Linux in Cuba: is it free software?

[crispy_420]

Don't know if anyone else caught this or if I'm even posting in the right place.

Cuba announced that it is dropping Windows from all government computers. And that includes higher education schools as well.

Here is one article I found:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070216/ap_on_hi_te/cuba_software_2

I also read (on news from my cell phone) they will be creating their own home brewed distro based on gentoo.

Just thought I'd pass the news on.

[Tomosaur]

uh oh, the only thing that prevented war during the cuban missle crisis was that their launch systems ran on windows and crashed when Castro tried to press the button. we're in deep trouble now.

zing!

Don't worry, there are no Nuke drivers for Linux!

[JAPrufrock]

Ok, in Latin America that makes both Cuba and Argentina Linux users. And I think that Brazil either has already switched to Linux, or is seriously considering it. Could Latin America be switching to Linux?

[Polygon]

alot of these countries are just paranoid as hell of america spying on them, and since windows is made by an american country and does have NSA backdoors in the operating system themselfs, they do have a valid point on switching.

[Arisna]

The part where it's based on Gentoo could really help America, though, since we could strike while they've got their weapons systems down to recompile themselves!

[PurplePenguin]

Plus, it sort of puts these countries in awkward positions. For example, all government departments have computers which must run an operating system, office suite, and so on.

If they go the Windows route, they can either 1.) pay lots of money to a huge American company in order to get licensed versions of all the software they need, or 2.) pirate it all and cross their fingers that they will be able to get all of the security updates that they will inevitably need (on a frequent basis) down the road.

The first could be seen as a political (and ideological) embarassment... the second just gives them constant headaches. Open source would seem quite attractive to countries in this kind of situation.

[Mateo]

how is it an ideological embarrassment to pay for licenses? Well, for Cuba, I guess, it's ideologically embarrassing, but for most countries... not sure where anti-license fits into any political ideologies.

[~LoKe]

Considering Cuba is anti-America, this doesn't surprise me in the least.

[JAPrufrock]

In the last few years quite a few Latin American countries have moved towards the liberal left (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, Venezuela), which distrusts the darker side of capitalism (monopolies). MS is the liberal left's natural enemy, so it's no surprise that such countries would move toward Linux.

[Mateo]

i know, I minored in LAS, but Argentina and Chile don't fit into that group ;). i don't know, i find it a bit of a stretch that any of those countries changed operating systems for ideological reasons, especially when a lot of their other choices don't always fit with what ideology would suppose.

[warp99]

If it was any other country making the switch to OSS it would be a non-issue, but on cue the US press and government start to "howl at the moon" over evil communist Cuba. Last time I checked China was still communist and they're the US's third largest trading partner.

Case in point the computer your using, the keyboard you typing on, and the monitor you are staring into reading this tidbit of factual information were all made in China and yes Taiwan is or isn't part of mainland China depending on who you speak with.

Another point is that for the last 17 years the United Nations has voted to lift all sanctions against Cuba with an almost unanimous vote except for the United States, Israel, Palau, and once in a while some Micronesian country.

So as far as the rest of the world is concerned this is a non sequitur. :lolflag:

[tigerpants]

If it was any other country making the switch to OSS it would be a non-issue, but on cue the US press and government start to "howl at the moon" over evil communist Cuba. Last time I checked China was still communist and they're the US's third largest trading partner.

Case in point the computer your using, the keyboard you typing on, and the monitor you are staring into reading this tidbit of factual information were all made in China and yes Taiwan is or isn't part of mainland China depending on who you speak with.

Another point is that for the last 17 years the United Nations has voted to lift all sanctions against Cuba with an almost unanimous vote except for the United States, Israel, Palau, and once in a while some Micronesian country.

So as far as the rest of the world is concerned this is a non sequitur. :lolflag:

America, no offence intended here, is probably the single most hypocritical nation on the planet. Thing is, it seems to revel in that.

Re: Linux, good for Cuba. I think it makes good business sense to switch and I doubt its got anything to do with politics. If you had a massive network to run, what would you choose to use? Its a no-brainer really, linux all the way.

[BWF89]

It's good news that any country is moving to open source. Whether it's switching all their computers to Linux or just adopting open source programs to run on their existing Windows machines.

How are countries like Cuba even able to run Windows?

I thought we had a trade embargo on them, wouldn't that bar Microsoft from selling them their American operating system?

[luca.b]

It's good news that any country is moving to open source. Whether


I don't think so. Their software may be free, but the citizens of Cuba aren't. I think this stunt by RMS was rather hypocritical.

"Free software" has no sense if other fundamental freedoms are ignored, like with Cuba (despite the embargo or whatever else, they're a totalitarian, oppressive regime).

[glotz]

Semper Fidelis!

[PurplePenguin]

how is it an ideological embarrassment to pay for licenses? Well, for Cuba, I guess, it's ideologically embarrassing, but for most countries... not sure where anti-license fits into any political ideologies.

Phew! It's a good thing for me that this thread is about Cuba! :D

I was referring to Cuba and any similar countries - that is, any left-leaning (or right, it's all relative) anti-American, anti-capitalist countries.

[crispy_420]

From what I read they switched for various reasons:

"Microsoft's near monopoly over operating systems"

"High cost of propietary software and security"

Microsoft cooperation with US military/intelligence agencies

fighting against US imperialism

Bill Gates once described people as people wanting to do away with proprietary software as "some new modern-day sort of communists" (Which is a badge of honor for Cuba)

Backdoors left open in code.

As you guessed it, trouble keeping updated. Some American companies, no doubt under government pressure, block downloads to Cuba.

Slow connection to outside world via satalite connection. So hard to get updates.

They even had Richard Stallman (Free Software Foundation (http://www.fsf.org/)) announce the arrangement.

[JAPrufrock]

i know, I minored in LAS, but Argentina and Chile don't fit into that group ;). i don't know, i find it a bit of a stretch that any of those countries changed operating systems for ideological reasons, especially when a lot of their other choices don't always fit with what ideology would suppose.

Not just ideological reasons- also ideological reasons. ALthough it makes sense for any nation to use an open format software on their govt. machines/networks, most don't- for practical reasons. More liberal governments have a little bit of extra motivation to do so. By the way, when I said leftest, I didn't necessary mean communist. Perhaps I should have said "more liberal".

Although Argentina and Chile are not as far left as Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia, and don't fall in to that group, they are as liberal as they have been in a very long time (in Chile since the fall of Allende in 1973).

[crispy_420]

Also it looks as though Venezuela has switched as well.

[Dr. C]

It's good news that any country is moving to open source. Whether it's switching all their computers to Linux or just adopting open source programs to run on their existing Windows machines.

How are countries like Cuba even able to run Windows?

I thought we had a trade embargo on them, wouldn't that bar Microsoft from selling them their American operating system?

I am suprised the US government has not taken legal action against Microsoft over this. As far as I can see they can subpeona the records for activation or validation of Microsoft software. WGA, WPA, OPA, OGA etc. An if any Microsoft Software passed validation or activation from a Cuban IP address, is that not an admission of the part of Microsoft that they have broken the sanctions?

As for the Cuban government, they would be crazy to use Microsoft software, especialy Vista. Could not the US govenment force Microsoft to place every copy of Vista in Cuba under "reduced functionality mode"? They were exported to Cuba in violation of US law were they not?

[leog]

That's good news for the Linux community!

[warp99]

Not just ideological reasons- also ideological reasons. ALthough it makes sense for any nation to use an open format software on their govt. machines/networks, most don't- for practical reasons. More liberal governments have a little bit of extra motivation to do so. By the way, when I said leftest, I didn't necessary mean communist. Perhaps I should have said "more liberal".

I don't believe that a "liberal", as in the American definition not in the classical sense, government would have more or less motivation to change to an open source model versus one with a more conservative policy. The motivating factor is the same as with other political and economic decisions made by various countries with varying ideologies and that is a reliance on any proprietary products from a company within the United States leaves the door open for the US government to impose restricts at will thus leaving the door open for extending the global hegemony that the US attempts to impose.

Latin America has been the victim of US foreign policy every since the establishment of the Monroe Doctrine. You mentioned Salvatore Allende and as we all know was removed from power by the CIA backed overthrow of his government on Septemeber 11, 1973. The foreign policy of the United States is littered with the bodies of various governments through the course of the 20th century in Latin America. The record is very clear and complete on the "inventions" that the US has imposed on it's neighbors to the south.

So no matter how small it may be switching to an open source model the overall reason is to safeguard the political institutions of these nations and exclude the possibility of software resources being controlled by the US government.

Food for thought:

"For globalism to work, America can't be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is....The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist...McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps." – Thomas Friedman, "What the World Needs Now" - New York Times

[jclmusic]

as much as i disagree with their brand of communism, i agree with this move, and microsoft are the stereotypical capitalist bastards lol.

[argie]

I am suprised the US government has not taken legal action against Microsoft over this. As far as I can see they can subpeona the records for activation or validation of Microsoft software. WGA, WPA, OPA, OGA etc. An if any Microsoft Software passed validation or activation from a Cuban IP address, is that not an admission of the part of Microsoft that they have broken the sanctions?

What if Microsoft India or Microsoft Canada or something like that sold it? Would it still be a violation?

[JAPrufrock]

I don't believe that a "liberal", as in the American definition not in the classical sense, government would have more or less motivation to change to an open source model versus one with a more conservative policy.

Of course they would. Government decisions are often idealogical ones, particularly those on the ends of the political spectrum (convervative-liberal). Leftist governments are ideologically opposed to large monopolistic corporations like MS and would, therefore, be much more likely to adopt an open source model, which, by definition, is community based.

[Dr. C]

What if Microsoft India or Microsoft Canada or something like that sold it? Would it still be a violation?

My understanding is yes. Microsoft Canada and Microsoft India are controlled by the US parent, and the US sanctions against Cuba are very far reaching when it comes to non US corporations. Then there is the question of the location of the activation servers for the DRM. Are they located in the US?

[warp99]

Of course they would. Government decisions are often idealogical ones, particularly those on the ends of the political spectrum (convervative-liberal). Leftist governments are ideologically opposed to large monopolistic corporations like MS and would, therefore, be much more likely to adopt an open source model, which, by definition, is community based.

You would be correct if we were speaking about a country such as the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea (DPRK) since it is the last bastion in the world of the Soviet style form of government, but in reality all of these countries, including Cuba, have incorporated some form of modified capitalism into there economies. In Cuba for instance there is a thriving tourist industry plus you can buy Coca-Cola and Gucci handbags in the shops that line downtown Havana. If anything the use of the open source model as an "ideologically opposed' stance is just anti-American rhetoric and does not reflect the true reasons for using it.

As a sovereign nation you would be absolutely insane to allow a foreign corporation, and by extension that corporation's government, to have control over the software infrastructure vital to both the national and economic security of your country. As I stated before the US Government could easily decide to impose restrictions when any country fails to perform the role of client status for US corporate interests. You're very astute about the history and inter-relationship with the US and Latin America so you can appreciate why these countries would choose the open source model on this reason alone.

The other reason would be economic. Why use software from a foreign entity exporting your monetary resources to that country? It would be much better for you to develope software within your own borders thus retaining your monetary resources and at the same time building an industry to the benefit of your own economy. The open source model allows a bases for this without restrictions imposed and benefits the host countries that embrace the model. 8-)

[luca.b]

I reiterate what I said earlier in this thread. How good is this move? The software will be free but the citizens won't be. Cuba is a dictatorship, and RMS is a hypocrite.

[glotz]

So unless you make it perfect, there's no sense in improving things, huh?

[warp99]

I reiterate what I said earlier in this thread. How good is this move? The software will be free but the citizens won't be. Cuba is a dictatorship, and RMS is a hypocrite.

Are you saying that only free countries can have the freedom of using open source software? Then by that logic proprietary software that removes your freedom can only be used in a country that is non-free, correct?

If anything the use of open source software will encourage freedoms in other areas of Cuban society so hats off to RMS. =D>

[aretei]

I reiterate what I said earlier in this thread. How good is this move? The software will be free but the citizens won't be. Cuba is a dictatorship, and RMS is a hypocrite.

I don't get this at all. It seems clear to me that you're trying to put two separate issues into one. (perhaps equivocation of "freedom")

[leog]

Of course they would. Government decisions are often idealogical ones, particularly those on the ends of the political spectrum (convervative-liberal). Leftist governments are ideologically opposed to large monopolistic corporations like MS and would, therefore, be much more likely to adopt an open source model, which, by definition, is community based.

The reasons for the adoption of an open source model are not only ideological. There are other factors such as technological independence, local capacity build-up (know-how), strengthen the local software industry, etc.

On the other hand, please guys..... stop using the word 'American' to refer to 'US citizens'. It's insulting for us who lives to the south of Río Bravo/Grande... we are Americans as well.

[punkinside]

Are you saying that only free countries can have the freedom of using open source software? Then by that logic proprietary software that removes your freedom can only be used in a country that is non-free, correct?

If anything the use of open source software will encourage freedoms in other areas of Cuban society so hats off to RMS. =D>

You make it sound like the average cuban has a computer in their house. They don't.

As for the coca-cola and gucci hand bags, they're only for sale to tourists. Cubans can't buy that.

You all have little or no knowledge of how things work in Cuba. Or how they will work in Venezuela. Sure, one can cheer a decree issued to force the use of FOSS in all government approved software proyects. But what do you care about the software when basic freedoms are nonexistant? I don't.

My respect for RMS degrades with every minute...

[punkinside]

Do you measure freedom with the ability to buy coca-cola and gucci hand bags?

Yes. Along with the freedom to leave the country whenever I want to, to talk s*** about the current (going on 40 years now!) "leader", have a cell phone and other dumb things like that.

None of those things are available to cubans. And the only cuban you will ever see at a resort in havana is carrying trays.

And no, RMS is not the reason cuba is poor. But he is a hypocrite. Nobody that wishes to associate himself with "freedom" and not get laughed at should be seen anywhere near Cuba or Fidel Castro.

Or, lets just hear what your first hand accounts of life in cuba sound like. Is it the socialist paradise we've all been promised?

[leog]

Yes. Along with the freedom to leave the country whenever I want to, to talk s*** about the current (going on 40 years now!) "leader", have a cell phone and other dumb things like that.

None of those things are available to cubans. And the only cuban you will ever see at a resort in havana is carrying trays.

And no, RMS is not the reason cuba is poor. But he is a hypocrite. Nobody that wishes to associate himself with "freedom" and not get laughed at should be seen anywhere near Cuba or Fidel Castro.

Or, lets just hear what your first hand accounts of life in cuba sound like. Is it the socialist paradise we've all been promised?

In the first place, drinking coca-cola and wearing gucci is not freedom.

Second, what has RMS to do with the political system in Cuba? Don't mix things up here. One thing is the free software/open source movement and another, completely different thing is to talk about politics. Or should we blame RMS for the political situation in Cuba?

[BWF89]

In the first place, drinking coca-cola and wearing gucci is not freedom.
The government controlling what your allowed to buy doesn't have anything to do with freedom?

Second, what has RMS to do with the political system in Cuba? Don't mix things up here. One thing is the free software/open source movement and another, completely different thing is to talk about politics. Or should we blame RMS for the political situation in Cuba?
He doesn't have anything to do with the politicial situation. But socialists & communists like RMS tend to bash leaders like Bush who operate free countries while championing totalitarian left-wing leaders like Castro as men of the people who take away freedom. Yes, Bush and the Republicans (and the Democrats, depending on who is in power) take away our freedom but nowhere near as much as people like Castro.

[leog]

The government controlling what your allowed to buy doesn't have anything to do with freedom?

He doesn't have anything to do with the politicial situation. But socialists & communists like RMS tend to bash leaders like Bush who operate free countries while championing totalitarian left-wing leaders like Castro as "men of the people" who take away freedom. Yes, Bush and the Republicans (and the Democrats, depending on who is in power) take away our freedom but nowhere near as much as people like Castro.

What's that for an answer? "We are bad. But not as bad as Castro". C'mon... give me a break! If someone should not be allowed to talk about democracy here, it's the United States... and I'm not standing up for Castro, or Chavez or whoever it might be... I'm only saying to you that you should not mix politics with the free software movement. It's two completely different things.

[warp99]

You make it sound like the average cuban has a computer in their house. They don't.

Please, I understand the economic reality in Cuba and unless you've been living in a cave for the last 45 years the average person would realize that the US embargo and the collapse of Cuba's benefactor, the Soviet Union, has devasted the economy. I don't believe any time soon a Best Buy or PC World is going to spring up in Havana.


"As for the coca-cola and gucci hand bags, they're only for sale to tourists. Cubans can't buy that."

Were did I say that the average Cuban can go out and purchase or even afford such luxuries. I stated that Cuba had embraced a modified form of capitalism with a thriving tourist industry and that these items were available. Your conflating freedom with capitalism, terms that are mutually exclusive.


You all have little or no knowledge of how things work in Cuba. Or how they will work in Venezuela. Sure, one can cheer a decree issued to force the use of FOSS in all government approved software proyects. But what do you care about the software when basic freedoms are nonexistant? I don't.

So let me get this straight I should disregard everything I've seen and heard and listen to you right? Sorry I don't follow the script from Miami or Altamira so try selling to someone else, I'm not buying. I know exactly how things work especially in Venezuela, I've seen the documents and the video:

http://venezuelafoia.info/

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144

As far as Venezuela is concerned there was this instrument of democracy called an election in which the majority of people, 60% if I'm not mistaken, voted for a person named Hugo Chavez Frias. This election was monitored by the Carter Center who deemed it fair and free. So in a democratic process the majority of the citizens of Venezuela voted in a free and fair election for the candidate of there choice. Sounds like freedom to me, doesn't it?

I'm sorry that your man Rosales, the coup supporter from Zulia, didn't win so the white minority in Caracas could reclaim there privileged position, but as you know in a true democracy the will of the people should be respected NOT subverted by the US Government and a conniving opposition.


My respect for RMS degrades with every minute...

Don't worry he doesn't lose sleep over it and neither do I. :lolflag:

[BWF89]

What's that for an answer? "We are bad. But not as bad as Castro". C'mon... give me a break! If someone should not be allowed to talk about democracy here, it's the United States... and I'm not standing up for Castro, or Chavez or whoever it might be... I'm only saying to you that you should not mix politics with the free software movement. It's two completely different things.
The main discussion in the thread is how a choice of software effects a country's political structure.

[luca.b]

Are you saying that only free countries can have the freedom of using open source software? Then by that logic proprietary software that removes your freedom can

I am saying that RMS is a hypocrite because he battles for "freedom", and such freedom is non existent in Cuba. I don't mind them using FOSS at all. But it's not good at all if their software is free, and they themselves aren't.

[punkinside]

What's that for an answer? "We are bad. But not as bad as Castro". C'mon... give me a break! If someone should not be allowed to talk about democracy here, it's the United States... and I'm not standing up for Castro, or Chavez or whoever it might be... I'm only saying to you that you should not mix politics with the free software movement. It's two completely different things.

I don't know how you can cheer on an authoritarian regime just because they've embraced the FSM. It just dosen't make sense to me.


Please, I understand the economic reality in Cuba and unless you've been living in a cave for the last 45 years the average person would realize that the US embargo and the collapse of Cuba's benefactor, the Soviet Union, has devasted the economy. I don't believe any time soon a Best Buy or PC World is going to spring up in Havana.

So we agree on something




Were did I say that the average Cuban can go out and purchase or even afford such luxuries. I stated that Cuba had embraced a modified form of capitalism with a thriving tourist industry and that these items were available. Your conflating freedom with capitalism, terms that are mutually exclusive.

That modified form of capitalism is like this: all the money from tourists goes right into Castro's pockets. Taxis, whores and such people in the "service" industry, which come in close and regular contact with tourists beg them to give them a few US$ instead of the money they are given to spend in cuba so they can maybe go to one of them "tourist" stores and buy themselves a second loaf of bread this week. Or a new pair of jeans. Once more, the average Cuban will not even know what a mouse is, let alone realize that his government embraced this thing called "free software".




So let me get this straight I should disregard everything I've seen and heard and listen to you right? Sorry I don't follow the script from Miami or Altamira so try selling to someone else, I'm not buying. I know exactly how things work especially in Venezuela, I've seen the documents and the video:

Ok, so let me get this straight. First, look at my location. Then tell me: sure, it makes perfect sense for you to know everything there is to know about venezuela when you've seen a web page whith 3 figures of Chavez in the first page and some video? Please, give me a break. This is not a book you don't read and wait for the movie. This discussion is not about Venezuela though, so I will ask you to carefully read this thread:

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=349891

Please read post #6

Please, stop acting like you know how anything works over here.

[warp99]

I am saying that RMS is a hypocrite because he battles for "freedom", and such freedom is non existent in Cuba. I don't mind them using FOSS at all. But it's not good at all if their software is free, and they themselves aren't.

As for hypocrisy we are ALL guilty of this if we've purchased goods from China and/or oil from Saudi Arabia since these regimes are very oppressive and in the case of Saudi Arabia MORE oppressive with regards to women.

The main reason that Castro does retain power is because of the US embargo on the Cuban people. It binds them together against a common enemy as with any country. If relations were normalized then the people would rise up and demand change. If you look throughout history democratization starts from the bottom up, not top down.

In every successful democracy it's the people that rise up and demand change. The power to rule is given by the people to the leaders. Once the leaders lose control of the people they lose there power unless some outside force intervenes.

RMS is advocating for freedom for the use of software and as such is committed to that narrow focus. Anytime you are able to raise the topic of freedom within Cuba it's a good thing no manner how trivia it may be.

Food for thought:

"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it's profits or so dependant on it's favors, that there will be no opposition from that class." -- Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863

[doobit]

Aside from the moral arguements, I'm concerned that the adoption of Linux and FOSS will be slowed or even opposed by some in the USA just because a few socialist countries are adopting it. Ideaologists tend to but heads on every issue even if they are not necessarily related to their original arguements.

[454redhawk]

In the last few years quite a few Latin American countries have moved towards the liberal left (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, Venezuela), which distrusts the darker side of capitalism (monopolies). MS is the liberal left's natural enemy, so it's no surprise that such countries would move toward Linux.

I completely disagree with that assumption.

Look at the high power liberals in America. They are EXTREAMLY rich (but dont want anyone else to be).

MS is in bed with the liberal left. They are one in the same.

Capitalism is NOT about monpolies.

BTW
Capitalism is the friend of the free world and has given you EVERYTHING you enjoy today and to come.

[leog]

I don't quite understand what the issue is here... if a country decides to adopt Linux... well, great!! Is not that something we all struggle for? Or should we ban Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador and all the other leftist countries because of their ideology? Maybe we should change the meaning of 'Ubuntu - humanity to others' with 'Ubuntu - humanity to others, except communists'?

[w00dchaz]

So now instead of just "Linux zealots," are people gonna start calling us commies? That would be just about right, use Linux and you're anti-American :(

[punkinside]

I don't quite understand what the issue is here... if a country decides to adopt Linux... well, great!! Is not that something we all struggle for? Or should we ban Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador and all the other leftist countries because of their ideology? Maybe we should change the meaning of 'Ubuntu - humanity to others' with 'Ubuntu - humanity to others, except communists'?

There is nothing wrong with a country adopting FOSS per se. I just don't think we should applaud dictatorships (who happen to be communist) for having free software when the citizens aren't free.

[leog]

There is nothing wrong with a country adopting FOSS per se. I just don't think we should applaud dictatorships (who happen to be communist) for having free software when the citizens aren't free.

1) Nobody is applauding Cuba's political system. We are talking about Linux here.

2) I'm kind of worried now after all this debate... let me explain myself; I live in a country with a "leftist" government and I'm currently part of the national LoCo Team. One of our goals -and main projects- is the adoption of FOSS in all government agencies. To achieve this we have to work very close with the government officials in charge of those agencies.

Let's say that one of these days I post in this forum the news that my "leftist" country is switching to Linux only... OMG... I can already imagine all your fingers pointing at me and accusing me of backing up dictators!!!

But it's OK... I've learned the lesson... in the open source community, there are way too many closed-minded people.

[punkinside]

As for me, I think it's great news. I especially like how they compare proprietary software to selling kitchen recipies. XD And for those of you that still want to whine like babies about how the software is free, but the people aren't, try to look on the bright side--maybe they are considering freedoms for people like freedoms from monopolies.

The great majority (we're talking 98% here) of Cubans won't even notice. They don't have computers, much less internet access (I once saw Castro himself giving a speech about how the internet is evil) I'm sorry but I can't get past the applauding of corrupt government officials of an oppressive regime for using FOSS.

[punkinside]

1) Nobody is applauding Cuba's political system. We are talking about Linux here.


Last I heard, we were applauding the regime for adopting FOSS. Who enforces Cuba's political system if not its regime?



2) I'm kind of worried now after all this debate... let me explain myself; I live in a country with a "leftist" government and I'm currently part of the national LoCo Team. One of our goals -and main projects- is the adoption of FOSS in all government agencies. To achieve this we have to work very close with the government officials in charge of those agencies.

Let's say that one of these days I post in this forum the news that my "leftist" country is switching to Linux only... OMG... I can already imagine all your fingers pointing at me and accusing me of backing up dictators!!!

But it's OK... I've learned the lesson... in the open source community, there are way too many closed-minded people.

Where do you live? The fact that you have a computer available to you and are able to post in this forum already says that your government is much, much more "free" than Cuba's.

Please, listen to yourselves: hey, they don't have any basic freedoms but their government uses linux! (even though they can't get anywhere near a computer) Hurrayyyyy!!!!

[punkinside]

And who the hell in there right mind wishes for a political assassination? ;)

Apparently I do.

I just wish people would stop talking out of their @*% about things they cant begin to comprehend. So ok, lets all give Castro a big applause for adopting FOSS. w00t.

Make sure you ask the next cuban immigrant you see why on earth he would leave a country that embraces FOSS in their government offices.

[leog]

Last I heard, we were applauding the regime for adopting FOSS. Who enforces Cuba's political system if not its regime?

Where do you live? The fact that you have a computer available to you and are able to post in this forum already says that your government is much, much more "free" than Cuba's.

Please, listen to yourselves: hey, they don't have any basic freedoms but their government uses linux! (even though they can't get anywhere near a computer) Hurrayyyyy!!!!

I don't agree with the Cuban political system on many issues, specially those regarding political freedom for their citizens. But, hey, on the other hand I'm not very happy with USA's state-sponsored terrorism either, so... do we have to agree with a country's political system in order to acknowledge their efforts in the adoption of FOSS?

PS: Yes, I'm free to use Linux in my country, but only because I fought for that freedom. If the Cubans want some gucci and coca-cola they can also fight for it. We, the Latinamerican people are not stupid, you know?

[Icarosaurus]

Few days ago i read the news and knew that the Cuban government will use linux.
I read that R. Stallmann supported this initiative.

I like linux and I'm a convinced user because it's FREE software and this doesn't only mean you don't have to pay for it.
Free means that everyone can contribute to the software development, away from politics and ideologies, but only through ideas.
That's why I think that linux being adopted and customized for the use of a totalitarian regime is bad and the true free software is a son of democracy.
A software that is born free and is used for limiting the freedom of people is not free anymore, in my opinion.

Linux will be used for limiting the access of people to the internet, control people, and force to think in a single way.

That's why I feel offended, and will not use linux anymore if I realize that the linux community goes along with this.

What do you think?

[rjfioravanti]

Linux will be used for limiting the access of people to the internet, control people, and force to think in a single way.



how are they going to control the way you think by installing linux?

and how do you think they are going to change the internet

[[h2o]]

I can't actually believe that anyone would switch operating systems because a certain country uses it. I hope you don't brush your teeth, because I am pretty sure both Fidel and Kim Jong Il does it as well... :)

[Icarosaurus]

I read there's a team that's "customizing" linux starting from the Gentoo distro.
The access to the internet is strongly limited in cuba.
Only 2% of population can access it in a controlled way.
Everything is submited to censorship and is filtered through the government servers.
Do you want linux to be an instrument for this?

[rjfioravanti]

well if they didn't do it with linux they would do it would something else so i dont see what the problem is

if you don't like what they are doing in general there are more effective ways to protest than switching back to windows

[Somenoob]

They intend to use their own modified version of Gentoo. Good for them...

[Icarosaurus]

;2236222']I can't actually believe that anyone would switch operating systems because a certain country uses it.

I don't switch operating system because of countries that use it as iI don't switch it because of weather.

I didn't want to put the stress on WHERE and WHO uses it but WHAT he's doing with linux.

[Sefrin]

Since Linux is open source I'm not sure how/why you would stop them from using it. Just because it may be adopted doesn't mean all developers of Linux will help create an OS based on controlling users. That said, Cuba could take Linux and change it however they see fit, but boycotting an entire open source community because of something they have no control over is not the answer. Computer usage is not at the root of the problem.

Do you have a link to an article about this?

[rjfioravanti]

People do inappropriate things with computers every day

I'm sure there are lots of pedophiles out there who save their pictures and distribute them from windows os, so make sure you dont use windows anymore either

[Icarosaurus]

if you don't like what they are doing in general there are more effective ways to protest than switching back to windows

Of course... It was a taunt.
I'm convinced that the best way for protesting is continue to use linux.
But I think that linux used by a totalitarism is like a theft.

[[h2o]]

Of course... It was a taunt.
I'm convinced that the best way for protesting is continue to use linux.
But I think that linux used by a totalitarism is like a theft.

Would it be better if they paid Microsoft to use Windows for whatever evil you might do with it? Sorry, I just don't see any connection.

[Icarosaurus]

Since Linux is open source I'm not sure how/why you would stop them from using it. Just because it may be adopted doesn't mean all developers of Linux will help create an OS based on controlling users. That said, Cuba could take Linux and change it however they see fit, but boycotting an entire open source community because of something they have no control over is not the answer. Computer usage is not at the root of the problem.

Do you have a link to an article about this?

I agree with you. Again...it was a taunt.
I think the force of linux is FREEDOM. And the linux community needs to boycott THIS USE of linux.
yes...the community doesn't have complete control on this. But i think a good starting point is "don't cooperate".

[Icarosaurus]

People do inappropriate things with computers every day

I'm sure there are lots of pedophiles out there who save their pictures and distribute them from windows os, so make sure you dont use windows anymore either

I'll never give a pedophile an internet connection if I know he's a pedophile.

[rjfioravanti]

can you give an example of how the linux community could effectively, not cooperate?

[Icarosaurus]

;2236309']Would it be better if they paid Microsoft to use Windows for whatever evil you might do with it? Sorry, I just don't see any connection.

No...I don't think it's better.
I think paying Microsoft is bad too.

[Icarosaurus]

can you give an example of how the linux community could effectively, not cooperate?

A:"can you help me developing this FREE software for the Cuban Goverment ?"
R:"No, thanks."

it's not too much... but it's a starting point.

I think Free Sofware Licenses should not only contain limitations on commercial distribution, but a sort of "ethical" terms too.

[rjfioravanti]

You still have not provided a link to an article which shows linux developers have offered to help the cuban government develop stuff for them

[Icarosaurus]

You still have not provided a link to an article which shows linux developers have offered to help the cuban government develop stuff for them

I don't have it. When I told there's a team of people working on it, I meant people engaged by the cuban goverment, not linux developers.

But I think linux community has the ethical must of not going along with this.

Try googling "linux Cuba"...there is a lot of articles.
Try googling "dos por tres" too... Do you know what 2x3 is?

[az]

Free means that everyone can contribute to the software development, away from politics and ideologies, but only through ideas.
That's why I think that linux being adopted and customized for the use of a totalitarian regime is bad and the true free software is a son of democracy.
A software that is born free and is used for limiting the freedom of people is not free anymore, in my opinion.

Linux will be used for limiting the access of people to the internet, control people, and force to think in a single way.

You are misguided. Software freedom includes the right to use the software for any purpose. If people are allowed to restrict how the software is being used, then it is not free.



That's why I feel offended, and will not use linux anymore if I realize that the linux community goes along with this.

What do you think?

I think that you feeling offended has nothing to do with the software - and I find it offensive that you would think that something should be done to the software that would take away the freedom to use the software just because of a political belief, regardless of what it is. I also think that if you stop using free-libre software because of this, no one will care.

[scrooge_74]

An idea, lets take away all copies of MS from Cuba and then take away Linux and send them to the dark ages so people wont be able to communicate with family outside the country.

I have a couple of friends from Cuba who either recently came out or they still have family there. Using Yahoo Messenger or Yahoo mail is the only affordable way they have to communicate.

Open source software is free for anybody to use, if developers in the island can make good use of it and make modifications let them do it. At least they can have a window into the outside world.

[Icarosaurus]

If people are allowed to restrict how the software is being used, then it is not free.
That's what I was trying to say. Cuban government wants to restrict the use of linux.



... I find it offensive that you would think that something should be done to the software that would take away the freedom to use the software just because of a political belief, regardless of what it is. I also think that if you stop using free-libre software because of this, no one will care.

I'm exactly trying to say the opposite!!!!

[[h2o]]

I think Free Sofware Licenses should not only contain limitations on commercial distribution, but a sort of "ethical" terms too.
Ok, but ethical terms set by who? There are no general ethical rules that all people agree should apply.

As someone already stated: If you start making conditions for using something, then it is not really free, is it?

[Icarosaurus]

;2236435']Ok, but ethical terms set by who? There are no general ethical rules that all people agree should apply.

As someone already stated: If you start making conditions for using something, then it is not really free, is it?

You're saying that for the sake of freedom, a government is free to limit the freedom of people?
that's not true freedom

True freedom consists in not limiting other people's freedom. That's the basis of democracy. Isn't it an ethical term of use?

[Icarosaurus]

An idea, lets take away all copies of MS from Cuba and then take away Linux and send them to the dark ages so people wont be able to communicate with family outside the country.

Oh yes they're free to communicate with families paying attention on what they say.



At least they can have a window into the outside world.

Yes...but that's not enough.

[reyfer]

I think that I want to be free from people that think their concept of what freedom is MUST be the same as mine. It is not a OS that will set cubans free, it is cubans. By having Linux in their machines, maybe some smart kid will learn how to hack it, and then the same tool you claim is being used to enslave them will be used to free them.

[hizaguchi]

I just don't get where the idea that the Cuban people are less free than, for example US citizens, comes from. As I understand it, the Cuban government provides free education (all the way through college) and healthcare to everyone. Their unemployment rate is also half that of the US and homelessness is extremely rare (compared with the 3.5 million homeless here in the US).

So you have a population of people who have reasonable access to education, healthcare, housing, and employment living in one of the most beautiful places on earth. Yes, some essentials are scarce due to the weak economy (read: US-enforced embargo), and yes, the political system is different than what many people associate with "freedom".

But for comparison, the US is a nation where the starving and homeless are ignored while the upper class elite earn literally millions of dollars a day, and where citizens can and have been imprisoned and tortured for years without trial or even criminal charges, and where the legitimacy of the elections (the very crux of our notion of "freedom") is now coming under scrutiny.

And we're having a discussion about what software is used to in some way support that terrible inhuman treatment they're handing out down there in Cuba?

PS: I'm not Cuban and my country has made it illegal for me to travel to Cuba, so I only know what I have read and heard from others. If somebody on these boards is actually in Cuba now, I'd love to have any inaccuracies in what I just said corrected, and I hope I've not offended you.

[rjfioravanti]

That's what I was trying to say. Cuban government wants to restrict the use of linux.




that doesnt sound right, I think they are going to take linux and customize it for their needs. it has nothing to do with restricting the use of linux. Unless you mean they are going to restrict peoples ability to download linux. But if they are restricting their ability to download stuff, I think they have bigger problem than not being able to get the latest release of ubuntu

[scrooge_74]

I think that I want to be free from people that think their concept of what freedom is MUST be the same as mine. It is not a OS that will set cubans free, it is cubans. By having Linux in their machines, maybe some smart kid will learn how to hack it, and then the same tool you claim is being used to enslave them will be used to free them.

That is exactly what I was thinking, is a two way door. I once gave a Knoppix CD to a friend on his way back to Cuba and he told me it was very usefull tool!! :D

[Icarosaurus]

I think that I want to be free from people that think their concept of what freedom is MUST be the same as mine.
I don't think you MUST have the same concept of freedom as mine.
But I still think there is ONE freedom as a fundamental right for humanity.

It is not a OS that will set cubans free, it is cubans. By having Linux in their machines, maybe some smart kid will learn how to hack it, and then the same tool you claim is being used to enslave them will be used to free them.
Cubans can use linux now too. I'm talking about Cuban Government.

[[h2o]]

You're saying that for the sake of freedom, a government is free to limit the freedom of people?
that's not true freedom
Eh, no, that is not what I said. I just said that free software would not be free if it came with a clause that said "...but you can't use it if you are an oppressive regime, an employee of Microsoft or gay."
Do I think it is right for a government to infringe the freedom of its citizens? No. Do I think it matters if they did it with free or proprietary software? No, because I don't think it has any relevance.

[scrooge_74]

I just don't get where the idea that the Cuban people are less free than, for example US citizens, comes from. As I understand it, the Cuban government provides free education (all the way through college) and healthcare to everyone. Their unemployment rate is also half that of the US and homelessness is extremely rare (compared with the 3.5 million homeless here in the US).

So you have a population of people who have reasonable access to education, healthcare, housing, and employment living in one of the most beautiful places on earth. Yes, some essentials are scarce due to the weak economy (read: US-enforced embargo), and yes, the political system is different than what many people associate with "freedom".

But for comparison, the US is a nation where the starving and homeless are ignored while the upper class elite earn literally millions of dollars a day, and where citizens can and have been imprisoned and tortured for years without trial or even criminal charges, and where the legitimacy of the elections (the very crux of our notion of "freedom") is now coming under scrutiny.

And we're having a discussion about what software is used to in some way support that terrible inhuman treatment they're handing out down there in Cuba?

PS: I'm not Cuban and my country has made it illegal for me to travel to Cuba, so I only know what I have read and heard from others. If somebody on these boards is actually in Cuba now, I'd love to have any inaccuracies in what I just said corrected, and I hope I've not offended you.

From my experience deaiing with cubans: they dont have freedom of speech, internet communications are monitor and are slow (the first thing is the same in other countries, but you can go around that if yo know how, the second is due to poor international communication links).

They have an acute housing shortage, because of poor goverment policies plus the embargo. Their health system has deteriorated to some degree, but still better that in other countries. Their education is still good, but they do have some things lacking, example i am an industrial engineer and I have a friend who came out of cuba who is also an Industrial engineer, and some manufacturing methods or the history of the beginings of engineering are not known to him due to the fact some of that history and technics are US made.

You do have two Cubas, the one for the tourist and the one for the rest of the country. They do have a shortage of money, but again is due to bad goverment policies and the embargo.

I am of the opinion that if the embargo were to be lifted many things would change in a matter of a couple of years. But US politicians dont want to forget the Cold War.

Any way the dictatorship before Fidel's was backed by the US goverment so politicians are to blame for the suffering of the common people.

Just my two cents

[zvacet]

Cuba swich to linux.From what?Windows.How it can be possible if we all know that Cuba is under U.S emargo?Was that reason to protest?China is not exactly a mirror of democracy and they develop they own linux called Red Flag and nobody have nothing to say.If somebody think that OS make you more or less free,that person lives in virtual reality.

[Mateo]

Explain to me how you think you can stop authoritarian governments from using linux, and then I'll think maybe this is something less than fanatical craziness.

[Icarosaurus]

;2236530']Eh, no, that is not what I said. I just said that free software would not be free if it came with a clause that said "...but you can't use it if you are an oppressive regime, an employee of Microsoft or gay."
Microsoft doesn't kill or imprison people, I'm sure almost all gay people don't do it.
Do you know how gay people were and are treated in Cuba?
But this is another story.


Do I think it is right for a government to infringe the freedom of its citizens? No. Do I think it matters if they did it with free or proprietary software? No, because I don't think it has any relevance.
It matters, for me.

[Icarosaurus]

Explain to me how you think you can stop authoritarian governments from using linux, and then I'll think maybe this is something less than fanatical craziness.

I'm not crazy, and I'm not fanatic. Why do you think I am?
We're just having peaceful discussion.

I don't want to stop a government to use linux. But I'd like to stop a government to use linux in a bad way.
I'm sad to know that linux is used by a totalitarian regime, while here we are using words like "human","free","open","community" and ... "ubuntu".

[az]

That's what I was trying to say. Cuban government wants to restrict the use of linux.


I'm not sure of what you are saying. Are you saying that Cubans will be abel to run a binary-only version of a linux OS (I doubt that's the case - that is against the GPL) or are you saying that the Cuban government will restrict the use of the internet in Cuba?

The former is relevant, the latter is not.


;2236435']
"I think Free Sofware Licenses should not only contain limitations on commercial distribution, but a sort of "ethical" terms too."

Ok, but ethical terms set by who? There are no general ethical rules that all people agree should apply.

There is not even a restriction on using the software for commercial uses! Read the GPL!

The GPL covers how to redistribute the software, not how to use it. The GPL is all about keeping the software free to use, study, modify and redistribute. Everything else is non of anyone's business but their own.


You're saying that for the sake of freedom, a government is free to limit the freedom of people?
that's not true freedom

True freedom consists in not limiting other people's freedom. That's the basis of democracy. Isn't it an ethical term of use?

It's not the software's place to determine that. Nor is it the author of the software's place to do so.


I just don't get where the idea that the Cuban people are less free than, for example US citizens, comes from. As I understand it, the Cuban government provides free education (all the way through college) and healthcare to everyone. Their unemployment rate is also half that of the US and homelessness is extremely rare (compared with the 3.5 million homeless here in the US).

So you have a population of people who have reasonable access to education, healthcare, housing, and employment living in one of the most beautiful places on earth. Yes, some essentials are scarce due to the weak economy (read: US-enforced embargo), and yes, the political system is different than what many people associate with "freedom".

...

And we're having a discussion about what software is used to in some way support that terrible inhuman treatment they're handing out down there in Cuba?


I agree. That is so self-righteous.


that doesnt sound right, I think they are going to take linux and customize it for their needs. it has nothing to do with restricting the use of linux. Unless you mean they are going to restrict peoples ability to download linux. But if they are restricting their ability to download stuff, I think they have bigger problem than not being able to get the latest release of ubuntu

That would be against the GPL, and RMS would not have sanctioned that.

If you want to censor the internet, good luck! You can try to block/censor all the traffic into your country, but it's a losing battle. You can even ask google to censor their searches, like China does. Whatever...

[az]

I'm sad to know that linux is used by a totalitarian regime, while here we are using words like "human","free","open","community" and ... "ubuntu".

I'm sad to know that the bible is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that education is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that television is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that books are used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that the economy is used by a totalitarian regime
etc....

[zvacet]

Microsoft doesn't kill or imprison people
I never sad they do.My point was somethig else.They broke embargo and they don´t care to whome they sell their products as long as that gives ´em profit.Even stranger is that U.S. govermant never react(as far as I know).Let´s look it from cuban side.Maybe easyer way to be hooked to net is to have software witch they don´t have to pay.I understand your humanistic point of wiev,but unfortunatly that is paradox of free OS.It means everybody is free to use it.That don´t nessesary mean that I have to like every linux user.Most of govermants in the world do unjuistice things to people they govern.How to stop it is out of range of this discussion.

[Hendrixski]

So Cubas Government restricts personal freedoms, and we're concerned if we want Linux to be used for something potentially restrictive. What if their switching over to Linux makes them less represive? Can we restrict people from using it based on our idealogy? Will we force our beliefs on others and vainly believe that we are the ones who know best?

I don't have the audacity to say that I would restrict someones access to Linux based on my personal beliefs. I pity those who do.

[IYY]

What you are proposing is basically a software embargo on Cuba. Not only is this not possible (it's Free software, so they can do whatever they want with it), but also highly unethical. Much of Cuba's current problems (though not all) are due to the embargo, not due to the way Fidel runs things. Saying that you want to restrict their use of software because it will be used for 'evil' is the same as saying as saying that we should not send them textbooks because they will be used to learn how to construct nuclear weapons (though for the record, their education system is equal or even better than ours, so I doubt they want our textbooks).

[FaceorKneecaps]

Freedom of expression means just that. Free software is another thing completely because it is a tool to express yourself, and with every right to change the tool. I am opposed to any sensorship what so ever, and more opposed to limit the tools for expression. There are two freedoms involved here and linking them is not an issue. If I was to do that I would not be using ubuntu because it has a christian edition, and me beeing against all religion thinking it its a evolutionary step yet to be completed, could not live with that. But I believe in the christians choise to express themself freely, and their right to change the tools of expression. The two freedoms are both important because they are freedoms, and linking them is a way to undermine the one with the other, something that leads to sensorship. Richard Stallman is a mighty wise man and I totaly support his statement, him not only beeing a guru for the linux community but a guru, and a true philosofer for all the communities.

Freedom of speech is a the only way to understand human nature, opposite to the sensorship that tries to forget it.

[Erik Trybom]

I don't think it's horrible if Cuba uses Linux to suppress free speech. I think it's horrible that they do it at all, no matter what tools they use.

Free software does not impose any restrictions upon its users. The GPL does not say in which ways you can and cannot use your software. RMS and Linus both share this view. If you don't like it, well, write yourself another license.

Besides, what could we do about it? Put a not-for-totalitarian-use clause into the GPL? The thought is just silly.

No, the only thing that the Linux community could do is refusing to help them if they ask us (and I doubt they will).

[Icarosaurus]

I'm not sure of what you are saying. Are you saying that Cubans will be abel to run a binary-only version of a linux OS (I doubt that's the case - that is against the GPL) or are you saying that the Cuban government will restrict the use of the internet in Cuba?
Yes I'm afraid Fidel will modify linux without sharing the source code. I can't be sure of this because it's only an intention. I don't think being aginst GNU/GPL it's the worse crime of a regime....so I think it's the last problem for a regime.
Anyway I'm sure that even if the source code will be available this will be used in a system where people get a "filtered" access to the internet (see "dos por tres"), and will be the only "official" version. And I'm sure of what being against an "official" thing means in a regime.



The former is relevant, the latter is not.

Again...this is relevant for me. We are in "Ubuntu Cafe" and we are not discussing on technical problems in licensing.
We are discussing about the use of linux in a system that limits freedom.



There is not even a restriction on using the software for commercial uses! Read the GPL!
The GPL covers how to redistribute the software, not how to use it. The GPL is all about keeping the software free to use, study, modify and redistribute. Everything else is non of anyone's business but their own.
It's not the software's place to determine that. Nor is it the author of the software's place to do so.

Yes.
I wanted to make considerations that go beyond the legal, technical matter.
I feel that the spirit that moves the linux community is being deceived.


I'm sad to know that the bible is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that education is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that television is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that books are used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that the economy is used by a totalitarian regime
etc....
This is the point.
There isn't any law that obliges a regime to not use bible,education,television,books,economy for it's own use. Because a regime is out of any law.
But as a priest, a teacher, an anchorman, a writer, an economist, you should make all efforts to avoid that tools made for humans, will not be used against humans.
Am I wrong?

[punkinside]

Theres a thread about this in the backyard. Look for it.


I just don't get where the idea that the Cuban people are less free than, for example US citizens, comes from. As I understand it, the Cuban government provides free education (all the way through college) and healthcare to everyone. Their unemployment rate is also half that of the US and homelessness is extremely rare (compared with the 3.5 million homeless here in the US).

So you have a population of people who have reasonable access to education, healthcare, housing, and employment living in one of the most beautiful places on earth. Yes, some essentials are scarce due to the weak economy (read: US-enforced embargo), and yes, the political system is different than what many people associate with "freedom".

But for comparison, the US is a nation where the starving and homeless are ignored while the upper class elite earn literally millions of dollars a day, and where citizens can and have been imprisoned and tortured for years without trial or even criminal charges, and where the legitimacy of the elections (the very crux of our notion of "freedom") is now coming under scrutiny.

And we're having a discussion about what software is used to in some way support that terrible inhuman treatment they're handing out down there in Cuba?

PS: I'm not Cuban and my country has made it illegal for me to travel to Cuba, so I only know what I have read and heard from others. If somebody on these boards is actually in Cuba now, I'd love to have any inaccuracies in what I just said corrected, and I hope I've not offended you.

I've been to Cuba and I can tell you that the "most beautiful places on earth" is restricted to the hotels where the only Cubans you'll see are carrying trays, or being smoked (pun intended). In the meantime, I though it would be nice for y'all to know that Fidel Castro is one of the richest men in the planet according to Forbes, his net worth is of $900 ("http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/2006/05/04/rich-kings-dictators_cz_lk_0504royals.html" ) million.

[rjfioravanti]

I wanted to make considerations that go beyond the legal, technical matter.
I feel that the spirit that moves the linux community is being deceived.


are you saying you understand that the linux can't and shouldn't do anything to stop them from using it, you just dislike the way they may or may not use it?

[punkinside]

I think that more importantly, one has to make a distinction. Do you want to applaud cuba for using free software? I fail to see how one can be happy for the "spread of linux" when the software is used by very few, in a very restricted manner, and most likely will aid in the repression of the freedom of cubans.



I'm sad to know that the bible is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that education is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that television is used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that books are used by a totalitarian regime
I'm sad to know that the economy is used by a totalitarian regime


All those things are used to repress, control and indoctrinate people in cuba. You can add linux to that list.

I'm not saying that we should somehow limit the use of books, computers or education by totalitarian regimes, I'm saying we should not support it or be happy for it.

[rjfioravanti]

but we wouldn't support what they are doing no matter what they were using! so the issue is not that they are going to use linux to do it

[luca.b]

It is hypocritical to be happy/endorse the use of Free software when the citizens are not free (the embargo is not the cause for you to be thrown in jail if you speak against the government, or for the lack of human rights in prisons). Sadly, some people, like RMS, are totally blinded by their ideology and can't see that.

Free software in a free country, otherwise it makes no sense.

[[h2o]]

So... can we sort of agree that this whole discussion is quite silly? :)

[Icarosaurus]

Oh I see there's someone supporting me :)

I think you should not say that your're a vegetarian if you kill a pig with a rolling pin and you don't use a knife.
If i was a vegetarian I'll be offended by your improper use of a rolling pin. :)

[justin whitaker]

I'll never give a pedophile an internet connection if I know he's a pedophile.

I think you are mixing metaphors here.

While I can understand your concern, since the code is open, there is no control of how it is used by definition. So if Cuba wants to use Gentoo instead of Windows, then there is little, if anything, that anyone can really do about it.

But suppose that known pedophile makes the argument that being barred from the internet somehow limits his freedom and rights? Doesn't that go against your argument?

[FaceorKneecaps]

;2237161']So... can we sort of agree that this whole discussion is quite silly? :)

Why is it silly? It's at the core of sensorship vs. freedom, and that is a serious matter. The practicality of the question might be called silly, but I think most posters a conserned with the principal of freedom. I think it's more silly picturing Castro on his russian laptop asking other xp users in a forum where they found those cute little smilies, so he can try to be funny while messaging Kimmy. :)

[.t.]

I haven't read the whole thread, so excuse me if this has already been said. However, I'd like to point out that free software development is not a democracy (in reference to "true free software is a son of democracy." from the original poster). Few votes are cast, and are available to everyone. To earn your right to be heard, you have to have given something back from all that you've taken away (i.e. all that software you have used for free). To earn your right to have a vote, you have to be recognised. Free software is run as a meritocracy.

[az]

are you saying you understand that the linux can't and shouldn't do anything to stop them from using it, you just dislike the way they may or may not use it?

Now that makes sense.




Anyway I'm sure that even if the source code will be available this will be used in a system where people get a "filtered" access to the internet (see "dos por tres"), and will be the only "official" version. And I'm sure of what being against an "official" thing means in a regime.

That is OS-agnostic.



we are not discussing on technical problems in licensing.
We are discussing about the use of linux in a system that limits freedom..

The only extent to which the software is considered free is in the licencing sense. You can only enforce the conditions under which you distribute the code.




This is the point.
There isn't any law that obliges a regime to not use bible,education,television,books,economy for it's own use. Because a regime is out of any law.
But as a priest, a teacher, an anchorman, a writer, an economist, you should make all efforts to avoid that tools made for humans, will not be used against humans.
Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong and for a lot of reasons. Not the least of which is practicallity. It is easy to licence the software for any purpose. It is impossible to enforce anything else.

Another reason is that the purpose of writing software is to make computers do things, not to effect political change. The issues in Cuba have nothing to do with the software.


I think that more importantly, one has to make a distinction. Do you want to applaud cuba for using free software? I fail to see how one can be happy for the "spread of linux" when the software is used by very few, in a very restricted manner, and most likely will aid in the repression of the freedom of cubans.



All those things are used to repress, control and indoctrinate people in cuba. You can add linux to that list.

I'm not saying that we should somehow limit the use of books, computers or education by totalitarian regimes, I'm saying we should not support it or be happy for it.

To be fair, no texts have been quoted and this is all speculation. Software freedom has a lot of potential to help Cubans recycle old computers and share their culture, knowledge and economy.



It is hypocritical to be happy/endorse the use of Free software when the citizens are not free (the embargo is not the cause for you to be thrown in jail if you speak against the government, or for the lack of human rights in prisons). Sadly, some people, like RMS, are totally blinded by their ideology and can't see that.

Free software in a free country, otherwise it makes no sense.

What exactly are you saying? You are speculating that the software is going to be misused, and then you go on to claim that RMS and others would be happy about it? I would assume that RMS is happy that more Cubans will be served using free-libre software than if they were using proprietary software - nothing more, nothing less.

Do you have any quotes from an article saying that RMS said he is happy that Cubans would have restricted access to the internet?* No.

There is no conflict with wanting people to use free-libre software and those people living in a dictatorship. One does not cause the other. One does not affect the other. No hypocrisy here.



Oh I see there's someone supporting me :)

I think you should not say that your're a vegetarian if you kill a pig with a rolling pin and you don't use a knife.
If i was a vegetarian I'll be offended by your improper use of a rolling pin. :)


I think you are mixing metaphors here.

While I can understand your concern, since the code is open, there is no control of how it is used by definition. So if Cuba wants to use Gentoo instead of Windows, then there is little, if anything, that anyone can really do about it.

But suppose that known pedophile makes the argument that being barred from the internet somehow limits his freedom and rights? Doesn't that go against your argument?

[BWF89]

The more people that use open/free software the better. Doesn't matter if their living in North Korea, Netherlands, or the USA.

[kragen]

I just want to say - I hate this "if its not capitalism / democracy, then its evil" attitude. It really pisses me off, in fact pretty much the only thing that pisses me off more is trying to force people into democracy.

[punkinside]

...
To be fair, no texts have been quoted and this is all speculation. Software freedom has a lot of potential to help Cubans recycle old computers and share their culture, knowledge and economy.

Cubans don't have computers. Period. And in the off chance that the government suddenly decided to start handing out computers to people and letting them have internet access. I very much doubt that the restrictions would not include this very forum. Sorry, I don't think theres a chance of you meeting a Cuban from Cuba in here.

And I don't have to quote texts because, like I said earlier, I've been to Cuba, and not for tourism.



...
I would assume that RMS is happy that more Cubans will be served using free-libre software than if they were using proprietary software - nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not a psychic to know what makes RMS happy or not. But from my POV, anyone who wishes to associate oneself to any kind of "freedom" should not allow himself to be seen anywhere near Cuban government officials.



Do you have any quotes from an article saying that RMS said he is happy that Cubans would have restricted access to the internet?* No.

No, look for the article posted on the thread in the backyard and you will see that RMS is quite happy, he even went there and gave a speech and all. So I imagine that he is happy they're using the software for whatever reason they're using it. Including, but not limited to, restricting access to the internet to the extremely few people that have it.



There is no conflict with wanting people to use free-libre software and those people living in a dictatorship. One does not cause the other. One does not affect the other. No hypocrisy here.

You're right. My point has always been that we should not applaud anything this government does until the Cuban people are free.

[punkinside]

The more people that use open/free software the better. Doesn't matter if their living in North Korea, Netherlands, or the USA.

And why is that? Please explain.



I just want to say - I hate this "if its not capitalism / democracy, then its evil" attitude. It really pisses me off, in fact pretty much the only thing that pisses me off more is trying to force people into democracy.

Nobody ever said anything about capitalism in this thread yet. We've been talking about freedoms that the cuban government (that happens to be communist) does not allow its citizens.

By the way... look for the link in one of my posts here that says that Castro's net worth is estimated at $900 million.

But don't worry, every other Cuban is equal (-ly poor), so yay for Communism!

[hizaguchi]

I've been to Cuba and I can tell you that the "most beautiful places on earth" is restricted to the hotels where the only Cubans you'll see are carrying trays, or being smoked (pun intended). In the meantime, I though it would be nice for y'all to know that Fidel Castro is one of the richest men in the planet according to Forbes, his net worth is of $900 ("http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/2006/05/04/rich-kings-dictators_cz_lk_0504royals.html" ) million.

I've not been to Cuba, but I know that, from what I have seen and experienced of the Caribbean, the hotel areas are far less attractive, on many levels, than the rest of the islands. That difference of opinion has little to do with the conversation though.

The relevant part is Fidel Castro. I'll go ahead and quote the article you linked:


We estimate his fortune based on his economic power over a web of state-owned companies including El Palacio de Convenciones, a convention center near Havana; Cimex, retail conglomerate; and Medicuba, which sells vaccines and other pharmaceuticals produced in Cuba. Former Cuban officials living in U.S. assert that he has long skimmed profits. Castro insists his net worth is zero.(emphasis mine)

There is a big difference in a private fortune like is common in capitalist economies and wealth estimation in terms of the "economic power" of a communist leader. The latter just means that he is the head of the government and that gives hime economic power approximately equivalent to that of someone with $900 million US. I'm not saying Fidel is a saint by any means, and I'm sure his life is fairly luxurious. I'm just not so sure that he's living it up any more than our own president.

[FaceorKneecaps]

There you have it. Would these to countries be symbiotic for so many years if one was poor, and without any collateral? Come on!

[[h2o]]

Why is it silly? It's at the core of sensorship vs. freedom, and that is a serious matter. The practicality of the question might be called silly, but I think most posters a conserned with the principal of freedom. I think it's more silly picturing Castro on his russian laptop asking other xp users in a forum where they found those cute little smilies, so he can try to be funny while messaging Kimmy. :)

*sigh* Yes, censorship and totalitarian regimes are a serious matter, yes. So that is not silly.

What I find silly is to think that free software should be free, but still have restrictions. It's either free or it is not. And, who the heck decides what is a "totalitarian regime" and what is not? It's all just really silly.

If someone is concerned about the lack of freedom in a specific country then do something about it through a political channel. Leave software out of it, it has nothing to do with it.

[Icarosaurus]

;2238115']
What I find silly is to think that free software should be free, but still have restrictions. It's either free or it is not.
Is it silly to think that the only restriction on being free is to not limit the freedom of others ?
I think that freedom is not making everything you want. It's a little more.
And I'm not the only one and the first person thinking this.
Free people in Cuba are very few.


And, who the heck decides what is a "totalitarian regime" and what is not? It's all just really silly.

Castro said that people who wanted to leave the island were already out of it and turned an island in a big prison.
Really you don't see the difference?


If someone is concerned about the lack of freedom in a specific country then do something about it through a political channel. Leave software out of it, it has nothing to do with it.
Sorry for talking about software used for political scopes. Maybe I had to be involved in politics for talking about it.
Please stop to use the word "silly" so easily.

[23meg]

Am I getting something wrong, or is someone asserting that a government will pick up GPL'd software, modify in it in a way that undermines the GPL, without disclosing the changes they make to the source, use it for oppressive purposes of whatever sort, and in doing this Richard Stallman of all people is holding their hand, giving them public support in person? And this assertion is made without any supporting information, let alone proof, and just on the basis of "but what if that dictator turns the software into evil", which is motivated mostly by disrespect towards that "dictator"?

In case anyone is unaware of the implications of that due to lack of knowledge of the history of FOSS, it would be the near equivalent Bill Gates going to China, giving a billion cracked copies of Windows Vista to the government, and posing for the cameras with the officials.

[aysiu]

I've moved the off-topic posts to this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=363366).

[JAPrufrock]

our healthcare system is the best in the world - bar none.

So where do you live- Scandanavia? or maybe Switzerland? There are at least 20 countries in the world with lower infant mortality rates than the U.S., and at least 16 countries in the world with higher life expectancy rates. You might argue that the U.S. doesn't fare as well as many other countries in those categories because it has a somewhat obese population that works too hard under a lot of pressure. I would agree, in part, but would also argue that U.S. medical care, though very good, is not the best in the world.

[[h2o]]

Is it silly to think that the only restriction on being free is to not limit the freedom of others ?
I think that freedom is not making everything you want. It's a little more.
And I'm not the only one and the first person thinking this.
Free people in Cuba are very few.
Yes, I think that is silly. Software really has nothing to do with this.


Castro said that people who wanted to leave the island were already out of it and turned an island in a big prison.
Really you don't see the difference? As I said, I don't disagree that Cuba is not democratic. I just fail to see how not letting them use free software would make any difference or even be relevant.

The US keeps Guantanamo Bay, should US citizens be forbidden to use free software? Italy is known for corruption and your president more or less ran all the media if I understood things right. So should you be allowed to use free software? Sweden has deported people back to countries where they would suffer torture or execution. Should I be forbidden to use free software? You can go on about this list for every single "democratic" country and find examples of why it is not free.

Can you not see why restrictions on use renders the "free" in "free software" null?

[raffytaffy]

Cuba and its citizens are not the riches in the world. Infact a large percentage of them live in what other countries would consider to be poverty. And yes cuba and USA dont see eye to eye on a large quantity of issues. However alot of folks seem to be missing the point. Cuba dosent have all the rescourses available that we as US citizens do. Their goverment dosent work as ours does. Yes im aware that perhaps this move was somewhat influenced by the political climate, however it comes down to the fact that using linux and free software in general in cuba can and will produce more funding for perhaps the school which this software would run. Has anyone thought of that? Yes cuba could use windows and buy the liscenes ( if this is legall, im not sure) but where would they use this software ...given the school wouldnt afford a computer to run it on.

my 2 cents. raf.

[luca.b]

;2239952']
As I said, I don't disagree that Cuba is not democratic. I just fail to see how not letting them use free software would make any difference or even be relevant.


As RMS said in one of his talks that "our goal is to liberate everyone in the cyberspace" - source: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060625001523547 - (sigh), his move to endorse this move by Cuba was hypocritical due to the fact that the aforemetioned country is not a democracy (therefore not a free country). Hence the reason for my dislike.

[Betelgeuse]

Few days ago i read the news and knew that the Cuban government will use linux.
I read that R. Stallmann supported this initiative.

I like linux and I'm a convinced user because it's FREE software and this doesn't only mean you don't have to pay for it.
Free means that everyone can contribute to the software development, away from politics and ideologies, but only through ideas.
That's why I think that linux being adopted and customized for the use of a totalitarian regime is bad and the true free software is a son of democracy.
A software that is born free and is used for limiting the freedom of people is not free anymore, in my opinion.

Linux will be used for limiting the access of people to the internet, control people, and force to think in a single way.

That's why I feel offended, and will not use linux anymore if I realize that the linux community goes along with this.

What do you think?

I feel offended about military organisations using linux too. The free software that we love to use so much is used to bomb and kill people too and in my opinion, killing people for whatever the reason is a murder and a person who kills for whatever reason is a murderer too. And this free software can be freely used by murderers and that disturbs me...

I'm a software developer and I'm giving service to compaines about their database applications but I'm refusing to work with any company who have any ties with military or goverment organisations, I do not need their money. And I do not make any software I make GPL becouse some military or goverment organisation may use it.

About Cuba, I was there 10 years ago as a tourist and before that, I had sympathy for socialism, but when I see the sitiation there, My opinions started to change. Now I feel I'm and anarchist and for me, all goverments are equal about taking freedoms from people. GWe do not need to be governed, all people should chose what is right for themselves. But people go to elections and vote for some person to herd them and this is called democracy. :confused:

[mr.v.]

killing people for whatever the reason is a murder and a person who kills for whatever reason is a murderer too

The right to self defense is inalienable, and anyone who tells you otherwise is a tyrant.

If someone is about to assault or kill you, your wife or your daughter, and you kill him, I'm to believe that you're a cold blooded murderer who shouldn't use Ubuntu? That's utter nonsense. Not every human life is precious. That's a lie they tell you in college.

Now about that nonsense about being an anarchist. Living in a society of laws isn't a bad thing. Provided those laws don't violate inalienable rights but rather help you protect them and provide justice when they're violated, is far better than living in your lawless, orderless jungle society.

[punkinside]

...
About Cuba, I was there 10 years ago as a tourist and before that, I had sympathy for socialism, but when I see the sitiation there, My opinions started to change. Now I feel I'm and anarchist and for me, all goverments are equal about taking freedoms from people. GWe do not need to be governed, all people should chose what is right for themselves. But people go to elections and vote for some person to herd them and this is called democracy. :confused:

I was an anarchist too in my teens until I grew up and realized its as impossible as communism or completely pure capitalism. Not everyone knows how to govern themselves.

You live and learn :)

[Icarosaurus]

Hey guys!
I'm not dead. :)
I'm just taking a little time for organizing my ideas, taking a look on considerations adverse to mine,of course.
I just wanted to thank all people here for their contributes to the discussion, this is important for me.
I'll soon write a new post with my conclusions, so the debate can continue :)
In the meanwhile, read this report by "Reporters Without Borders (http://www.rsf.org/)", sounds very interesting to me:

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=19335

See you soon!

[Hendrixski]

I was an anarchist too in my teens until I grew up and realized its as impossible as communism or completely pure capitalism. Not everyone knows how to govern themselves.

You live and learn :)

:) yup. There can never be perfectly pure communism, perfectly pure capitalism, nor perfectly pure anarchism. The only t hing that can exist purely, is REALISM.

Also in reality there is no pure way to use Linux. It's a tool, can be used for good, but maybe even can be used for evil. Hopefully, most of us will keep using it for awesome.

[diskotek]

Don't know if anyone else caught this or if I'm even posting in the right place.

Cuba announced that it is dropping Windows from all government computers. And that includes higher education schools as well.

Here is one article I found:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070216/ap_on_hi_te/cuba_software_2

I also read (on news from my cell phone) they will be creating their own home brewed distro based on gentoo.

Just thought I'd pass the news on.

the topic with "is it freedom" tag-line is really disturbing. what's the relevance??? we are discussing Cuba or just their movement towards open source?


Considering Cuba is anti-America, this doesn't surprise me in the least.

they might be anti-USA but it's better to say "anti-capitalist"..right?

[diskotek]

:) yup. There can never be perfectly pure communism, perfectly pure capitalism, nor perfectly pure anarchism. The only t hing that can exist purely, is REALISM.

Also in reality there is no pure way to use Linux. It's a tool, can be used for good, but maybe even can be used for evil. Hopefully, most of us will keep using it for awesome.

anarchism & communism are different concepts asi thouhgt.

well, you can still keep your attitude as you can do. like using linux also has political attitude.

note: this was for punkinside's quote :D

edit:

well it seem impossible to destroy state/nations/borders, but utopias gives us a broader view and makes us step forward like anarchism (even libertarianism)

[ellis rowell]

Never mind Latin America, France is gradually moving over to Linux (Ubuntu). Parliament last year, Gendarmerie this year, Next year, schools, then the general public?

Eastern European countries stop pirating Windows and use Linux?
Most of the EU goes over by 2020, leaving UK to be the last at 20XX?