Mark it is ok , i know that is not You. Dave, If you support the travel expenses as I did myself to Liverpool i Will ask Him personally Although i know He Had friends and came to Rio de Janeiro frequently.
Rob , dont get me wrong but You did not understand some questions. Open for Who ? Only for the ones that wants to learn programming, and that is ok but it is not for all át. All. There is no innovation on Open Source software , they emulate paper and files and worst they repeat the same Graphic User Interface as Adobe or Microsoft. Open source software is growing because is cheaper to enterprises and goverments because there is no properties rights, wich is ok. Open source is not free and Will never be and advertise that is a trap from marketing that puts the movement in descredit and in the same level as ordinary enterprises. Take care with words Will say Saussure and Lacan . But most important do NOT believe and use the same marketing bullshit of the others . Most of the people that advocates Open Source dont praticse OPEN DATA. Recently MIT was facing that in the most horrible way. Simon, condition is not culture , on the contrary is unconditional, diferent from the digital condition we are living in. > Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:51:18 +0000 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] New Digital Culture Unit @ Goldsmiths > > On 13/02/13 16:45, Eduardo Valle wrote: > > > > Open source for Who ? > > Free Software for all. > > > Why Open softwares emulates Adobe and use the same GUI ? Why not > > inovatte and takes risk ? > > GNU doesn't control GNOME or KDE. > > > Is that true that Open source Still around just because is cheaper to > > enterprises and goverments ? > > Free software has different advantages for different users. Reduced > costs to large organizations is one of them. It's also a motivation for > them to invest in its production, which benefits other users. > > > Why most of the people that are for Open source are not for Open Data ? > > Is that the case? > > > I am saying that because use the term free can turn the Open source > > movement a joke in the eyes of others, and That is NO GOOD. > > Open Source was a marketing term created specifically to sell free > software to corporations by emphasizing its perceived economic > advantages over its stated ethical objectives. > > The value of "the open source development model" derives from the > freedom of those involved with it, and is useful only to the extent that > it supports that freedom. > > - Rob. > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
