El 22 de enero de 2016 15:39:19 GMT+00:00, Fabio Pesari <[email protected]> escribió: >tl;dr: The free software community should teach as many people as it > can about programming and free software. The best that can > happen is that those people contribute to free software, and the > worst is that they become aware of free software and learn how > computers work, which might encourage them to reject nonfree > software even if they don't end up becoming developers. Win-win. > >There are many courses nowadays which aim to teach programming >(especially in schools) at zero cost, but those are usually funded by >corporations who develop proprietary software and want to promote their >own agendas and walled gardens, as well as lower the wages of >future programmers (which goes against their purposes, since it will >inevitably encourage independent crowdfunding). > >The free software community should do its best to make sure that when >people are taught about programming, there isn't any bias toward >proprietary technologies, and that free software is taught as an >essential concept (like free speech) rather than something optional >(like "open source"), with an emphasis on copyleft (otherwise, we'd >be doing those companies a favor). > >It would be ideal to teach free software and programming directly in >schools, but we all know that won't happen anytime soon for a number of >reasons, so I thought perhaps we could offer people some >*zero cost courses which ideally, should be recognized as valid >certifications* (can the FSF or FSFE help there, I wonder)? > >Here's some people who might benefit from it, and that should be >especially targeted (since they are snubbed by all of society): > >1. Poor, unemployed people [Easy] > > These are sad times. A lot of (especially young) people are > committing suicide (or crimes, see point 3) due to unemployment (and > its consequences, like the impossibility to start a family, > homelessness, mental illness, addiction and debt) and automation is > only going to reduce the number of available jobs in the future > (except programmers, until they get replaced by AIs). > > Even if a Basic Income is implemented globally, those people would > still have a lot of free time on their hands and depend completely > on their government, which might hurt their dignity as well as > require them to be "good citizens" and accept every potential future > law in order to be eligible for the BI, some of which could force > them to use proprietary software (since most countries are > considering to ban encryption without backdoors, even if it's just > mathematics, and it's hard to enforce such a ban unless proprietary > software is also enforced; it isn't hard to imagine a world in which > developing or even using free software requires explicit > authorization, and only corporations and the government are granted > it - even if such a regime would last very shortly). > > Teaching programming to these people can help them find a job in one > of the few fields that won't be affected by automation anytime soon, > and contributing to free software can offer them a chance to build > their portfolios and CVs. > > If they want to keep contributing to free software after they find a > job, good for them (and us); if they don't, at least they will know > about free software, which is more than you can say about most > people who work in IT nowadays (who are all about "open source", > which often just means writing the same programs over and over in > JavaScript using Sublime Text on Mac OS X and releasing them without > any licensing info on Github). > >2. Retired people [Medium] > > Retired people have a lot of time on their hands and they often > are treated as if they are useless or unable to keep up with the > younger generations, but I don't think that's true, and many of them > are lonely and abandoned by their own families and would greatly > benefit from the warmth of the free software community, as well as > the sense of purpose that contributing to free software can offer > (or maybe, just a nice hobby, or a side job because pensions are > too low, especially now that many adults have to live with their > parents due to unemployment, see point 1). > > The way old people are ignored and put aside in our technological > world is cold and dehumanizing, and only free software can offer them > a chance to participate (because, willing or not, even old people > will be forced to interact with technology at some point). > > I spent a lot of time with old people in my life and I know they > like to feel useful (or rather, helpful), just like everybody else. > I'm Italian and in my country, old women who can't chew their own > food will spend many hours preparing it for others, even when they > are close to death, and feel happy and fulfilled when they see > someone eat and enjoy it, even strangers. > > I think giving old people a second chance to participate in society > is great, and that they have a lot of wisdom and perspective to offer > that most of us don't have (especially when it comes to > accessibility, UI and UX. If a granny can understand something, > it means it's done properly). > > Plus, there are tons of old people who used to work in software > development, it's just a matter of getting them into free > software. People in retirement age include Larry Wall, who just > helped create Perl 6, Ken Thompson & Rob Pike, co-creators of Go, > Bjarne Stroustrup, who's making C++ better than ever and of course, > RMS. I'm sure there's someone like them out there, maybe someone > who's worked as a researcher or a C64 developer for many years and > who can outcode even the leetest of us, and has never heard of free > software but would jump on it if given the chance. > >3. Prisoners [Hard] > > This can sound controversial - who would use a program > knowing that it was written by a criminal? > > Ignoring the fact that authors can legally use a pseudonym, that > I don't know anything about who wrote the programs I use daily, > that a lot of people are arrested for nonviolent (often > drug-related) offences and that some of them committed crimes due to > hopelessness (see point 1), people have no issue listening to > popular music or watching Hollywood films or mainstream sports, so > I don't expect them to react differently to software. > > Some people who've been arrested are sincerely sorry for what > they've done, are quietly paying their dues and would like to > contribute back to society and to be offered a chance to reintegrate > for when (if) they get out. > (No need to mention those who are innocent or have been arrested > under ridiculous charges, like free software developer Bassel > Khartabil - I'm pretty sure that if he's alive, he'd rather write > some free code than not. Please never forget about him, it could > have been anyone who posts here!) > > Prisoners can already write books and record albums in some > countries; there's no rational reason a prisoner shouldn't develop > free software and even without access to the Internet, they still can > write code that can be reviewed (for hidden messages) and submitted > by authorities on their behalf, using a pseudonym if necessary. > > There are plenty of prisoners who can already program and most of > the others would benefit from learning this trade, as they will > likely be poor and unemployed when they get out (point 1), and even > worse, with a criminal record. Why not give them a chance to have a > better future, so that they are less likely to repeat their mistakes > when they get out? > > Even if someone has been given a life sentence (the "hidden death > penalty"), free software could give them another shot at life, > something purposeful to look forward to and a chance to share > something with the outside world, to redeem themselves and leave > behind some good memories of them. > > Prison should aim to rehabilitate people, and free software can do > that by teaching its altruistic values. > >Teaching programming to as many people as possible, in general, can >only be helpful for the purpose of spreading free software. Let's say >you teach programming to 1000 people - even if all of them find a job >developing proprietary software (unlikely), the chance that at least >one of them (but realistically, more) will develop or promote free >software in their spare time and/or as part of their job is pretty high >compared to the chance people who haven't been taught the same have. > >Of course, free software needs more than programmers. Designers and >people who can spread the word (some would call it "marketing") are >actually a bigger necessity right now - as we have plenty of free >replacements for proprietary programs but nobody is using them, like >Tox or GNU/Linux itself - but the idea is that spreading free software >awareness to the largest number of people possible will naturally also >bring in some who have those skills. > >What do you think? Any programmers willing to share their knowledge >with >everybody else?
Hi Fabio, looks like a great Plan. fsf have survey: https://my.fsf.org/civicrm/profile/create?gid=403&reset=1&pk_campaign=survey-launch&pk_kwd=survey where you can make your priorties heard. fsfe has done some work on education. found this mailing list: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-eu Look for the work of Guido fellow of fsfe he collected all the stuff that is already done. -- RichmondMakerlabs.uk Ham United Group
