Slashdot Log In
Thai IT Minister Slams Open Source
Posted by
samzenpus
on Thu Nov 16, 2006 02:09 AM
from the not-good-enough dept.
from the not-good-enough dept.
patiwat writes "Thailand's newly appointed Information and Communications Technology Minister has slammed open source software as useless and full of bugs: 'With open source, there is no intellectual property. Anyone can use it and all your ideas become public domain. If nobody can make money from it, there will be no development and open source software quickly becomes outdated... As a programmer, if I can write good code, why should I give it away? Thailand can do good source code without open source.' This marks a sharp u-turn in policy from that of the previous government."
Related Stories
[+]
Hardware: Thailand Government Cancels OLPC Participation 196 comments
patiwat writes "Thailand's new junta-appointed Education Minister has cancelled Thailand's participation in the One Laptop Per Child project and scrapped a plan to give a 2B1 laptop to every primary school student. He has also cancelled plans to roll out computers and a broadband connection to every single school in Thailand. The cancellation of half a million scholarships for needy students is being studied. He cited the lack of readiness of teachers and the need to focus on basic education standards. 'We will not focus too much on technology and materials. We will focus on substance,' he said. This comes on the heels of the cancellation of the Thai government's open source policy."
[+]
Politics: Thailand Bans YouTube 377 comments
An anonymous reader writes "The new government of Thailand that forced its way into power last year has banned the website YouTube after a 44 second clip was found of someone spray painting on a picture of Thailand's king. When Google refused to remove the 'offending' clip the website was redirected to a different page. This comes days after a Swiss man was jailed 10 years for spray painting on pictures of the king while drunk, and is the same government that earlier this year slammed open source software for being useless and buggy."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Are the some Netcraft links I missed? (Score:5, Insightful)
If nobody can make money from it ...
Maybe he would be so kind as to provide links where Netcraft confirms that IBM, Sun and Google are dead or dying?
Spoken like someone without a clue. Sheesh.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Netcraft confirms: IBM, Sun, and Google make boatloads of money off of the countless unnamed and unpaid developers who write the code that they use. Does the amount they contribute back exceed the amount they gain by benefiting from the work of others?
OK. Let's pack up and go home (Score:5, Funny)
Netcraft confirms: IBM, Sun, and Google make boatloads of money off of the countless unnamed and unpaid developers who write the code that they use. Does the amount they contribute back exceed the amount they gain by benefiting from the work of others?
You know what? You and the Thai IT Minister are right. I don't know how I missed it for all these years.
OK. Everyone, let's pack it up and go home. Some one be sure and shutdown the web servers on the way out. I hear that Best Buy is hiring, maybe I'll try there.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Reward for Open Source? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've often wondered this myself. What is the reward for developing open source software? If companies can come in and use open source components in their own creation in a way that they make money without violating licenses, but at the same time aren't obligated to give anything back to the community, where's the motivation for new developers to go open source? Not everybody operates with an altruistic "I'm giving back to the community" motivation.
Personally, I don't develop software just so that I can be an anonymous contributor to future technology. I do it to pay the rent, buy cars, etc.
What am I missing here? (And I'm not being sarcastic with that, I genuinely don't understand why anyone would want to share the fundamentals of their creation in a way that would compromise any potential future earnings.)
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:5, Interesting)
True, open source contributions may work against your future earning potential. On the other hand, it can also help build it in a number of ways. In my case, I'm not a formally-trained programmer. I learned C++ on my own out of books and trial/error for my scientific research. As such, I didn't have a lot of confidence as a programmer.
Starting an open source project helped me to gain valuable feedback that improved my programming skills in a way I could never have done on my own. I also got a helpful confidence boost--I'm no longer ashamed of my coding, or scared of letting others see it. This has been liberating, and has helped me to improve as a collaborator. In my case, the improved skillset gained through open source contributions will most certainly add to my future earnings potential.
For those who already have all their skills and couldn't possibly gain from feedback (whoever that may be), open source could be viewed as the equivalent of pro bono work done by lawyers. Lawyers often do pro bono work to help the poor, etc., and possibly to keep certain skills sharp on things they may not do on a day-to-day basis. For a programmer, open source gives the opportunity to practice something new or out of the daily grind and get valuable feedback on it. Or to work on a larger project that they wouldn't have time for otherwise.
And then as mentioned above, there's the resume aspect. When I was applying for an NSF postdoc fellowship (still underway), I was asked for "synergistic activity": ways you contribute to the maths/science/engineering community or education beyond your normal duties. Being able to say "lead author of a project used in undergraduate education and industrial and academic research in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia" was certainly a boost, considering many graduate students can only claim making better handouts for their classes or the occasional presentation.
So, there's another perspective. ;-) -- Paul
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:5, Insightful)
MythTV and other PVR's that intentionally do what the user/consumer wants and NOT what the corperations and laws want.
My MythTV box can rip my Cd's share the mp3's throughout my home to my audiotron, Crestron AAS on my whole house audio, etc... Even my daughter's ipod picks up the files. Now I can record Tv shows that automatically skip the commercials, rip the recordings to mp4 format for my daughter's ipod and evne generate a RSS feed so her itunes automagically gets the files for her.
I can name numerous other projects that are 100% impossible under closed source and a business model. If you made and sold MythTV you would be sued out of existance by the media companies for destroying their profits and violating the license you "agree" to by watching TV. Then the law woud get involved because those pissed at you would get laws passed, somehow you would run afoul of patents, and other bullshit that the corperate world likes to create to force companies to do things their way or put you out of business.
Open source is the LAST bastion of freedom for invention and innovation. REAL innovations get done in OSS because they can. More often than not a OSS project get's closer to the goals a customer wants than a closed source corperate product. If the apple ipod was easy to hack and put a new OS onto there would have been people doing it and making a better ipod without any DRM. (They did it with other mp3 players, for some reason the ipod is either harder to work on or has some kind of locking on it.. I am so hoping the Zune is hacked and a new OS for it is released that has no MS DRM on it... that will probably save that device.)
OSS helps you learn if you are not a "edumacated" programmer, but it's biggest reward is that it can dare to go where no other model can dare to tread.
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:5, Interesting)
What am I missing here? (And I'm not being sarcastic with that, I genuinely don't understand why anyone would want to share the fundamentals of their creation in a way that would compromise any potential future earnings.)
Because the whole is bigger than the sum of its parts.
The vast majority of people who write free software ARE compensated. Lots of students do it for the educational value (for example, Mosaic the proto-netscape, was written by undergrads and graduate students at NCSA). Lots of software developers do it in support of their daily job - for example, the guy who writes a module for Apache because his employer's website needs that functionality, or the guy who writes perl because he needs a better way to process log files at NASA, etc. Or they are paid specifically to work on it, like the hundreds of developers at IBM and HP and Redhat.
Most developers of Free software realize they have the choice of starting from scratch and reinventing the wheel, or standing on the shoulders of the people who have gone before them and getting the results they need so much faster with a much higher level of quality. Since their jobs aren't about monetizing software creation, there is little to no upside to starting from scratch.
While the "altrustic" streak is there, just like it is in the proprietary software world (look at all the people who spend man-months of their life giving out free support for proprietary software users on various web forums) Free software as an economic model is solidly based on the self-interest of the developers who use it to as a tool, not an end unto itself.
If companies can come in and use open source components in their own creation in a way that they make money without violating licenses, but at the same time aren't obligated to give anything back to the community, where's the motivation for new developers to go open source?
The GPL prevents that. Any improvements that are distributed beyond the improver him/it-self must effectively be made available to the community in general. Other licenses, like the BSDs do not protect against that sort of free-rider problem. (Which is one reason MS is so very anti-GPL, but pees a little every time they talk about the BSD license).
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:5, Insightful)
Passion fulfilled.
Right now, there are many projects that I have on the burners. They are on the burners only because I am driven to do them. Some people climb mountains - others code software. Don't ask why - the reason is the same.
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:5, Insightful)
Most, if not all, of the research (and the money that the scientist makes) in an academic facility is funded by contracts with commercial companies. They get a bargain by tossing you a few $100k and you practically get indentured servants (in the form of graduate students). In return, they don't have to (potentially) hire employees and buy equipment. Researchers bill their salaries out of those research funds. It's a lot like a service model. The cost of your research is amortized across several similar research contracts so you can charge less per contract than if you were only did it as a one shot project.
Then... if you do good enough research and find something interesting, you sometimes have the option to be hired by the company that funded you or you can spin-off from the facility and start your own company doing things similar to what you did for the research (which is what I did).
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:4, Informative)
Plus, getting published increases your equity in yourself and your pay can increase because of them (become noted in your field and you can have your pick of better jobs and more pay).
It works the same way with open source. The best open source programmers end up working for large companies like Google, Redhat, and Novell.
Most, if not all, of the research (and the money that the scientist makes) in an academic facility is funded by contracts with commercial companies.
The OSDL funds Linux kernel development and is comprised of several large commercial companies. This is very similar to payment for research and development.
Then... if you do good enough research and find something interesting, you sometimes have the option to be hired by the company that funded you or you can spin-off from the facility and start your own company doing things similar to what you did for the research (which is what I did).
If you're lucky this can happen in the OSS world too.
Giving away software for free is a choice. Taking away that choice would be worse in any situation, especially when governemnt does it. Governement should be open and auditable and open source is really the only way you can do that effectively with software.
If good programmers want to get paid they will whether or not they write open code or proprietary code. There are already several large open source companies that have hundrends of open source programmers working for them. We still need programmers in the open source world and if their services require payment then someone will pay them. The cat's already out of the bag; open source has already been shown to be viable and it is here to stay. I guess I just don't understand how some governments determine that open source isn't viable when cleary that line of thinking has been outdated for years now.
Parent
Re:Reward for Open Source? (Score:5, Interesting)
Any profession where a person only puts in the bare minimum and has no emotional or intellectual connection to what they're doing is probably not their "calling." Unfortunately, I also think the majority of people have no real calling and therefore can only put in the bare minimum in whatever they do--in which case it's almost always irrelevant what job it is (the exception being scientists and civil/social services where an emotional and intellectual attachment to the job should be, in my opinion, an unconditional requirement).
I feel lucky that in all the workplaces I've been in, the software department has always been full of people wholly dedicated to solving problems and figuring out answers rather than "buying cars" and bottom-lines. These people are good programmers but terrible businessmen, which these days I tend to see as a plus when interviewing for a new job and visit the IT room(s) of the company. The programmers who are good businessmen but not passionate tend to be mentally lazy, stick to solutions that work, and are incapable of seeing the problem to be solved as anything more than a way to make money. In those environments I often find myself doing the brunt of the labour. I don't think such attitudes are inherent to open source or nonexistant in closed source, but people with this type of personality and attitude towards their work tend in my experience not to "get" open source software.
The minister of IT quoted in the article was formerly head of the University of Technology and is a millionaire. Go figure that he views open source software with mistrust. It probably goes against everything he's ever believed. It's funny, and I think I mentioned it once already in another discussion, but the professors I had at school were two kinds of people. There were the mainstream classes for introductory topics, which were always taught by die-hard Windows professors for whom nothing outside the realm of Visual Basic and MS-DOS programming even existed (these types remind me of the parent of the poster to whom I'm replying), and there were the more theoretical professors who always forced us to do every homework assignment on a Sparc station and seemed to brim with disgust at the "introductory" professors and the students who would take some Java and VB courses and spend the rest of their degree period falling asleep in class and dreaming about the day they have that sweet Microsoft job with the cabriolet and the trophy wife and Sunday schmooze trips to the golf course.
Parent
Re:OK. Let's pack up and go home (Score:5, Insightful)
Almost all of the money made by open source has been made by exploiting open source. Yes most of the internet runs on OSS. But how many of the billions if not trillions of dollars has made it back to the pockets of the developers of the big parts like Apache? I would guess not much since even Apache has a 'donations' link on their site.
Apache Software Foundation (apache.org) has a donation link on their site because they are a non-profit corporation [apache.org]. So by definition they don't make money. That does not mean they don't get money and resources; it just means that they use it all on improving the product.
That said, the companies listed (and many others) have indeed contributed to as well as profited from open source software. IBM spends billions every year on Linux alone. And where do you think all that code comes from? the magic code monkeys? People that work for these companies are either paid directly to work on open source software or allowed to do so because of permissive policies that derive directly from the fact that those companies are making money from the profit of their labour.
Meanwhile all of this work is shared and the wheel does not have to be reinvented. IBM benefits from the code contributed by Sun as well as Chucky down the street. And it works the other way too. And all of them are making money ... I mean even Chucky gets a job or can do consulting work because he's been working on this stuff all that time. Like when AOL hired all the Mozilla people. Or RMS's consulting, which probably has not made him particularly rich, though he is not exactly starving to death.
There are a lot of ways to make money from open source. Some of the easiest ways involve working with or for companies, but there are others. Still, to focus too much on the aspect of direct monetary gain is to miss the greatest benefits of free software / open source. The best thing about the software is when you actually get to USE the software. Sure, you can contribute code if you want to, and you can customize it for your needs, but ultimately you derive gain from the fact that you can use the software freely, unencumbered by onerous licenses and likely free as in beer as well. That means that whether you need software for your business or for personal use you have easy access to it and you don;t really have to do anything to get it other than go get it.
Maybe your business is making money from free software (lots of people and companies do). Maybe you are doing something else but you use free software to accomplish those ends (way more companies are doing that). Maybe you just use it to learn, or because you feel like it. But no matter what you end up saving time, money, and other resources because you are benefitting from the community, and thus you profit from the use of Open Source / Free Software.
Parent
Re:Are the some Netcraft links I missed? (Score:5, Informative)
I understand why you listed Google and IBM. But why is Sun in your list?
If you hadn't heard, Sun just open sourced the entire Java compiler, virtual machine, and JIT compiler. That makes Java one of the most popular open source projects in the world. And then there's the tens of millions of lines of code for OpenSolaris. So far, Sun is the largest contributor to both of those.
I'd almost be willing to say Sun has released more open source code than any other company.
Parent
Re:Are the some Netcraft links I missed? (Score:5, Informative)
And OpenOffice.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Even before I join Google I never minded the idea that some corporations would benefit from the work I did, it is totally ok with me. In fact I would get really worried if that were not the case, it would mean I failed to make something useful. Speaking as a
Re:Are the some Netcraft links I missed? (Score:4, Interesting)
You know what? It's not a zero sum game.
Secondly, I would guess for most heavy users of Free Software, the amount they contribute back doesn't exceed the amount they gain by benefiting from the work of others.
That is a good thing. I can put in a little and take out a lot. Cool. I can also put something in once and a million people can take it out five million times without me having to lift a finger from there on. Cool. This digital realm has some amazing properties that it seems many don't get or don't want to admit to.
That said, I am not sure I know of any big coproration that I think is all good when it comes to Free Software or that I would trust in the matter.
all the best,
drew
http://code.google.com/p/drsoundwall/ [google.com]
dRsoundWall
Parent
Re:Are the some Netcraft links I missed? (Score:5, Insightful)
What a strange quality for a politician, don't you think?
Parent
Money? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is complete nonsense.
Typical idiot. (Score:5, Funny)
in other news (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:in other news (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:in other news (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:in other news (Score:5, Informative)
A Thai friend once explained to me why Bangkok has both a monorail system and an underground railway. I think the same principle is at work here: a new government always abandons the projects started by the previous government, and starts new ones.
You see, bribes are always paid at the start of a project, during the vendor selection phase. This person is looking to get a large sum of money from Microsoft in exchange for abandoning some open-source projects and switching to Windows.
Parent
Re:in other news (Score:4, Informative)
Anyway the only people who make money from commercial software in Thailand are the pirates. Its been a few years since I visited but Pantip Plaza was literally a 6 story high mall where every single shop sold pirate cds, dvds and software. Thailand should embrace open source as a way to get Microsoft and others off their back. If businesses do business on Linux, if governments run off Linux, there is less market for the pirates and the problem will simply recede through less demand.
Parent
budget whore (Score:4, Insightful)
Seth
Fud or just dumb? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am hoping something was lost in translation, because if it wasn't this guy is not only not getting the idea but totally missing the point. Then one must ask, what kind of country has an "IT Minister"? I bet he gets razzed for that... in fact that my explain this. If the guy can't install anything open source without causing errors, I really don't think he belongs in that job.
Neither. You don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
this guy is not only not getting the idea but totally missing the point.
He is a smart politician.
That means: what he says has little or nothing to do with what he thinks. A politician says something for one of two reasons:
Once you understand this, the world will start making more sense to you.
Parent
How was it delivered to our eyes? (Score:4, Interesting)
Hmmmm... By what means was his message delivered? What kind of server?
HTTP/1.1 200 OKDate: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:15:11 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) PHP/4.2.2
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.2.2
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html
Bangkok post : Linux Thailand IT ministry: ASP.net (Score:5, Informative)
However, it is interesting to note that it was running Linux about a month ago [netcraft.com].
Parent
Linux with Microsoft-IIS?. (Score:4, Insightful)
The Netcraft link you posted does claim that it was running Linux in September, but it also claims that the web server was still IIS. Perhaps this is me mis-interpreting the way that Netcraft presents its data, but how does one run IIS on a Linux platform? Unless it was something like Apache temporarily configured to report that it was Microsoft-IIS, but I can't see the point in doing that.
The IP address is also radically different, so my guess is that the domain was temporarily redirected to another hosting service in September that had a server configured quite differently, and possibly wasn't reporting its state as accurately.
Parent
Appointed by a military junta, BTW. (Score:5, Insightful)
-jcr
Re:Appointed by a military junta, BTW. (Score:5, Interesting)
But yeah, this chap clearly has no idea what he's talking about.
Parent
Re:Appointed by a military junta, BTW. (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't live there, but I have friends who are in the royal family (it is a big family) and that's the impression I get too. The guy who was ousted appeared to have gone a little too far in indulging in american-style government/corporate bogus-free-market kleptocracy (the "socialize the costs, privatize the profits" kind where he and his family were majority shareholders).
Thai, but otherwise unrelated, I just saw Citizen Dog [imdb.com] and loved it. Along with Bangkok Loco [imdb.com] and Shutter [imdb.com] the Thai film market has been showing some real potential. I hope this "regime change" will continue with the economic circumstances that have encouraged recent local film production.
Parent
Thailand? Gee, didn't I hear about them recently? (Score:3, Insightful)
No suprise. (Score:3, Interesting)
They did have democracy, but the military 'closed' that.
How about citizenship? (Score:3, Insightful)
And you, mister politician, why should you serve your community? How about telling your people that you are looking for money, fame, and power? Fortunately, there are still people in this world who are not in it for the money.
Likes censorship too... (Score:5, Informative)
lese majesty also lèse majesté (lz mj-st)
n. pl. lese majesties or lèse majestés
1. An offense or crime committed against the ruler or supreme power of a state.
2. An affront to another's dignity.
Re:Likes censorship too... (Score:5, Informative)
So I guess I'd better avoid giving an opinion of the minister in question in case of getting a unwelcome knock at the door! Regardless of him though, open-source is quite strong in Thailand. The National Computer Center (http://www.nectec.or.th/) has released a lot of open source code and data, and there's a relatively thriving OS community here - linux.thai.net (a thai slash-code site), opentle.org, thaiopensource.org, tosf.org, osdev.co.th etc. It seems unlikely to me these comments will change that much.
Whether these comments have anything to do with an alliance with Microsoft I don't know. Often when you buy a new PC here, they don't want to pay the Windows tax but instead of coming with Linux (or, god forbid, XP starter edition) it's advertised as coming with "Microsoft DOS Operating System" (!). After you pay, the shop staff then load a pirated version of XP pro for you without even asking! I guess it's certainly in Microsoft's interest to get that situation improved.
Parent
clueless gibber (Score:4, Insightful)
a thai's take (Score:3, Interesting)
"open source" has almost no meaning in thailand because 99% of software you can buy is pirated
it's true though you can buy "Microsoft" Windows for like $5
at what seems like a real computer store
Reminds me of a Valenti quote (Score:4, Interesting)
-Jack Valenti, quoted in "Digital Copyright" by Jessica Litman
Thank god Hollywood has stepped up to save Shakespeare et al.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In open source, one thing is always true (Score:5, Insightful)
If it's needed, it'll get done.
Parent
misquote (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
However, with Closed Source the situation really isnt any different. The only visible difference is that abandoned projects vanish, and do not reside in freshmeat/sourceforge/etc. But plenty of CS is *bad* code; just look at those ugly telco install CDs, many small shareware apps, many drivers (especially TV card ones)...
That said, big opensource projects usually develop some sort of quality assurance. New code is reviewed, only core developers can actually commit to the repository etc.
The clear OS advantages are security and availability. If I have 2 packages doing the same thing, one is OS, the other CS, then I usually choose the OS one, because I can examine it for buffer overflows, hidden trojans, backdoors etc. The CS package is a black box. (This is the main reason why OpenBSD opposes binary drivers.) Also, 3rd party patches are possible, which touches the second advantage: availability. If a CS software is abandoned, its *dead*. It won't be ported to succeeding platforms, it won't be patched etc. You have a binary copy, that's it. With OS, it is never really dead, you CAN port it (just look at the zillions of Doom ports), fork it, improve it, even if you are not the original developer. This is becoming more relevant in the future, when someone has to access very old files, but the format is unknown, and the only programs capable of reading it run only on machines that no longer exist. (NSA had to deal with this in the past.)
Parent