Well, Google is really one of the biggest non-free software vendors
today, so saying yes to google and no to microsoft is very silly.
Also, organisations are big. Google makes Google Classroom and Google
Apps for Education ("GAFE"), yet still the OSPO gives SL funds.
Thanks,
Sam
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com> wrote:
Hi Laura
I'd like to follow up on this thread :)
On 15 July 2016 at 23:39, Laura Vargas <la...@somosazucar.org> wrote:
- Microsoft (laura -1: No private software funds shall get into our
accounts!) (dave +1: money is money, and almost all the funding
sources are private companies; the Nadella Microsoft is very
different to the Gates/Ballmer era and is about as ethical as
Google, Facebook, Intel, or IBM :) (Laura: don't apply, the
requirement from grants providers to resonate SL values is not
negotiable as it stands for the whole learning model we are
proposing.) (Sean -1: No point adding Microsoft or Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation to this list.) (Dave: You assert your own values as
"SL values", but the observable behaviour of SL and OLPC is not
consistent with them. What do you see as the difference between
Google and Microsoft? Why does SL take Google's money?)
How does Google resonate with SL values more than Microsoft?
Cheers
Dave
_______________________________________________
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
