Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
I am in personal contact with Stallman (rms) on this. Who else here knows him? We have met several times at computing events, and discussed other questions in e-mail. I was a factor in his choice of the XO as his main computer, which unfortunately lasted only a short time, because he was unaware that Nicholas had Mitch working on a GPLed BIOS replacement. rms is talking nonsense still, but there remains the possibility of progress. I'll let you know more if I hear anything positive. Our correspondence will appear in OLPC News as an Open Letter with whatever followup is appropriate. I have looked through the rest of this thread. I don't have time to reply in detail, but I have raised all of these issues with rms, and asked him why he won't take Yes for an answer. ^_^ You should understand that _we_, all of us, have failed to communicate with the public, with the press, and with our natural allies. It isn't just Nicholas. We need a way to put out press releases when Nicholas says something dumb, or the Wall Street Journal runs a completely false op-ed about our work. We should be able to get a pro bono account at PR Newswire or some such service. On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:33 AM, Bill Kerrbillk...@gmail.com wrote: n Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: === Sugar Digest === 4. The recent FSF campaign condemning the use of Windows 7 in education (See http://windows7sins.org/) imputes OLPC in complicity with Microsoft. It is disappointing that the FSF is not making any constructive arguments in favor of free software alternatives to Windows such as Sugar on GNU/Linux, which is currently shipped on every machine distributed by OLPC. http://windows7sins.org/#1 When I first saw it I interpreted that page as contrasting the xo as a positive alternative to Windows (and still think that is a valid interpretation) When I read what walter wrote above later I was shocked to realise that it could indeed be interpreted the way walter has, as well On revisiting I can't see any clarifying text there If walter's interpretation is the correct one, which may well be true, then it's a bad choice of graphic - they should have shown windows running on the xo screen, not happy smiling children from this 2008 article RMS is supportive of sugar but ambivalent about the xo: Sugar is free software, and contributing to it is a good thing to do. But don't forget the goal: helpful contributions are those that make Sugar better on free operating systems. Porting to Windows is permitted by the license, but it isn't a good thing to do http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/can-we-rescue-olpc-from-windows ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) i...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep -- Edward Mokurai Cherlin Silent Thunder (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) is my name, and Children are my nation. The Cosmos is my dwelling place, the Truth my destination. http://earthtreasury.org/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Bill Kerrbillk...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Bastien bastiengue...@googlemail.com wrote: After a discussion with the FSF, they agreed the picture was not really appropriate and that the text should clearly distinguish OLPC from Sugar. They will make an update - stay tuned. the picture is gone but the words are still there: As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed still over zealous, purist and FUD I think you are giving them too much credit :-) They simply didn't do their homework on this one. Sameer ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
Bill Kerr billk...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Bastien bastiengue...@googlemail.com wrote: After a discussion with the FSF, they agreed the picture was not really appropriate and that the text should clearly distinguish OLPC from Sugar. They will make an update - stay tuned. the picture is gone but the words are still there: This is good. As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed still over zealous, purist and FUD The FSF proposition is a normative judgement. For me I concentrate on fixing factual errors, not such judgements above, as I think it's just a time-sink. -- Bastien ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
On 28.08.2009, at 11:33, Bill Kerr wrote: n Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: === Sugar Digest === 4. The recent FSF campaign condemning the use of Windows 7 in education (See http://windows7sins.org/) imputes OLPC in complicity with Microsoft. It is disappointing that the FSF is not making any constructive arguments in favor of free software alternatives to Windows such as Sugar on GNU/Linux, which is currently shipped on every machine distributed by OLPC. http://windows7sins.org/#1 When I first saw it I interpreted that page as contrasting the xo as a positive alternative to Windows (and still think that is a valid interpretation) When I read what walter wrote above later I was shocked to realise that it could indeed be interpreted the way walter has, as well On revisiting I can't see any clarifying text there You need to click the Learn more link next to the XO picture. Citing from that concoction: As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed. The project tragically became yet another example of Microsoft exerting its control to ends harmful to society's freedom. It's tragic how they undermine their allies' efforts in their blind zealousness. - Bert - ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 14:08, Bill Kerrbillk...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Bert Freudenberg b...@freudenbergs.de wrote: On 28.08.2009, at 11:33, Bill Kerr wrote: n Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: === Sugar Digest === 4. The recent FSF campaign condemning the use of Windows 7 in education (See http://windows7sins.org/) imputes OLPC in complicity with Microsoft. It is disappointing that the FSF is not making any constructive arguments in favor of free software alternatives to Windows such as Sugar on GNU/Linux, which is currently shipped on every machine distributed by OLPC. http://windows7sins.org/#1 When I first saw it I interpreted that page as contrasting the xo as a positive alternative to Windows (and still think that is a valid interpretation) When I read what walter wrote above later I was shocked to realise that it could indeed be interpreted the way walter has, as well On revisiting I can't see any clarifying text there You need to click the Learn more link next to the XO picture. Citing from that concoction: As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed. The project tragically became yet another example of Microsoft exerting its control to ends harmful to society's freedom. It's tragic how they undermine their allies' efforts in their blind zealousness. I see it now, thanks Bert. I agree, it's far too zealous and purist. I agree with Luke too. ( I did click on that link before but it sometimes seems to just reload the same page) I do give the FSF an annual donation so I'll write to them and complain. I thought the over zealousness came more from some FSF supporters than the leadership but perhaps I was wrong. What I think is bad about the campaign is that they say that the OLPC project is a vector for Microsoft when the truth is that it's being a great vector for free software, regardless of what their leaders wish or have said in the past. From reading the FSF campaign, people are supposed to think that Microsoft is evil and OLPC bowed to their pressure and abandoned their principles. This, I think can have much less impact that if people learned that they can help us so more children have a great learning experience with free software. So I wouldn't ask FSF to stop bashing MS, I would ask them to publicize those projects that can have a big impact on their mission. That is the point I was trying to make. I don't really care what FSF does re Microsoft, but they are missing out on an opportunity to promote a learning project that is aligned with FLOSS by ignoring Sugar. -walter Regards, Tomeu -- «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David Farning ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
Is the author local to Boston? Maybe we should take him over to the GPA and show him a room full of Windows machines all running open software. Perhaps seeing it for himself will help, the authors certainly seem to care about what kids are using for their education. On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 14:08, Bill Kerrbillk...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Bert Freudenberg b...@freudenbergs.de wrote: On 28.08.2009, at 11:33, Bill Kerr wrote: n Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: === Sugar Digest === 4. The recent FSF campaign condemning the use of Windows 7 in education (See http://windows7sins.org/) imputes OLPC in complicity with Microsoft. It is disappointing that the FSF is not making any constructive arguments in favor of free software alternatives to Windows such as Sugar on GNU/Linux, which is currently shipped on every machine distributed by OLPC. http://windows7sins.org/#1 When I first saw it I interpreted that page as contrasting the xo as a positive alternative to Windows (and still think that is a valid interpretation) When I read what walter wrote above later I was shocked to realise that it could indeed be interpreted the way walter has, as well On revisiting I can't see any clarifying text there You need to click the Learn more link next to the XO picture. Citing from that concoction: As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed. The project tragically became yet another example of Microsoft exerting its control to ends harmful to society's freedom. It's tragic how they undermine their allies' efforts in their blind zealousness. I see it now, thanks Bert. I agree, it's far too zealous and purist. I agree with Luke too. ( I did click on that link before but it sometimes seems to just reload the same page) I do give the FSF an annual donation so I'll write to them and complain. I thought the over zealousness came more from some FSF supporters than the leadership but perhaps I was wrong. What I think is bad about the campaign is that they say that the OLPC project is a vector for Microsoft when the truth is that it's being a great vector for free software, regardless of what their leaders wish or have said in the past. From reading the FSF campaign, people are supposed to think that Microsoft is evil and OLPC bowed to their pressure and abandoned their principles. This, I think can have much less impact that if people learned that they can help us so more children have a great learning experience with free software. So I wouldn't ask FSF to stop bashing MS, I would ask them to publicize those projects that can have a big impact on their mission. That is the point I was trying to make. I don't really care what FSF does re Microsoft, but they are missing out on an opportunity to promote a learning project that is aligned with FLOSS by ignoring Sugar. -walter Regards, Tomeu -- «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David Farning ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Caroline Meeks Solution Grove carol...@solutiongrove.com 617-500-3488 - Office 505-213-3268 - Fax ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Caroline Meekssolutiongr...@gmail.com wrote: Is the author local to Boston? Maybe we should take him over to the GPA and show him a room full of Windows machines all running open software. Perhaps seeing it for himself will help, the authors certainly seem to care about what kids are using for their education. I don't know who wrote it, but there is a large FSF community in Boston, so let's try to arrange it. -walter On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 14:08, Bill Kerrbillk...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Bert Freudenberg b...@freudenbergs.de wrote: On 28.08.2009, at 11:33, Bill Kerr wrote: n Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: === Sugar Digest === 4. The recent FSF campaign condemning the use of Windows 7 in education (See http://windows7sins.org/) imputes OLPC in complicity with Microsoft. It is disappointing that the FSF is not making any constructive arguments in favor of free software alternatives to Windows such as Sugar on GNU/Linux, which is currently shipped on every machine distributed by OLPC. http://windows7sins.org/#1 When I first saw it I interpreted that page as contrasting the xo as a positive alternative to Windows (and still think that is a valid interpretation) When I read what walter wrote above later I was shocked to realise that it could indeed be interpreted the way walter has, as well On revisiting I can't see any clarifying text there You need to click the Learn more link next to the XO picture. Citing from that concoction: As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed. The project tragically became yet another example of Microsoft exerting its control to ends harmful to society's freedom. It's tragic how they undermine their allies' efforts in their blind zealousness. I see it now, thanks Bert. I agree, it's far too zealous and purist. I agree with Luke too. ( I did click on that link before but it sometimes seems to just reload the same page) I do give the FSF an annual donation so I'll write to them and complain. I thought the over zealousness came more from some FSF supporters than the leadership but perhaps I was wrong. What I think is bad about the campaign is that they say that the OLPC project is a vector for Microsoft when the truth is that it's being a great vector for free software, regardless of what their leaders wish or have said in the past. From reading the FSF campaign, people are supposed to think that Microsoft is evil and OLPC bowed to their pressure and abandoned their principles. This, I think can have much less impact that if people learned that they can help us so more children have a great learning experience with free software. So I wouldn't ask FSF to stop bashing MS, I would ask them to publicize those projects that can have a big impact on their mission. That is the point I was trying to make. I don't really care what FSF does re Microsoft, but they are missing out on an opportunity to promote a learning project that is aligned with FLOSS by ignoring Sugar. -walter Regards, Tomeu -- «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David Farning ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Caroline Meeks Solution Grove carol...@solutiongrove.com 617-500-3488 - Office 505-213-3268 - Fax -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
After a discussion with the FSF, they agreed the picture was not really appropriate and that the text should clearly distinguish OLPC from Sugar. They will make an update - stay tuned. Thanks! -- Bastien ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
Thanks! We'd still love for them to come by GPA just for the sheer joy of seeing an entire room of old windows machines shinning with Open Source software. Caroline On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:05 AM, Bastien bastiengue...@googlemail.comwrote: After a discussion with the FSF, they agreed the picture was not really appropriate and that the text should clearly distinguish OLPC from Sugar. They will make an update - stay tuned. Thanks! -- Bastien -- Caroline Meeks Solution Grove carol...@solutiongrove.com 617-500-3488 - Office 505-213-3268 - Fax ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] FSF attitude to xo and sugar
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Bastien bastiengue...@googlemail.comwrote: After a discussion with the FSF, they agreed the picture was not really appropriate and that the text should clearly distinguish OLPC from Sugar. They will make an update - stay tuned. the picture is gone but the words are still there: As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed still over zealous, purist and FUD ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
