territory from people who are trying to turn it into just another instance of the real world?
I think it's very understandable why teen (and immature) geeks behave like this, but it's also sad. It means geeks are using their superior knowledge to beat those weaker than him/her, just like bullies use their superior physical strength to beat those weaker then them.
On the Internet, the geeks are the bullies! My advice to geeks: be honest and think about this or you'll turn into what you despise. My advice to everyone else: think about this next time you abuse a geek. It's just human nature, after all.
The reason Linux is being adopted by corporations is because it's Unix. The reason why there are so many Linux developers is because it's Unix. If you take Unix away from Linux you end up with something like Windows - that's where DOS came from, btw, a subset of Unix. You don't like permissions? Run as root! You don't want to know about Unix intricacies? You don't have to: just install RPMs and you're game. In over 20 years of experience, if I learned something it was this: every time they try to make something easy by hiding the complexity they end up with something that fails more and is harder to fix.
First, I'm really tired of the way everybody seems to (mis)understand the so-called underdeveloped countries. Although we do have major social and economic problems, we are in the 20th century, just like the rest of the world (If you're part of the group who can't count, go ahead and celebrate te millenium a year in advance - I don't care).
There's not a well defined line between developed and underdeveloped countries. My country's financial system is *totally* dependent on computers and we had to put the same kind of effort to clearing Y2K issues as the rest of the world, not to mention putting up with the Y2K hype and histeria.
Second, I think anyone who uses words like "proactive" should be taken with a tiny bit less seriousness than other mortals - nothing personal, just stating a belief.
Just thought I'd report: Jan 1st, 2000 is pretty much like any other day here in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Besides all the rain yesterday the Sun is shining and the temp is high. All the computers I have access to (Linux, SCO, AIX) rolled over nicely, from 486s to RISC-6000s and everything in between. Despite the city-wide hangover (I assume from the silence outside everyone else is feeling like me), electrical power is up, traffic lights are working, phones and TV are OK. Best of all, my expresso machine seems to be Y2K compliant!
Probably a programmer error. Ansi C returns date - 1900. It's up to the programmer to add 1900 to the date. Apparently this guy made a typo and added 19000...
The executive officer of a bank here in Brazil had a great idea: he went to Australia to spend the weekend, all expenses payed by his employer, to "observe the Y2K onset and report back to headquarters". Why didn't I think of it??
In the specific case of the Melissa virus, Microsoft's mistake was to make an e-mail client which by default makes it possible for anyone to execute arbitrary code on any Outlook equipped machine through an e-mail message. The question here is not liability, but plain bad design. It stems from the fact that the in the Windows environment security was added as an afterthought. Ideally, consumers should understand this kind of fact and demand better design by changing to a competing product. The only thing preventing consumers to do so is the monopolistic characteristics of the Microsoft business. Hopefully this will end up happening anyway as the computer industry matures, as has been pointed out by someone else here.
I think 1999 was the year Linux became know, but 2000 will be the year it makes history. We can expect some very interesting developments, including a Linux vs Win2K showdown and probably the unveiling of MS's strategy against Linux.
Your English is not so bad, but then I'm Brazilian also... As for your question (tah certo isso?): it's technically right, but I believe they use the expression "developing countries".
Carlos, I agree with what you say but for your 1) item. The law specifically calls for open source programs and it takes the trouble of defining open source; actually, the definition seems to be a direct translation from the GPL.
Disposes on the utilization of open source programs by public and private entities under stockholder control of the public administration.
Article 1 - All levels of the public administration, the Powers of the Republic, the Government owned and/or controlled companies, the public agencies and all other institutions under control of the Brazilian society are obligated to use preferencially, in its systems and informatic equipment, open source programs, free from proprietary restriction as to its licensing, alteration and distribution.
Article 2 - Open source programs are those which adhere to a license of industrial or intelectual property that doesn't restrict in any aspect the licensing, distribution, utilization or alteration of original features.
Article 3 - The open source program must assure users unrestricted access to its source code, without any cost, with the intent of modifying said program, in its entirety if needed, to promote its development.
Paragraph: source code must be the preferential resource used by the programmer to modify the program, not being permited obfuscating its accessibility or introducing any intermediate form of output from a pre-processor or a translator.
Article 4 - The utilization license for open source programs must allow modifications and derivative works and their free distribution under the same terms as the license for the original program.
1 - The license may only restrict distribution of a modified form of the source code if it allows for the distribution of the altered programs together with the original source code, aiming at the alteration of the program during compilation.
2 - It must explicitly allow the distribution of the program compiled from the source code, and it can require that derived work have different names or version numbers so as to differentiate it from the original work.
Article 5 - There must be no clause in the license that implies in the discrimination of persons or groups of persons.
Article 6 - No license shall be specific to any one product, so that programs extracted from the original distribution have the same guarantee of free alteration, distribution and utilization as the original product.
Article 7 - The licenses of open or restricted products shall not restrict those of products in the same distribution.
Article 8 - Bodies intending to commercialize computer programs with the entities described in Article 1, shall mandatorily be regulated by the principles established in this legislation.
Article 9 - Entities described in Article 1 shall mandatorily use computer programs distributed under licenses not in agreement with this law only in the absence of open source programs contemplating the solutions required by the acquisition process.
JUSTIFICATION
For more than fifteen years the free manipulation of computer programs or "free software" (in english in the original) has been discussed in the whole world. In 1984 it was impossible to use a modern computer without the installation of a proprietary operating system, distributed only under broad spectrum restrictive licenses. No one was allowed to freely share computer programs and it was very hard for anyone to change the programs to satisfy their specific operational needs.
The GNU project, dating from the beginning of the Free Software Movement, was created to change this. Its first goal was to develop a portable operating system compatible with Unix that would be 100% free for alteration and distribution, making possible for users to contribute with its development and to modify any part of its original constitution.
Technically GNU is like Unix, but it differs from it in the freedom it allows its users. Many years of work by hundreds of programmers were needed for the development of this open source operating system. In 1991, the last major component of a Unix like operating system was created: Linux.
Today the Linux/GNU combination is used worldwide, freely by millions of people. This program is just an example of how the freedom to modify, distribute and use computer programs can influence in a faster and more democratic way the profile of social and technological development in the world. The State, as a facilitator of technological development and of the democratization of access to new technologies by the society, has a responsability to prioritize the utilization of open source programs. If small, medium and large multinational companies are already adopting open source, thus avoiding paying hundreds of millions of American dollars in program licenses, why should the State, with its infinite social causes in need of resources, continue to buy - and at premium prices - commercial programs?
To those are concerned about government forcing people to use free software, please notice:
The proposed law only forces government agencies, not private citizens or companies.
Big companies do have an immense power over our government. Lobby is rampant. I don't think anything can compete in its own merits in such a situation.
If not for something like this, Brazilian governmental agencies would never try anything other than Microsoft, just because no other company comes closer when it comes to spilling money for lobbying.
My main computer, bought 3 monthes ago in Sao Paulo, is a PIII - 450 MHz, 128 MBytes RAM, 2 x 6 GBytes HD, 44x CD, SoundBlaster AWE 32, 56 K Modem. Video card is just a Cirrus Logic SVGA, but that's because I'm not much into gaming myself. I paid all of US$ 1300,00 for it.
Please, what exactly do you mean our problems are with our people? Maybe there's a problem with the way our society has evolved, I could accept that, but the people?? In exactly what way do you propose the Brazilian people, all 190 million of us, are problematic?
It is extremely unfortunate that the killing of children ever happened. It should NOT have happened. But I'm really sick of what the international media has made of it. PLEASE, once and for all:
We Brazilians do NOT applaud the killing of children in the streets. We Brazilians do NOT like the fact that some children don't have homes. We are trying very hard to surface after centuries of neglect followed by decades of dictatorship. We have problems. If you are genuinely interested in the Brazilian situation please seek information and try to make your own mind. There are many things happening here and I hate to see all the world knows about is that children were killed and maybe that we're a very sexual people.
Same old story... Americans blame drugs, the Brazilian Government blames the games, and leftist activists blame the Americans... sigh!
BTW, I'd really like to know exactly where in Brasil you're from because you sound just like a lot of people who know a lot about my city's social problems from seeing them on TV. Civil war? Get real!
I live in Sao Paulo - Brasil; I see some of my countrymen have already replied to this but I wish to clarify a few things:
The version of Carmageddon sold in Brazil is called "Armagedon", because the pun makes no sense in Portuguese. "Carmageddon" means absolutely nothing while Armagedon is a perfectly valid Portuguese word. Also, this game is from the times when companies still tried to translate game titles - nowadays they don't bother anymore partly because time time to market is everything and partly because when the games are officialy released here people have been playing them for a while, either downloading from the 'net or ordering a copy from some American Internet shop. Some game fans don't wait for the 2-3 monthes it takes to translate all the dialogs, user manual, etc.
Some kinds of shooting are indeed (and sadly) common in the streets of Sao Paulo, but they're usually related to gang fights, "vigilantes" and organized crime. This case caught everyone's attention because the perpetrator is a med student with no involvement with those underworlds.
Coke is not Brasil's #1 cash crop. Although we are an important part of the route drug follows to reach the US and Europe, it's actually grown in the bordering countries of Bolivia and Colombia. I also wish to remind you that the only reason the drug is grown and follows this route is because people at its destination will buy it.
The weapon used is actually illegal here, which doesn't make it impossible to buy from black markets. Just like cocaine is illegal in the US, by the way.
Yes, this ruling was made just to show the government is doing something, it's just a media stunt. Yes, it will probably be overruled by a superior court.
Meira was not immobilized by guards while reloading, he was overtaken by the moviegoers when he ran out of amo. This is causing some protests against the mall administration.
Finally, and more to the subject: all kinds of explanations were ventured by the media. One of the more stupid I've seen is he did it to emulate so many similar cases happening in the US, a kind of "wish to be in the 1st world". Games, drugs, everything is to blame. The fact the he had just interrupted drug treatment for his mental condition - against medical advice - was barely reported.
Slashdot Mirror
Today every time I connect (as a consultant) a new client to the Net, the first things they want are a) a way to monitor what the employees are doing; b) a way to restrict access to "unnaproved" sites and c) a way to look at every single incoming or outgoing e-mail message in order to screen it.<P>
The concept of "portals" was designed to exploit the "TV desire" of newcomers, and it is definitely working. To some people "the Internet" and whatever their software installs as "home" for their browsers are the same thing. This kind of behaviour has the same origins as that in which people doing most of their work on word processors tend to fire up Word, open a document and click "save as", instead of simply copying whatever it is they want copied. Sadly, most people don't like to think and don't like to learn new things.<P>
The most recent fad in my country is the popping up of a great number of "free internet providers". All people pay attention to is the word "free" (as in lunch, not as in speech). They don't mind if these providers tie them to a proprietary browser that attaches its own ad banners to every site they visit. They don't care if these providers filter anything from content to entire protocols. They just want to "watch Internet for free", as someone put it to me the other day.<P>
It would take a lot of educating these people before things would be different. It just won't happen. Like TV, people will willingly give the power for free to the same media moguls, then just sit back and "enjoy the show" while they pile up fortunes.<P>
For myself, I still struggle hard against that kind of complacency, but I think it's a lost cause. People don't want to publish their ideas freely because most of them don't have (or don't think they have) any ideas worth publishing. They want to read the sports page. People don't want to pay for Internet access. They'd rather watch ads. People don't want to think, they prefer watching TV.
That book is "The City and The Stars".
The impression that everything is not organized comes from someone who knows nothing about Unix; I mean, "once I found
I understand the need the GUI generation (and most of non-geeks) have for easy to use tools, especially if Linux wants to take over the desktops (which I'm not sure is a good idea anyway), but I really worry about it turning Linux into something it's not, which is difficult to use for the experienced user.
Please be careful with automated tools. To try to put all the Unix miriad configuration files under ONE tool has a huge potential for chaos. It's almost inevitable the thing is going to get out of sync as already happens with linuxconf, unless you refrain from doing any kind of configuration by hand.
My feeling is that half the problems of the Windows family are caused just by that - the GUI and the need to make everything easy.
Maybe if Linux would split into 2 things, one of them being what already exists and the other some distribution for the masses. If something like this does happen, I'll bet anyone the version for the masses will not be nearly as stable and flexible as the original design.
Please, guys, make your install/config tools, but be careful!
The eclipse will be visible from all of the Americas, including Central and South. São Paulo time, it will start at 01:01, reach mid-eclipse at 02:44 and end at 04:25, all AM.
By what you say in your comment I deduce you started learning about computers when you were 12, and you consider yourself competent since 14. Obviously, you know the difference between the way you use computers and the net and the way non-geeks do it. You probably fit right in in the society us older geeks built in the net.
I think your reasoning about quick gratification is right on. I didn't take that into account and I should. When I was attracted to computers in the first place, though, the little beasties were anything but quick gratification; thanks for upgradind my view of them.
Again, your reasoning about the jealousy of the sacrifice and commitment is right. I know it affects all of us, not just teenagers, because I still feel it very strong even at my age. Teenagers are not more prone to jealousy, though; they are more prone to reacting violently, which is more to the point.
The fact that you're 17 and your reply is so mature, not to mention the fact that you bothered to compose such a lengthy reply to post # 315, indicates something in favor of us geeks: we tend to mature earlier
No matter if you're beaten up by bullies in high school, if you're left out of any sports you care to practice, if you can't get a date to the prom: in the world of computers you're the master. Recently not only you're the master but you get reconginition and lots of people coming to you for help. You may even get a well paying job years before all those bullies even think about earning their own money, and that feels good. Until very recently, the expertise and command of technical things that was required to access the net was a limiting factor and put geeks in contact with other geeks in a worldwide fashion. It gave us a head start in building the communities, filosophy and rules by which the internet functions.
Then the possibility of getting online with just a few clicks allowed anyone, no matter how stupid (from the point of view of teenage geeks), to "intrude" in our own world. Now not only we are excluded from most social events in real life, the same people want to take over our own private world!
Of course when geeks grow older, and I'm a 34 yo geek, we learn to deal with those issues and end up adjusting; we learn to use whatever capabilities we have in a useful way and we simply outgrow the need to be accepted in some circles - we learn that we usually are well accepted in the circles that really matter.
But can you blame a teen geek, who is probably feeling left out, who gets humiliated every other day, from defending violently his/her perceived territory from people who are trying to turn it into just another instance of the real world?
I think it's very understandable why teen (and immature) geeks behave like this, but it's also sad. It means geeks are using their superior knowledge to beat those weaker than him/her, just like bullies use their superior physical strength to beat those weaker then them.
On the Internet, the geeks are the bullies! My advice to geeks: be honest and think about this or you'll turn into what you despise. My advice to everyone else: think about this next time you abuse a geek. It's just human nature, after all.
The reason Linux is being adopted by corporations is because it's Unix. The reason why there are so many Linux developers is because it's Unix. If you take Unix away from Linux you end up with something like Windows - that's where DOS came from, btw, a subset of Unix. You don't like permissions? Run as root! You don't want to know about Unix intricacies? You don't have to: just install RPMs and you're game. In over 20 years of experience, if I learned something it was this: every time they try to make something easy by hiding the complexity they end up with something that fails more and is harder to fix.
just my 0.02.
* MCP buddy sold separately
There's not a well defined line between developed and underdeveloped countries. My country's financial system is *totally* dependent on computers and we had to put the same kind of effort to clearing Y2K issues as the rest of the world, not to mention putting up with the Y2K hype and histeria.
Second, I think anyone who uses words like "proactive" should be taken with a tiny bit less seriousness than other mortals - nothing personal, just stating a belief.
All the best for you all!
Probably a programmer error. Ansi C returns date - 1900. It's up to the programmer to add 1900 to the date. Apparently this guy made a typo and added 19000...
The executive officer of a bank here in Brazil had a great idea: he went to Australia to spend the weekend, all expenses payed by his employer, to "observe the Y2K onset and report back to headquarters". Why didn't I think of it??
In the specific case of the Melissa virus, Microsoft's mistake was to make an e-mail client which by default makes it possible for anyone to execute arbitrary code on any Outlook equipped machine through an e-mail message. The question here is not liability, but plain bad design. It stems from the fact that the in the Windows environment security was added as an afterthought. Ideally, consumers should understand this kind of fact and demand better design by changing to a competing product. The only thing preventing consumers to do so is the monopolistic characteristics of the Microsoft business. Hopefully this will end up happening anyway as the computer industry matures, as has been pointed out by someone else here.
I think 1999 was the year Linux became know, but 2000 will be the year it makes history. We can expect some very interesting developments, including a Linux vs Win2K showdown and probably the unveiling of MS's strategy against Linux.
Your English is not so bad, but then I'm Brazilian also... As for your question (tah certo isso?): it's technically right, but I believe they use the expression "developing countries".
Carlos, I agree with what you say but for your 1) item. The law specifically calls for open source programs and it takes the trouble of defining open source; actually, the definition seems to be a direct translation from the GPL.
(By Mr. Walter Pinheiro)
Disposes on the utilization of open source programs by public and
private entities under stockholder control of the public administration.
Article 1 - All levels of the public administration, the Powers of the
Republic, the Government owned and/or controlled companies, the public
agencies and all other institutions under control of the Brazilian
society are obligated to use preferencially, in its systems and
informatic equipment, open source programs, free from proprietary
restriction as to its licensing, alteration and distribution.
Article 2 - Open source programs are those which adhere to a license of
industrial or intelectual property that doesn't restrict in any aspect
the licensing, distribution, utilization or alteration of original
features.
Article 3 - The open source program must assure users unrestricted
access to its source code, without any cost, with the intent of
modifying said program, in its entirety if needed, to promote its
development.
Paragraph: source code must be the preferential resource used by the
programmer to modify the program, not being permited obfuscating its
accessibility or introducing any intermediate form of output from a
pre-processor or a translator.
Article 4 - The utilization license for open source programs must allow
modifications and derivative works and their free distribution under the
same terms as the license for the original program.
1 - The license may only restrict distribution of a modified form of
the source code if it allows for the distribution of the altered
programs together with the original source code, aiming at the
alteration of the program during compilation.
2 - It must explicitly allow the distribution of the program compiled
from the source code, and it can require that derived work have
different names or version numbers so as to differentiate it from the
original work.
Article 5 - There must be no clause in the license that implies in the
discrimination of persons or groups of persons.
Article 6 - No license shall be specific to any one product, so that
programs extracted from the original distribution have the same
guarantee of free alteration, distribution and utilization as the
original product.
Article 7 - The licenses of open or restricted products shall not
restrict those of products in the same distribution.
Article 8 - Bodies intending to commercialize computer programs with the
entities described in Article 1, shall mandatorily be regulated by the
principles established in this legislation.
Article 9 - Entities described in Article 1 shall mandatorily use
computer programs distributed under licenses not in agreement with this
law only in the absence of open source programs contemplating the
solutions required by the acquisition process.
JUSTIFICATION
For more than fifteen years the free manipulation of computer programs
or "free software" (in english in the original) has been discussed in
the whole world. In 1984 it was impossible to use a modern computer
without the installation of a proprietary operating system, distributed
only under broad spectrum restrictive licenses. No one was allowed to
freely share computer programs and it was very hard for anyone to change
the programs to satisfy their specific operational needs.
The GNU project, dating from the beginning of the Free Software
Movement, was created to change this. Its first goal was to develop a
portable operating system compatible with Unix that would be 100% free
for alteration and distribution, making possible for users to contribute
with its development and to modify any part of its original
constitution.
Technically GNU is like Unix, but it differs from it in the freedom it
allows its users. Many years of work by hundreds of programmers were
needed for the development of this open source operating system. In
1991, the last major component of a Unix like operating system was
created: Linux.
Today the Linux/GNU combination is used worldwide, freely by millions of
people. This program is just an example of how the freedom to modify,
distribute and use computer programs can influence in a faster and more
democratic way the profile of social and technological development in
the world. The State, as a facilitator of technological development and
of the democratization of access to new technologies by the society, has
a responsability to prioritize the utilization of open source programs.
If small, medium and large multinational companies are already adopting
open source, thus avoiding paying hundreds of millions of American
dollars in program licenses, why should the State, with its infinite
social causes in need of resources, continue to buy - and at premium
prices - commercial programs?
Sessions Room, December 15 1999
Congressman Walter Pinheiro
Well, I am Brazilian and if it wasn't for Slashdot I'd have to look around to find the congressman's address. Thanks for the service, /.!
My main computer, bought 3 monthes ago in Sao Paulo, is a PIII - 450 MHz, 128 MBytes RAM, 2 x 6 GBytes HD, 44x CD, SoundBlaster AWE 32, 56 K Modem. Video card is just a Cirrus Logic SVGA, but that's because I'm not much into gaming myself. I paid all of US$ 1300,00 for it.
Please, what exactly do you mean our problems are with our people? Maybe there's a problem with the way our society has evolved, I could accept that, but the people?? In exactly what way do you propose the Brazilian people, all 190 million of us, are problematic?
We Brazilians do NOT applaud the killing of children in the streets.
We Brazilians do NOT like the fact that some children don't have homes.
We are trying very hard to surface after centuries of neglect followed by decades of dictatorship. We have problems.
If you are genuinely interested in the Brazilian situation please seek information and try to make your own mind. There are many things happening here and I hate to see all the world knows about is that children were killed and maybe that we're a very sexual people.
BTW, I'd really like to know exactly where in Brasil you're from because you sound just like a lot of people who know a lot about my city's social problems from seeing them on TV. Civil war? Get real!
Whew. Sorry for the long post...