Viva El Software Libre!

When you think of groups promoting the adoption of free software around the world, you do not probably think of staid old UNESCO; and yet this organisation is actually quite active in this field. Here's one of its latest moves:

UNESCO Office in Montevideo, Uruguay, in cooperation with the network of Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) in Latin America and the Caribbean, published the Guía práctica sobre software libre: su selección y aplicación local en América Latina y el Caribe (Guidelines on free software: how to choose it and apply it locally in Latin America and the Caribbean).

...


This easy to read and practical guide promotes FLOSS contribution to sustainable development. It gives practical advice on the selection of adequate FLOSS solutions with the requested functionality and addresses the issue of migration from proprietary software to FLOSS. To facilitate the exchange of experience, the book offers a list of organizations and country related contacts. It also gives an overview of the thematic and regional landscape of the FLOSS community through the hints on annual FLOSS conferences in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Even for those who do not read Spanish, there are some very useful resources in this (free) guide. For example, there is a very detailed table showing free equivalents of Windows programs, and a good list of the main free software organisation around South America.

So if you ever need to know about free software in Belize or about the Fundación Código Libre Dominicano, you know where to go. Two countries stand out: Brazil (no surprise) and Uruguay (a big surprise, for me at least), which has more than half a dozen organisations supporting free software.

All in all, there seems to be far more going on Latin America than I with my anglocentric bias would have expected. All very hopeful for the future - and great to see UNESCO doing its bit to push things along there.

Open Source Drug Discovery

There's something utterly perverse about the way new drugs are developed. Pharmaceutical companies spend hundreds of millions - sometimes billions - of Euros investigating vast numbers of new compounds in the hope that they might treat a particular disease. If they find one that works, they then have to test it extensively for side-effects and the rest. Moreover, most of the negative knowledge they acquire - what doesn't work - is wilfully thrown away, since it represents "competitive" information.

But how about turning things on their head? Instead of trying millions of new substances for one disease, how about experimenting with the tens of thousands of known, safe medicines in the public domain on thousands of diseases? Like this:

The Johns Hopkins Clinical Compound Screening Initiative is an open-source effort to collect and index more than 10,000 known medications and determine which of them are also effective against hundreds of low-profile, Third World killers, such as Chagas disease, cholera and leprosy. The library will function something like a Wikipedia of drug discovery, where scientists around the world can contribute to the database and even provide samples or screen drugs themselves, thereby saving millions of dollars on R&D.

This could save millions of lives. Just one problem: nobody gets obscenely rich in the process....

Microsoft Joins Open Source Business Foundation

Here's another interesting example of Microsoft's attempt to snuggle up to open source:

Die Open Source Business Foundation (OSBF) hat Microsoft als neues Mitglied gewonnen. Die OSBF mit Vereinssitz in Nürnberg ist ein Netzwerk aus Unternehmen und Institutionen, das sich für den Einsatz und die Verbreitung von freier Software in Unternehmen einsetzt und bereits 120 Mitglieder hat. Mit Microsoft Beitritt zur OSBF hat Andreas Hartl, Director Platform Strategy bei Microsoft, einen Sitz im Vorstand der OSBF übernommen. Neben seiner Vorstandstätigkeit wird er außerdem die Aktivitäten der OSBF-Projektgruppe "Interoperabilität" koordinieren.

Hartl sieht den Beitritt Microsofts zur OSBF als konsequenten Schritt im Rahmen der Open-Source-Strategie seines Unternehmens, von dem beide Seiten profitieren würden. Microsoft strebt neue Verbindungen mit Partnern aus dem Open-Source-Umfeld an und will bestehende Kooperationen festigen; die OSBF-Mitglieder können laut Hartl von Microsofts Erfahrung im Bereich der Business-Entwicklung profitieren.

[Via Google Translate:

The Open Source Business Foundation (OSBF), Microsoft has won as a new member. The OSBF association with headquarters in Nuremberg is a network of companies and institutions, for the use and dissemination of free software use in enterprises and already has 120 members. With Microsoft joining the OSBF has Andreas Hartl, Director of Platform Strategy at Microsoft, a seat on the board of the OSBF. In addition to his board work, it is also the activities of the project group OSBF "interoperability" coordinate.

Hartl sees Microsoft's accession to OSBF as consistent step in the open-source strategy his company, which would benefit both sides. Microsoft is seeking new connections with partners from the open source environment and will strengthen existing cooperation, the OSBF-members may, according to Hartl of Microsoft's experience in the field of business development.]

Why Libertarians Should Love GNU/Linux

Ha!

When software is produced by a commercial company and sold in the marketplace, it’s relatively easy for the state to tax and regulate it. Commercial companies tend to be reflexively law-abiding, and they can afford the lawyers necessary to collect taxes or comply with complex regulatory schemes.

In contrast, free software will prove strongly resistant to state interference. Because virtually everyone associated with a free software project is a volunteer, the state cannot easily compel them to participate in tax and regulatory schemes. Such projects are likely to react to any attempt to tax or regulate them is likely to be met with passive resistance: people will stop contributing entirely rather than waste time dealing with the government.

Hence, free software thus has the salutary effect of depriving the state of tax revenue. But even better, free software is likely to prove extremely resistant to state efforts to build privacy-violating features into software systems.

Czy Spadające Ceny Pamięci Flash Zagrażają Microsoft?

One for my Polish readers (with thanks to Iwo Hencz).

When is a Standard Not a Standard?

On Open Enterprise blog.

Brazil, Free Software and "Castrated Windows"

Like many, I've been keeping my eye on the Brazilian computer market, since there seems to be a lot happening there in terms of free software. Details have been dribbling out here and there, but this is by far the best summary of the situation there:

Brazil imported the anti-Microsoft stance common in American geeks, but on top of the usual arguments Microsoft is foreign. This adds fuel to the flame. To the Brazilian Microsoft hater, not only there is an “evil monopoly”, but its profits are repatriated and its jobs are elsewhere. Practices like the 3-program limitation on Vista Starter further erode good will (Brazilians call it the “castrated Windows” among other colorful names). Add a dash of anti-American sentiment and you’ve got some serious resistance. This fiery mood has a strong influence, from the teenager hanging out in #hackers on Brasnet to IT departments to the federal government. Even in a rational self-interest analysis, one might rightly point out that if free/open source software (FOSS) were to wipe out Windows, negative effects on Brazil’s economy are likely minimal. The wealth, jobs, and opportunity created by Microsoft aren’t in Brazil (productivity gains might be, but that’s a whole different argument). The trade offs of a potential Linux/Google take over are different when there’s no national off-the-shelf software industry, plus Google’s revenue model works beautifully in a developing country. This mix of ideological and rational arguments torpedoes Microsoft’s support.

...

Now people in Brazil can actually develop interesting and widely used programs. We’ve got kernel hackers like Marcelo Tosatti, who maintained the 2.4 Linux kernel series, and Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, who co-founded the Conectiva distribution. There are RedHat employees, Debian contributors, committers on various projects, and so on. Lua, the programming language, comes from Brazil. There’s a practical advantage in being able to, say, tune a distribution for a particular purpose (e.g., the distribution being delivered to public schools). But beyond that it’s inspiring to finally be able to work with talented people in cool projects and have a chance to participate, rather than be handed down a proprietary product built abroad over which you have zero control. People are excited about and grateful for this. By the time you mix up these elements nearly all talented CS students and alpha geeks are well into the Linux camp. Unlike the US, the dynamic economy isn’t there to add some fragmentation. When these people go on to make technology choices in government or industry, guess what they’ll pick?

Reminds me, I must brush up my Portuguese.

Xandros: Good News, Bad News

The good news:

Xandros is known for its Windows-like Linux distribution, which has been dubbed by one DesktopLinux reviewer as "the best Linux desktop distro for Windows users." Currently in version 4, the distro is bundled with the popular Asus Eee mini-notebook. Now apparently, the company plans to go after the even smaller format netbooks and the coming onslaught of tablet-like MIDs based on the Intel Mobile Internet Device spec, which appears to blur the lines between desktop and embedded realms.

And the bad news:

Earlier this week, Xandros announced a beta of its Xandros BridgeWays Management Packs at the Microsoft Management Summit. The new product follows up on a broad collaborative agreement between Xandros and Microsoft in June of last year, which included a somewhat controversial intellectual property assurance, similar to one hatched between Redmond and Novell, under which Microsoft will provide patent covenants for Xandros customers.

Sigh.

OOXML? For Pete's Sake, No

Peter Murray-Rust is one of the key figures in the world of open data and open science, and deserves a lot of the credit for making these issues more visible. Here's an interesting post in which he points out that PDF files are not ideal from an archiving viewpoint:

I should make it clear that I am not religiously opposed to PDF, just to the present incarnation of PDF and the mindset that it engenders in publishers, repositarians, and readers. (Authors generally do not use PDF).

He then discusses in detail what the problems are and what solutions might be. Then he drops this clanger:

I’m not asking for XML. I’m asking for either XHTML or Word (or OOXML)

Word? OOXML??? Come on, Peter, you want open formats and you're willing to accept one of the most botched "standards" around, knocked up for purely political reasons, that includes gobs of proprietary elements and is probably impossible for anyone other than Microsoft to implement? *That's* open? I don't think so....

XHTML by all means, and if you want a document format the clear choice is ODF - a tight and widely-implemented standard. Anything but OOXML.

There Are 9 Million Underground Stations in Beijing

This is what wikis were invented for:

Dongdan Subway Station is an underground subway station on the Beijing Subway's Line 1 and Line 5.

Has OOXML Broken the British Standards Institution?

On Open Enterprise blog.

Asus Eee PC: Just the Facts

I've written much about the rise of ultraportables, but it's nice to have hard numbers as well as the hand waving. Here are some from Asus:

Asustek Computer on Wednesday forecast it will nearly double shipments of the popular Eee PC low-cost laptop in the second quarter, compared to the first.

Eee PC shipments will rise to between 1.2 million to 1.3 million units in the three months ending June 30, Asustek said in presentation materials for its first quarter investors' conference. The company shipped 700,000 Eee PCs in the first quarter.

...

Shipments of the Eee PC have ramped up so fast that they could challenge the company's other laptop PC products. Asustek predicts it will sell between 1.3 million and 1.4 million notebook PCs during the second quarter, up from 1.3 million in the first quarter.

The company's Eee PC shipment target for this year is 5 million units.

Not bad for what many perceived as a niche product. And that's just the beginning.

Do You Copy, RIAA?

Here's an important observation:

Though there is already a growing body of legal decisions that seem to be weighing against RIAA efforts to discourage individual consumers from copying content, the Howell decision is notable in that the judge went to particular pains to delve into the technological "hows" of file sharing as well as into legal precedents. In doing so, Judge Wake has challenged publishers pursuing such suits to recognize that the more that they go into these suits the more that they create a wide portfolio of rulings that begin to flesh out the full reality of electronic content use - a portfolio that over time has weakened rather than strengthened their claims to inhibit content copying. Put simply, the more that these suits continued, the more circumscribed their claims become and the more that their presumption of complete power over copying will weaken.

Multiple Implementations vs. Multiple Standards

I've written many times about the distinction between multiple competing impementations of a standard, which promote competition because there are no switching costs, and multiple standards, which promote lock-in. But it seems that some people just don't get this simple idea:

The “South African Bureau of Standards” (SABS) approved the Open Document Format (ODF) on Friday 18 April as an official national standard. This adoption, if implemented, will reduce choice, decrease the benefits of open competition and thwart innovation. The irony here is that South Africa is moving in a direction which stands in stark relief to the reality of the highly dynamic market, with some 40 different formats available today.

“Multiple co-existing standards as opposed to only one standard should be favoured in the interest of users. The markets are the most efficient in creating standards and it should stay within the exclusive hands of the market”, Hugo Lueders explains.

And which bunch of geniuses put this nonsense together? Why, our old friends CompTIA, which has by now given up any pretense of offering objective comment on the computer market, and is simply a vehicle for crude Microsoft propaganda. At least their desperation in the face of rising open standards like ODF are driving them out into the open for all to see. (Via Rob Weir.)

But They Can Spell "Intellectual Monopoly"...

British-based music industry umbrella the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry is now rapidly acquiring the reputation the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has in the US for heavy-handed but thinly-veiled anti-piracy measures. It’s produced a booklet it’s distributing through schools and colleges, libraries, record stores, teaching portals and websites in 21 countries that “aims to help young people use the Internet and mobile phones safely and legally to download music”.

Thank goodness British yoof don't read books nor booklets no more.

Is The Lack of Open Source Drivers Driving You Mad?

On Open Enterprise blog.

What's in a Name? Strong and Weak Open Access

A few months ago, I had the temerity to suggest the following:

Definitions matter. If you want to see why, compare the worlds of open source and open access. The very specific definition of what is open source - having an OSI-approved licence - means that it is relatively easy to police. Open access, by contrast, does not have anything like a tight, "official" definition, with the result that less scrupulous publishers try to pass off their wares as open access if it's vaguely open or vaguely accessible.

This brought down upon me the wrath of Mr Open Access himself, as the comments to the above post bear witness. Happily, I survived the thunderbolts, and therefore lived to see the following declaration from the same presiding OA oracle:

The term "open access" is now widely used in at least two senses. For some, "OA" literature is digital, online, and free of charge. It removes price barriers but not permission barriers. For others, "OA" literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of unnecessary copyright and licensing restrictions. It removes both price barriers and permission barriers. It allows reuse rights which exceed fair use.

There are two good reasons why our central term became ambiguous. Most of our success stories deliver OA in the first sense, while the major public statements from Budapest, Bethesda, and Berlin (together, the BBB definition of OA) describe OA in the second sense.

As you know, Stevan Harnad and I have differed about which sense of the term to prefer --he favoring the first and I the second. What you may not know is that he and I agree on nearly all questions of substance and strategy, and that these differences were mostly about the label. While it may seem that we were at an impasse about the label, we have in fact agreed on a solution which may please everyone. At least it pleases us.

We have agreed to use the term "weak OA" for the removal of price barriers alone and "strong OA" for the removal of both price and permission barriers. To me, the new terms are a distinct improvement upon the previous state of ambiguity because they label one of those species weak and the other strong. To Stevan, the new terms are an improvement because they make clear that weak OA is still a kind of OA.

On this new terminology, the BBB definition describes one kind of strong OA. A typical funder or university mandate provides weak OA. Many OA journals provide strong OA, but many others provide weak OA.

This was partly what I was trying to get across, in my own, 'umble and clearly not very successful way: the fact that "open access" was being used for quite different things - now named "strong" and "weak" open access - which confused matters no end, not least for people who were coming to the concept for the first time.

As a result of this new nomenclature, we now have precisely the "tight" definitions I was looking for:

"Weak OA" literature is digital, online, and free of charge. It removes price barriers but not permission barriers. "Strong OA" literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of unnecessary copyright and licensing restrictions. It removes both price barriers and permission barriers. It allows reuse rights which exceed fair use.

There, that wasn't too hard, was it?

Has the BBC Duped Us over iPlayer?

You may remember that a little while back there was a bit of a kerfuffle about the BBC's decision to go with a Microsoft-based DRM solution for its download service. Initially we were told that only six people and a couple of mangy dogs ever accessed BBC sites with GNU/Linux, and therefore it wasn't worth supporting, but the BBC later admitted that what they really meant was that the audience ran to six *figures*. The story then was: trust us, we'll get round to GNU/Linux support as soon as we can. And you know what? Silly old me believed them.

So what do we have here?

Today was a big day for BBC iPlayer: it's the day that it first became available on a portable device. BBCiPlayer is now available on iPhone and iPod touch.

Really groovy. Er, now could we have GNU/Linux, please?

Then this:

If you have a Nintendo Wii, it's already connected to your TV, and now you can play iPlayer programmes directly on your Wii.

Amazing. But what about the GNU/Linux you promised?

And now we have this:

Today is another significant day for BBC iPlayer as it launches on its first TV platform: Virgin Media.

Totally far-out, man. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE BLOODY GNU/LINUX VERSION?

I wonder how that complaint about the BBC providing state aid to Microsoft is coming along....

The Free Web: 15 Years Old Today

It was exactly 15 years ago that the Web was made free:

Heute vor 15 Jahren erhielten Tim Berners-Lee und Robert Cailliau vom Genfer Kernforschungszentrum CERN die offizielle Erlaubnis, den Code der ersten Web-API und Webservers libwww als freie Software zu vertreiben.

[It was 15 years ago today that Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Cailliau received official permission from the Geneva research centre CERN to distributed the first Web-API and libwww web server as free software.]

I somehow doubt whether things would have come so far, so fast if Sir Tim or CERN had tried to make money from this whizzo Web idea.

Windows XP Service Pack 3 Good, Vista Bad

Oh look, yet another reason *not* to upgrade to Vista:

The third service pack for XP gives you all the Windows XP performance updates, security updates and hotfixes that have been released since Service Pack 2 came out way back in August 2004. While Service Pack 3 may not be as big of a change as Service Pack 2 was, there are some noteworthy features from Vista that have been included in this release. Namely, NAP, a policy enforcement platform for limiting network access to secure machines, “Black Hole” Router Detection, a cryptographic module for the kernel and a new Product Activation module allows you to install XP without a product key.

Microsoft: The Police State's Best Friend

You can't make this stuff up:

Microsoft has developed a small plug-in device that investigators can use to quickly extract forensic data from computers that may have been used in crimes.

The COFEE, which stands for Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor, is a USB "thumb drive" that was quietly distributed to a handful of law-enforcement agencies last June. Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith described its use to the 350 law-enforcement experts attending a company conference Monday.

The device contains 150 commands that can dramatically cut the time it takes to gather digital evidence, which is becoming more important in real-world crime, as well as cybercrime. It can decrypt passwords and analyze a computer's Internet activity, as well as data stored in the computer.

Now, tell me again why you want to run Windows instead of GNU/Linux?

Hello Hayeren OS

One part of the world that has always fascianted me is Armenia. It's an ancient civilisation, but one that today finds itself in a pretty parlous state, not least economically. This makes open source a perfect resource, so it's good to see an all-Armenian distro appearing:

The author of the Hrat GNU/Linux project is Vardan Gevorgyan, who manages a small group of volunteers. The project is open, interested may join. More, we think that the success of the project and the power of considered system mostly relays on the compatriot's support.

And if you want to see what the Armenian page for it looks like, here it is.

Should We Boycott Microsoft? Can We?

On Linux Journal.

John Wilbanks on the Knowledge Web

Here's a nice meditation from Science Commons' John Wilbanks on openness, access and innovation, which includes the following thoughts on the "knowledge web":

Just to be clear, here’s what I mean by a knowledge web: it’s when today’s web has enough power to work as well for science as it currently works for culture. That means databases are integrated as easily as web documents, and it means that powerful search engines let scientists ask complex research questions and have some comfort that they’re seeing all the relevant public information in the answers. A knowledge web is when journal articles have hyperlinks inside them, not just citations, letting systems like Google do their job properly.

A knowledge web is predicated on access, and not control, of knowledge. There will never be a competition to provide the best single-point query to the full-text of journals without access- unless the journals all merge down into one company. That’s the only way a controlled system covers the whole world, through monopoly. There will never be a knowledge web where the entire backfile is hyperlinked to databases for relevance based indexing without access. Scientists won’t get to use the newest and best technologies until those companies that control knowledge decide to adopt those technologies. Control is the enemy of testing the newest technologies, of building one’s own system to suit one’s own needs. We have to have access to build a knowledge web, at least if we hope to replicate the success of the regular Web and the Internet.

GPM on LWN.net

In the spirit of passing on vaguely useful information, I notice that LWN.net has put together a handy master index of external contributors, including yours truly.