|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

The O'Reilly Radar site has a report from the Worldwide Free Knowledge Forum, just held in Venezuela. "The stuff that is happening with 'Software Libre' in Venezuela is really mind-boggling. In January the Venezuelan open source law goes into effect, mandating a two year transition to open source in all public agencies. This massive undertaking will involve the training of hundreds of thousands of government employees and migrating of the software that runs not only their public agencies, but also their oil industry (which accounts for 70% of the country's economy and is one of the largest business enterprise in Latin America). They are talking about a huge country-wide move to open source that dwarfs anything I've heard about anywhere else."

to post comments

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 7, 2005 17:49 UTC (Wed) by philips (guest, #937) [Link] (16 responses)

I hope it wouldn't turn bad as it is in Munchen.

I'd rather to see transition to OSS as grass root movement. I always have bad feeling about things mandated by goverments and regulators.

I support the way MA did that - going open standards - effectively creating leveled play field for productivity software manufacturers.

Open standards is what tries to take best of natural self-regulating function of capitalism by ensuring choices for customer.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 7, 2005 17:56 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (6 responses)

How bad is it in Munich? I attended a report on LiMux at FOSS.IN which suggested that things are proceeding apace. Certainly this project is not immune to the issues that beset large projects and city politics, but my sense is that it is headed in the right direction...

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 7, 2005 19:27 UTC (Wed) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (5 responses)

Probably he's remembering the hubbub leading up to the changeover, involving (as I recall) anti-software-patent grandstanding at the expense of Linux credibility, and some (now familiar) Microsoft shenanigans.

The key phrase is "two-year transition". Organizations that try to switch overnight have problems, but two years is plenty of time, and newly free[-beer] VMWare makes some things easier.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 7, 2005 20:23 UTC (Wed) by madscientist (subscriber, #16861) [Link] (2 responses)

"Newly free[-beer] VMWare' ?!?!

What's this? I haven't heard that!

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 7, 2005 21:07 UTC (Wed) by NightMonkey (subscriber, #23051) [Link] (1 responses)

http://www.vmware.com/products/player/

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 7:40 UTC (Thu) by hingo (guest, #14792) [Link]

"VMware Player is free software ..."

Sorry, couldn't resist:-)

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 7, 2005 23:22 UTC (Wed) by HappyCamp (guest, #29230) [Link] (1 responses)

Along with the VMWare player, don't forget Xen. Xen 3.0 supports the virtualization technology that Intel is releasing. So you will be able to run Windows under Linux within the next three months.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 17:56 UTC (Thu) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link]

Only with new hardware. One of the attractions of switching to Linux is that they won't have to buy all new equipment next time Microsoft wants a capital injection.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 7, 2005 22:20 UTC (Wed) by jstypo (guest, #34400) [Link] (5 responses)

Indeed, I tend to agree with phillips, especially knowing how the current Venezuelan government has discovered how convenient and easy it is to slap together LAMP-based applications, such as the infamous Tascón list and its successor the Maisanta-Batalla de Santa Inés list to further needlessly cruel repressiion of the general populace.

The Tascón list, so named by the deputy to the National Assembly that hosted it on his website, held the names of approximately 3.5 million people who signed against President Chávez in the August 15th 2004 recall referendum and was used as the basis for a sustained purge and execration of thousands upon thousands of government employees and those of their contractors listed therein.

This list was superceded by the Maisanta (or Batalla de Santa Inés) list, a somewhat more sophisticated, integrated windows app/database, holding the entire Electoral Registry of around 12 million people, with all the associated (supposedly secret) voting data, so that literally anyone can get a complete rundown of a particular person, their complete name and address, if and how they voted in past elections, if they are beneficiaries of government handouts, whether or not they have signed against the president in the recall referendum ... all Vintage orwellian 1984 ... all based upon open source.

These tools are currently used on a daily basis throughout the country to establish a level of political and social discrimination, the likes of which I have never seen or even read about before.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 0:44 UTC (Thu) by jabby (guest, #2648) [Link] (2 responses)

I haven't heard about any of this. Can you provide any sources?

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 15:37 UTC (Thu) by jstypo (guest, #34400) [Link]

> I haven't heard about any of this. Can you provide any sources?

Heh, no, but you could search the major bittorrent trackers for the binaries. Try for the terms cne tascon venezuela ... that should do the trick.

There is a .rar archive on the net that contains a compressed nero image.

Seeing is believing!

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 15:54 UTC (Thu) by jstypo (guest, #34400) [Link]

> I haven't heard about any of this. Can you provide any sources?

Please excuse my repeat reply to the same post, but while googling, I found this website, http://www.maisantalist.com/, from which one can download this application it directly.

Still no sources though :(

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 1:08 UTC (Thu) by szoth (guest, #14825) [Link] (1 responses)

The first google search I could think of to check up this fellow's facts:

http://www.google.com/search?q=Tasc%C3%B3n+In%C3%A9s+Vene...

Seems to indicate that only people who are inclined to judge against Chavez are propagating these talking points.

http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?content=home

http://daniel-venezuela.blogspot.com/2005/05/where-is-ven...

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/categories/tasconSFascistL...

The position that Chavez is a "dictator" is more extreme than that promoted by the Bush Administration, one of his harshest critics.

The man was elected by the poor, the majority of the country, and claims to be working in their interest. That claim is for them to judge and they seem to be judging in his favor.

Back on topic, any move towards free software and openness is a move toward democracy, and we should support it even from the most vile dictator.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 12:31 UTC (Thu) by jstypo (guest, #34400) [Link]

> The position that Chavez is a "dictator" is more extreme than that promoted by the Bush Administration, one of his harshest critics.

This is a position usually assumed by opponents within Venezuela, who are acutely aware of the issues involved.

It's slightly more difficult to assume this position from outside Venezuela, because the country's oil production has, is and will be used as an oversize menacing club with which to further government political interests. Testimony to this can be borne by small countries like El Salvador, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic that have crumbled before Venezuelan interests and big ones like the US, that has flexibly bent every which way to avoid hiccups in the stream of oil shipments.

> The man was elected by the poor, the majority of the country, and claims to be working in their interest. That claim is for them to judge and they seem to be judging in his favor.

This statement is initially quite correct. His electoral base was fundamentally the poor and needy, back in 1998.

Since then, however, his policy has been basically to divide the country, playing one sector off against another, with a view to facilitating his stay in power and his control over the country.

To bring us back down to earth, though, a curious phenomenom has recently ocurred in the context of the recent elections to the National Assembly. It has been recently proven in front of international observers representing the OAS and the EC, that the entire, highly computerized voting apparatus can be used to figure out who voted for whom in real time nationwide.

Because of this appalling discovery, which has been suspected for a long time by opposition factors and publically denied by officials of the local electoral council, there has been a very strong upsurge of mistrust against the electoral council causing an important segment of the opposition to withdraw from elections alleging lack of fair conditions.

The election went ahead anyway but despite Chavez's party's extremely advantageous position, wild expenditure of public funds, open threats by officials against government employees who wouldn't vote and blatant generalized disregard for electoral rules, the election was transformed into a plebescite regarding Chavez's approval when the opposition withdrew from the elections with a resulting: 25% of the registry voted, half of which were protest null votes (figures courtesy of the electoral council) ... demonstrating that even with their figures, they admit to approximately 12% support. Local pundits speculate that his real support is much less than that.

I often wonder what the Venezuelan government gives back to open source and what the true motivation for adoption is.

> Back on topic, any move towards free software and openness is a move toward democracy, and we should support it even from the most vile dictator.

It makes me uneasy knowing that "vile dictators" are harnessing the world's finest intellect to do their darkest deeds and shudder to think, as should we all, of the million ways that a country's government in cahoots with its other supposedly independent executive entities, acting as one giant monolithic block can suffocate a populace using FOSS. To be fair, probably many other governments would do the same thing, if they could.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 1:15 UTC (Thu) by jabby (guest, #2648) [Link] (1 responses)

natural self-regulating function of capitalism

It's exactly this that Venezuela is trying to fight against. The natural function of capitalism is to exploit everyone and everything for profit. If it makes a software company more money to force its consumers onto an upgrade treadmill, or to create buggy software and then sell computer security services, or to intentionally refuse to support an open standard, or to bribe government officials and procurement officers to force the use of their product on people, who are the consumers to stop it?

Consumer choice is a false benefit. Under capitalism/greed, consumers have their choice of parasites and can only "vote" with their dollars (and who gets the most votes?). Under socialism (society organized for the benefit of society, not just the rich), consumers... [no, see under proprietary software we are relegated to mere consumers, but with open source, we are people, with just as much power and control over our software as the programmers.]... *people* can actually organize collectively to create whatever it is they need, which is pretty much how open source works.

If the Venezuelan people decide they need a piece of specialized software to run their oil industry, they don't want to depend on proprietary foreign software to do it. Same might as well go for public documents, military software, running of the schools, etc. Buying proprietary foreign software costs them hard currency, leaves them dependent on other countries, and does not help them to develop a local tech economy.

Open formats are good, but why stop there? When you know that there's something in the water that's hurting you, you don't just give it equal footing with something good... you filter it out!

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 4:15 UTC (Thu) by rqosa (subscriber, #24136) [Link]

> If it makes a software company more money to force its consumers onto an upgrade treadmill, or to create buggy software and then sell computer security services, or to intentionally refuse to support an open standard, or to bribe government officials and procurement officers to force the use of their product on people,

But what if it doesn't make a company more money to do those things? Unless I'm mistaken, the number of proprietary software companies is decreasing (partly because Microsoft is driving other ones out of business, partly because of the rise of free software), whereas the number of companies selling services around free software is increasing.

> who are the consumers to stop it?

They can avoid those things by using free software, or writing free software, or funding the development of it.

Venezuela Open Source (O'Reilly)

Posted Dec 8, 2005 3:58 UTC (Thu) by rqosa (subscriber, #24136) [Link]

> I always have bad feeling about things mandated by goverments and regulators.

Notice that the article says that they are "mandating a two year transition to open source in all public agencies" (emphasis mine). In other words, the government is mandating that its own agencies use free/open source software. This is the same in principle as any other government procurement policy; do you object to all of those too?

The only thing unusual about this procurement policy is its requirement for free/open source software, and this is a good thing.

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 7, 2005 19:44 UTC (Wed) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510) [Link] (11 responses)

At GUADEC in 2004, I debated Senator Villanueva regarding the Open Source bill he had authored for the nation of Peru. My contention is that there should be a level playing field upon which Free Software and proprietary can compete upon their merits. Of course, the rights granted by Open Source licensing are very significant merits, and in most cases Free Software would win - given a level playing field.

In addition, there are applications where Open Standards are a must - especially public documents and the interface to government. The Massachussets Open Document approach is the correct way to deal with this problem - it establishes a level playing field through Open Standards. Companies should also insist on Open Standards without royalties or discriminatory licensing for the file formats and intercommunication protocols of programs they buy. This would allow interoperation and healthy competition that would drive prices down and quality up as well as establish a level playing field for Open Source and proprietary.

I still think that preference laws are the wrong way to go. But it's a fact that most of the world has preference laws that work in favor of proprietary software and against Open source - like software patenting, DMCA, etc., and there is no level playing field today.

Perhaps people in poverty stricken third-world nations need preference laws simply to offset the power of entrenched first-world monopolies. But I keep thinking that the end still doesn't justify the means.

Bruce Perens

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 7, 2005 20:57 UTC (Wed) by gravious (guest, #7662) [Link] (4 responses)

Yes they are a good idea Bruce. Which is fairer, a flat tax or a heavy progressive tax that requires the richer members of society to contribute more because it benefits society as a whole? The progressive tax is fairer. Is it just to legislate against years of imperial colonialism and capitalism? Yes.

If you as a law-maker are not actively doing harm then how you structure your society is fair game. If proprietary code-shops get burnt by Peruvian or Venezuelan or Where-ever laws they can always go the sensible route and move towards free software licences. Let's not shed too many tears for the billionaires as they slowly choke on their own greed!

Warmest Regards,
Anto

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 8, 2005 1:20 UTC (Thu) by jabby (guest, #2648) [Link]

I agree.

[Repeating my logic from above (sorry)...]

Open formats are good, but why stop there? When you know that there's something in the water that's hurting you, you don't just give it equal footing with something good... you filter it out. And the quicker the better!

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 8, 2005 14:00 UTC (Thu) by zotz (guest, #26117) [Link] (2 responses)

"Yes they are a good idea Bruce. Which is fairer, a flat tax or a heavy progressive tax that requires the richer members of society to contribute more because it benefits society as a whole? The progressive tax is fairer. Is it just to legislate against years of imperial colonialism and capitalism? Yes."

No, it is not. Now, if a flat tax applied to the new rich and a progressive tax applied to the old or entrenched rich, you might have more of an argument. Although, the old rich probably have their stuff well protected in trusts and foundations and offshore, etc., so you may not get them anyway.

For those who want high death and inheritance taxes, I suggest you think of the new rich exemption as well. How about a family has to be above a certain "rich" line for a certain number of generations (x, 3? 5? what would be a good x?) before the tax kicks in.

I am not advocating such taxes, but if those that do want to accomplish what they say they want, wouldn't these ideas make sense?

I am open for discussions in these areas.

all the best,

drew
-----
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937
Tings. A CC BY-SA Novel - winner in NaNoWriMo 2005.

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 10, 2005 18:49 UTC (Sat) by beoba (guest, #16942) [Link]

Money is money, dear.

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Aug 13, 2006 10:16 UTC (Sun) by gravious (guest, #7662) [Link]

Hi Zotz,

Thanks for taking the time to reply - Sorry I didn't see this before. As beoba says "money is money dear". I prefer a progressive tax to a flat tax because above a certain level all wealth becomes essentially disposable. For instance. Say I live in country X and the currency is in €. Okay, in X to afford myself a certain minimum of living it costs me €300 a month for rent, another €300 for food and bevvies, €100 for transport, €200 for utilities such as water, lights, phone, refuse and so on. Add another couple of hundred for clothing and what have you and we get a figure of €1100. Now if there's a flat tax of 40% then I have to earn at least €1833 a month. If I'm earning €5000 a month I pay €2000 in tax but I now have €1900 above a minimum standard of living. While it seems a fixed percentage tax is fair it is in fact unfair because it penalises the less well off by never allowing them to have any spare capital and also does not recognise the fact that there are only so many yachts a person needs to buy.

So the moral of the story is - people on welfare and minimum wage don't pay tax. People on crap wages pay a bit and get to keep a bit. Rich folk pay a lot but still get to keep a lot.

I also believe the state should inherit 100% of a dead person's estate - my thinking is that ideally (I know, I know, this is not an _ideal_ world) everyone should be able to get ahead regardless of circumstances and inheritance merely perpetuates centuries of inequity.

I'm willing to argue all this out though. I believe as the system becomes fairer for all, these decisions will be the least of our concern. Besides, with all the poverty and oppression in the world it will be a long time before these minor issues become global.

I too, am open for discussion,
Kind regards,
Anthony

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 8, 2005 1:21 UTC (Thu) by grouch (guest, #27289) [Link] (5 responses)

A level playing field is a sufficient goal for business. For public government functions, open source is the only reasonable goal. The code that manipulates public data by a government should be open for public inspection. Any exceptions should be allowed only with a clear and demonstrable need.

Open document formats address the needs of public data storage, retrieval and presentation. They are not sufficient to ensure fair electronic voting, including voting by the citizenry and by legislative bodies. The electorate has a right to determine for itself whether its votes are being properly counted. This cannot be done if software is used which cannot be examined. No amount of testing for expected output from closed voting software is sufficient to show that it could not be manipulated during the voting process and be designed to leave no trail of the manipulation.

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 8, 2005 7:04 UTC (Thu) by neoprene (guest, #8520) [Link] (4 responses)

"A level playing field is a sufficient goal for business."

Business does NOT want a "level playing field", they want a monopoly. Thats the whole idea behind patents.

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 8, 2005 7:26 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510) [Link]

Do not make the mistake of thinking of business in the role of software vendor. Software vendors make up a very small minority of the business world. Most of them are users, and many produce software for their own needs without ever selling it.

If you haven't read my economics paper, you should. It might give you a clearer vision of Open Source in the business world.

Thanks

Bruce

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 8, 2005 14:05 UTC (Thu) by zotz (guest, #26117) [Link] (1 responses)

"Business does NOT want a "level playing field", they want a monopoly. Thats the whole idea behind patents."

True, but only for themselves, not for their suppliers. Copyrights also give monopolies, not just patents. How exactly do we get free markets where government granted monopolies are involved?

Are they even possible where Free licenses are involved? I think we can certainly get close.

all the best,

drew
-----
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937
Tings. A CC-BY-SA Novel. Enjoy. Profit.

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 8, 2005 22:51 UTC (Thu) by neoprene (guest, #8520) [Link]

"How exactly do we get free markets where government granted monopolies are involved?"

"Free" markets means different things to different entities. Some view that "NAFTA" freedom gives freedom to large corporations to sideline old tariffs [meant to protect domestic producers]at the expense of the benficiaries of the old tariffs, perhaps small farmers. Sometimes corporate interests dominate, perhaps a sign of a weak democracy.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0498d.asp

Are preference laws a good idea?

Posted Dec 11, 2005 2:08 UTC (Sun) by grouch (guest, #27289) [Link]

'Business does NOT want a "level playing field", they want a monopoly. Thats the whole idea behind patents.'

I was not clear enough in my comment. You are correct in your point with respect to an individual business. However, I was contrasting software for business use versus software for governments.

Mr. Perens' comments regarding a level playing field for software is reasonable for business use of software. Businesses do not have an obligation to preserve data and the access to that data for the long periods demanded of governments. The data that business manipulates is not owned by the general public and the general public does not have an inherent right to know how such data is being manipulated. Therefore, a business may choose whether to use closed software or open software. Equal access to that market for each type of software is a good goal. Forced preferential access is not a good thing, whether that forced preference is for closed software or open software.

Governments are supported by the general public, manipulate data owned by the general public, store that data in facilities supported by the general public, and must be held accountable to the general public for actions taken with or based upon that data. A government should have to show good cause before using software which cannot be examined by the public.


Copyright © 2005, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds