BBCWorld's The Codebreakers, documentary on FOSS

[kblood]

Hi everyone,

Did anybody see this? I just got a chance to see the first part, unfortunately I couldn't record the second half.

http://www.bbcworld.com/content/template_clickpage.asp?pageid=2783

The Code Breakers

Microsoft has dominated the world of computing for many years, with its heavily guarded ‘code’ being beyond reach to many in the developing nations. In some of the poorest countries the cost of upgrading an operating system to keep up with the rest o fthe world amounts to a year's wages, and there are few legitimate options. In Thailand for example, 95 percent of software on computers is pirated. The poorest countries are now beginning to use free or open source software (FOSS), a software that parallels many of Microsoft's programmes but with the major difference being that they are distributed free of charge and can be altered by computer programmers who are allowed unfettered access to the 'source code'. In this two-part documentary, Code Breakers includes stories and interviews from around the world where FOSS is making an impact, from disaster management in Sri Lanka to tortoise breeding programmes in the Galapagos.


Actually, after seeing the first half, I am quite happy I didn't record the second... What a piece of cr... sorry, of VERY FINE Microsoft advertisement!

They pitched Open Source software as unprofessional, underground, and only a reasonable choice when you just can't afford to pay the licenses of commercial software.

They failed to mention anything about Red Hat, SUSE, Novell... They actually went to South Africa and didn't mention Canonical and Ubuntu!

Everytime they made any mild statement pro-Open Source software, they right away switched over to an interview excerpt from Jonathan Murray, of Microsoft Europe, who then proceeded to dismiss the point and chant the wonders of Microsoft in any and every case. This guy had more time on screen than all the other speakers together! When they showed Richard Stallman, for some reason, decided to use some weird audio and video effects on him, to remove any trace of seriousness from his words.

Seriously, any and every trace of professionalism and reliability in Open Source software was thoroughly removed from the documentary. It was presented as simply the only option for developing countries to try to get to the level of technology developed countries have. And that, simply for lack of money/resources to go for commercial software. Again Mr. Murray brought the point home by saying that you can either choose for reliability and ease of use, or for community-developed Open Source. Right. Saying that Windows is reliable...

Anyway, I would love to hear some comments from people that have seen it, and what could be done about this. I had high hopes for this documentary, coming from the BBC, usually quite neutral and reliable for information...

[23meg]

the BBC, usually quite neutral and reliable for information...The one good thing about this documentary seems to be that it gave you a chance to rethink that statement.

[ice60]

the BBC is well known for making up the news rather then reporting it. infact there was a big shakeup of the BBC recently after the Hutton Inquiry.

try putting the word 'biased' into google and see what you get :rolleyes:

[Jason_25]

They're not a friend of FOSS at all. Just look at the proprietary media formats on their web page.

[G Morgan]

The BBC have been on a long slippery slope for some time. The problem is in order to justify charges to the tax payer (the TV license may as well be a tax) the BBC were told to chase ratings. So instead of producing informative programs and providing a service they have been reduced to the standard of a capitalist moron baiting society. When they were free to follow their charter they were a good body. Now that the cut taxes at all costs people have had their way I can only see the BBC going downhill. Eventually they won't be able to justify being a public body because they are behaving like they belong to the likes of Rupert Murdoch.

[andy101]

Opensource unproffessional and only used by thoose who can't afford better?
Odd how www.bbc.co.uk is runnning open source!!!

according to the response headers (as provided by the webdeveloper extension for firefox) they have apache 2.0.54

If opensource is so unproffessional why are they using it and how is it keeping there highly used website running?

What a bunch of hypocrits

[23meg]

Speaking of bbc.co.uk, they won't let any news comment that's the slightest bit progressive or critical of Western foreign policies appear on the comment pages. None of my comments on open source related news have made it past their moderation either.

[ComplexNumber]

Speaking of bbc.co.uk, they won't let any news comment that's the slightest bit progressive or critical of Western foreign policies appear on the comment pages. None of my comments on open source related news have made it past their moderation either. hmmm thats interesting. i sometimes read the comments pages. i'll have to pay more attention to that in future. i'm surprised news about open source related stuff was censored if it doesn't break any rules.

the bbc are quite disliked in this country. and that licence fee is universally despised - it charges an OAP the same as it does a milionaire for the same old boring repeats day in day out. thats sad and pathetic!

[warp99]

hmmm thats interesting. i sometimes read the comments pages. i'll have to pay more attention to that in future. i'm surprised news about open source related stuff was censored if it doesn't break any rules.

the bbc are quite disliked in this country. and that licence fee is universally despised - it charges an OAP the same as it does a milionaire for the same old boring repeats day in day out. thats sad and pathetic!

No offense but what you have is alot better than anything here in the States. For God's sake we have a news channel called "MSNBC" which is a cooperative between NBC and Microsoft. :(

At least in the U.K. you have news, biased in some cases, but otherwise it's still news. In the U.S. we have "infotainment". The worthless dribble of news models and talking heads. I would glady PAY ANY LICENSE FEE just to get a shred of real news.

In the U.S. it's a desert and we're dying of thirst while in the U.K. complaining about the BBC is like saying the water isn't "Perrier". :-?

[ComplexNumber]

No offense but what you have is alot better than anything here in the States. yeah, we shouldn't moan really. britain is just america on a smaller and lesser scale. and we have you guys to blame because when america sneezes, we catch a cold. so you can bet your life that all the crap that you currently have, we will be guaranteed to have somewheere down the line.

[ice60]

I would glady PAY ANY LICENSE FEE just to get a shred of real news.
you would have no say in the matter - you have to have a TV licence if you own a TV. the licence is ONLY for the BBC, even if you never watch anything by the BBC, all the other channels have commercials to pay their way.
http://www.marmalade.net/lime/david_guest.html

http://www.denyerec.co.uk/index.php?p=111
http://www.20six.co.uk/Chippy/archive/2005/03/21/141fb615378mj.htm

[warp99]

yeah, we shouldn't moan really. britain is just america on a smaller and lesser scale. and we have you guys to blame because when america sneezes, we catch a cold. so you can bet your life that all the crap that you currently have, we will be guaranteed to have somewheere down the line.

And the sad thing is I agree with you 100%. :-D

[bruce89]

yeah, we shouldn't moan really. britain is just america on a smaller and lesser scale.
Expecially since the 2 main parties are clones of each other (or so Cameron wants them to be)

[warp99]

you would have no say in the matter - you have to have a TV licence if you own a TV. the licence is ONLY for the BBC, even if you never watch anything by the BBC, all the other channels have commercials to pay their way.

And with commericals to pay their way you are not the consumer of news, but the product. The real consumers are the advertisers. With the BBC you are the consumers of the end product because YOU paid for it.

Have you every seen a cable run news network in the U.S? Just remember if you disband the BBC your news will most likely end up a clone of CNN, MSNBC or FOX news. Any takers? :cool:

[ComplexNumber]

Expecially since the 2 main parties are clones of each other (or so Cameron wants them to be) spot on, except that blair on his new labour cronies are more right wing than the conservatives ever were.



With the BBC you are the consumers of the end product because YOU paid for it. thats just a rumour :D. it doesn't work out like that in practice. the strange thing is, is that the licence fee keeps on going up and up and up, and the amount of crap(eg mind numbing drivel appealing only to the lowest common denominator of our society such as Big Brother etc) and number of repeats increases year by year :(.
as ice60 says, you have no option other than to buy a licence if you have aTV. it doesn't matter if you just use your TV to watch videos on. the BBC aren't interested - if you have a TV, then its taken for granted that you watch TV and the BBC. thereofore you have to pay them the same licence fee whether you're a millionaire, a student, unemployed, or an old age pensioner.

[Maria_Firewire]

I've always looked on the BBC as my last hope for real news instead of the typical 'news' Americans seem to love (or are at least okay with). This is heartily depressing. I can't believe they MAKE you Brits pay a fee for the BBC and now they're shoveling out this crap about FOSS being a last resort. *shakes head* Is there anyway to get news that isn't completely biased and corrupt?

Maria

[warp99]

thats just a rumour :D. it doesn't work out like that in practice. the strange thing is, is that the licence fee keeps on going up and up and up, and the amount of crap(eg mind numbing drivel appealing only to the lowest common denominator of our society such as Big Brother etc) and number of repeats increases year by year :(.
as ice60 says, you have no option other than to buy a licence if you have aTV. it doesn't matter if you just use your TV to watch videos on. the BBC aren't interested - if you have a TV, then its taken for granted that you watch TV and the BBC.

I can understand why pay for something you not using is unfair, but look at the alternative. If you have a system that is completely commercialized it's only a matter of time before the advertisers drive the programming and that includes the news.

In the U.S. all of the major news media outlets are owned by 5 major corporations with political ties to Washington. IMHO these media outlets are just the marketing arm of these corporations, but it's well know that the news media is driven by advertisers.

Run a negative story against a large sponsor with a hugh advertising budget, guess what? Loss of sponsor = loss of revenue = loss of your job if you run the news desk. So what you get is infotainment (AKA: news free news).

So your choices are the following:

1) Pay the TV license fee
2) News free news

Remember that here in the states we had the Fairness Doctrine which mandated that news by free of bias, but that was shelved in the mid 1980's. Before we had most news bias free. Now we have, as FOX news puts it, "Fair and Balanced". :evil:

[ComplexNumber]

but look at the alternative i do the alternative. i don't have a TV, i don't pay any poxy licence, and i listen to the radio instead. if i want to watch TV, i'll nip over to rumberlows and watch it there.

[kblood]

Hello everyone,

Well, unfortunately I see that nobody else could watch that documentary. I would have liked to exchange some comments.

I plan to send an email to BBC complaining about it, I wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one who got that impression out of it.

In any case, quite interesting discussion. I guess it's hard to find reliable sources. But where I am right now, it's either BBCWorld or CNN, so I choose BBCWorld any day... I get my fair share of internet-based news, thankfully.

[warp99]

i do the alternative. i don't have a TV, i don't pay any poxy licence, and i listen to the radio instead. if i want to watch TV, i'll nip over to rumberlows and watch it there.

Good for you!!! I wish I could get away from the idiot box. I don't watch that much TV, but the kids like to watch their shows in the morning. Favorites are, believe it or not, Thomas the Train, Balamory, Teletubbies, and Brum. Go figure? :cool:

[ComplexNumber]

Thomas the Train is that supposed to be Thomas the Tank Engine with a politically corrected name change or something? :mrgreen:. hehe i sure hope not. maybe the politically correct brigade thought that having the word "Tank" in the title showed signs of violence and decided to change the name just in case everyone under the age of 5 decided to persue a career in the arms trade.

[warp99]

is that supposed to be Thomas the Tank Engine with a politically corrected name change or something? :mrgreen:. hehe i sure hope not. maybe the politically correct brigade thought that having the word "Tank" in the title showed signs of violence and decided to change the name just in case everyone under the age of 5 decided to persue a career in the arms trade.

Who the hell knows? I looked at the DVD guide and it says "Thomas & Friends", but the web site on the back says thomasthetankengine.com. On the TV menu it says "Thomas & Friends".

Your propable correct on the "tank" name change. Some marketing ***** on this side of the pond most likely decided it would "confuse" the children between Thomas and GI Joe toys. I guess if they heard "tank" they would try to blow it up or something like that. :mrgreen:

[ComplexNumber]

probably :D

[Virogenesis]

i do the alternative. i don't have a TV, i don't pay any poxy licence, and i listen to the radio instead. if i want to watch TV, i'll nip over to rumberlows and watch it there.
I believe you need a tv licence if you listen to the radio... not 100% certain mind.
Thank our lucky stars we don't have tv like they do in India or America.
America you get more ads than shows its annoying and in India you get an advert and they don't even bother stoping the film from airing so you miss parts during the break and I do miss our old quality on the box, now its just reality show this and reality show that, its bloody annoying.

[ComplexNumber]

I believe you need a tv licence if you listen to the radio... not 100% certain mind. and i'm 101% certain that you don't need a TV licence to listen to the radio. trust me. you can have everything that i own if i'm wrong

[Virogenesis]

and i'm 101% certain that you don't need a TV licence to listen to the radio. trust me. you can have everything that i own if i'm wrong
you are correct just checked the laws they got rid of the broadcasting licence hahaha.....this is amusing......


Blind people only pay 50% of the full licence fee. lol http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/keyfacts/stories/licencefee.shtml read thart its amusing

[MetalMusicAddict]

I wonder how NPR rates aginst the BBC? Ive started to listen to alot of it lately. Too bad about the BBC. I kinda liked it. :(

[ComplexNumber]

you are correct just checked the laws they got rid of the broadcasting licence hahaha.....this is amusing......

i would have been penniless otherwise :D




Blind people only pay 50% of the full licence fee. lol http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/keyfacts/stories/licencefee.shtml read thart its amusing
if the BBC could be represented by any one person to give an idea of what they are like, it would have to be Alan B'Stard from The New stateman (click (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_B%27Stard))

[warp99]

Thank our lucky stars we don't have tv like they do in India or America.
America you get more ads than shows its annoying and in India you get an advert and they don't even bother stoping the film from airing so you miss parts during the break and I do miss our old quality on the box, now its just reality show this and reality show that, its bloody annoying.

Here in America we get the same reality show after reality show, with the added bonus of commercials. Plus many of the non-reality shows now have product placement in the episodes, so you have the characters of the show pushing products for advertisers in ADDITION to the normal commericals they subject on us. ](*,)

[helpme]

They're not a friend of FOSS at all. Just look at the proprietary media formats on their web page.
This strikes me as a rather uninformed comment.
If anything, the bbc is very opensource friendly:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/opensource/

[kblood]

This strikes me as a rather uninformed comment.
If anything, the bbc is very opensource friendly:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/opensource/

That's what I thought, until I saw the documentary that started this thread...

[helpme]

That's what I thought, until I saw the documentary that started this thread...
Well, I haven't seen it, so I can't really comment on it.
But I think one should keep in mind that the bbc is a hughe entity, so it's perfectly possible that on the one hand their technical staff are very open source friendly, while some journalists at the same time make idiotic documentaries about FOSS.

[23meg]

Well, I haven't seen it, so I can't really comment on it.
But I think one should keep in mind that the bbc is a hughe entity, so it's perfectly possible that on the one hand their technical staff are very open source friendly, while some journalists at the same time make idiotic documentaries about FOSS.
That's exactly why huge corporations whose one hand isn't aware of what the other is doing are bad for society and good for the bosses.

[Jason_25]

This strikes me as a rather uninformed comment.
If anything, the bbc is very opensource friendly:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/opensource/
How do a bunch of generic open source links help people that want to view their content with free PCs?

[bruce89]

Dirac will be used in the future I think, which is FOSS. It is a wavelet-based video compression.

[helpme]

How do a bunch of generic open source links help people that want to view their content with free PCs?
They don't in general, though dirac will.

I do though distincly remember answering someone who claimed the bbc was not open source friendly, to which I replied that this is a rather uninformed comment and provided a link to the bbc open source projects to prove my point.

Now how exactly is this claiming that "a bunch of generic open source links" will "help people that want to view their content with free PCs?"

[kblood]

How do a bunch of generic open source links help people that want to view their content with free PCs?

Well, they aren't just links. Those are Open Source projects started and developed by the BBC itself. So it is quite a nice initiative, not just links.

(specifically, the Dirac video codec seems to be quite interesting)

[Jason_25]

Well, their really obscure open source projects are great I guess. But they don't seem to practice what they preach. WMV or Real Media. What a choice.

[helpme]

Well, their really obscure open source projects are great I guess. But they don't seem to practice what they preach. WMV or Real Media. What a choice.
For crying out loud, what's the widely used and available free alternative they should use?
Oh wait, they are even investing in developing one.

Add to this their open sourcing other projects and contributing to open source projects (yep, apache really is such an obscure project btw.) and you really have an open source friendly media company.

[Jason_25]

They created apache? Do you have any links? All I saw they created for apache were some modules that made apache work for their site. Ogg is available today, and has been for some time.

[helpme]

They created apache? Do you have any links? All I saw they created for apache were some modules that made apache work for their site. Ogg is available today, and has been for some time.
Sigh.
I don't think there's any sense in continuing this little "conversation"...

[MartinJ]

I'm happy to pay for a licence, although I'm not too happy about the cost of it. At least it can be split between flatmates. After living in the US for three years I'd pay anything for decent tv and news again! (ok, maybe slightly biased). I can't comment on the documentary mentioned though - we don't get BBC World in the UK!

The BBC go further than most organisations in encouraging and helping free / open source software. For example, have a look at the BBC help main page (http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/index.shtml). Those links go fairly deep too, and they're quite informative (http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/linux/seeing/text/browser/sub_3.shtml).

The tech news section tends to be a bit hit and miss. They're very pro-Firefox but their copyright / patent views aren't exactly FOSS friendly; but, they're a media organisation so why should they be I suppose.

{edit} Just found this on the tech news pages (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4727267.stm). Can't quite see that happening, or could it...

[warp99]

For all of you in the U.K. here's another product pushing commerical ridden media vehicle for everyone in the United States to enjoy. It's called a video news release, VNR for short. What happens is that corporations produce these VNR's then pay local news channels to broadcast them. Basically they are commericals for products diguised as real news.

Check out this site for more info:

http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary

So the lesson for the day is in the U.S. fake news = real news, or is it the other way around?. :-k