Thai IT Minister Slams Open Source

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 If nobody can make money from it, there will be no development and open source software quickly becomes outdated...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."

Are the some Netcraft links I missed?

[El Cubano (631386)]

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:Are the some Netcraft links I missed?

[cp.tar (871488)]

Spoken like someone without a clue. Sheesh.

What a strange quality for a politician, don't you think?

Money?

[camperdave (969942)]

Maybe, just maybe, people are not in it for the money. Maybe they love to code for "the pure fun of it". After all, millions of people do crosswords, solve sudoku, climb mountains, ride bicycles, and blast apart aliens, for the sheer joy of it. They don't get paid a red cent (or <color><smallest Thai coin>) for doing it. Maybe they like the recognition of being the one that wrote $widgit$. Maybe they want to put "Accomplishments: Developed $wigit$ software" on their resume. Maybe they're already so filthy stinking rich that a few measly $100K a year isn't worth the hassle of cowtowing to a pointy haired boss with no more imagination than week old oatmeal, who couldn't code his way out of a paper bag if all he had to do is double click on the "Escape from paper bag" icon.

OK. Let's pack up and go home

[El Cubano (631386)]

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.

Re:OK. Let's pack up and go home

[rifter (147452)]

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.

Re:Reward for Open Source?

[macklin01 (760841)]

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.

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

Re:Reward for Open Source?

[Jah-Wren Ryel (80510)]

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.)

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).

Re:Reward for Open Source?

[dsginter (104154)]

I've often wondered this myself. What is the reward for developing open source software?

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.

Re:Reward for Open Source?

[Filip22012005 (852281)]

Unfortunately, not many scientists publish in journals everyone can read. Most journals require hefty fees. Not that the scientists get rich, of course. Some journals even ask for a submission fee.

Re:Reward for Open Source?

[heroofhyr (777687)]

... What am I missing here?

My guess would be passion for what you are doing. For people who really love what they are doing, compensation for it is just the icing on the cake.

Why do I get the feeling the grandparent was one of those types I recall from uni who studied programming because they read in a magazine in secondary school that IT was the wave of the future and wanted a piece of the cake? I think what the GP is "missing" is a satisfaction for what they do. There have been times when I was hired to do a freelance project on the condition that I only get a paycheck if it can be accomplished, clocked 100 hours per week on it for a couple months, find that the task is too complicated or too grand for the platform, and felt that I didn't deserve to be paid merely because I had failed--in fact in those cases I was more upset by the fact that I couldn't succeed than by the lack of a wage. I doubt the people who program just because there's (sometimes) good money in it ever feel like this. When I'm working, the only motivation to get paid comes from my wife and the bills that come in the mail. If neither of those existed it would probably never occur to me that it's payday until those occasional weekends where I feel burnt out from 28 hours without sleep or food and feel like buying a DVD or run out of smokes.

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.

Re:Are the some Netcraft links I missed?

[jlarocco (851450)]

Does the amount they contribute back exceed the amount they gain by benefiting from the work of others?

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.

Re:Are the some Netcraft links I missed?

[nathanh (1214)]

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.

And OpenOffice.

Typical idiot.

[Teddy Beartuzzi (727169)]

He sounds eminently qualified for politics.

Fud or just dumb?

[bky1701 (979071)]

"With open source, there is no intellectual property. Anyone can use it and all your ideas become public domain."

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.

[by Anonymous Coward]

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:

1. He/she thinks it will persuade more people to vote for him
2. He/she thinks it will attract money (in whatever form: campaign donations, bribes, bigger budget)

Once you understand this, the world will start making more sense to you.

Appointed by a military junta, BTW.

[jcr (53032)]

Let's not forget that Thailand's legitimate government was toppled by the army a short while ago. I'm sure this clown is the least of Thailand's troubles right now.
-jcr

Re:Appointed by a military junta, BTW.

[bjprice (863197)]

The coup was obviously undemocratic, but Thailand is now actually in a far better situation than under the previous regime. I live here.

But yeah, this chap clearly has no idea what he's talking about.

Likes censorship too...

[spiritraveller (641174)]

The ICT Ministry will soon put forward draft Acts to the National Legislative Assembly on cybercrime and on web sites that are pornographic or considered lese majeste, allowing officials to arrest, fine and imprison offenders.

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...

[jaiyen (821972)]

I live in Thailand, and there's masses of internet censorship. Although it's not quite to Chinese limits (as all news sites are available), they block as many porn and gambling sites as they can find and anything that fits the rather vaguely defined category of "lese majeste" or "threat to national security" also. Criticizing the decision of a high-court judge is against the law too. On the most popular Thai language forum (pantip.com) you're required to give a valid ID card number to register, and there's often stories in the news of contributors being tracked down for their opinions. I guess at the moment any anti-coup or pro-democracy website could fall under the national security category, it's all a bit uncertain. So much for free speech!

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.

Re:in other news

[strider44 (650833)]

I hate it when people always dismiss things like this as paid for by Microsoft. That guy could very well just be a genuine idiot, and yet you're trying to insult him by saying he's corrupt as well.

Re:in other news

[badfish99 (826052)]

It's not the government coffers he is thinking of.

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.

Bangkok post : Linux Thailand IT ministry: ASP.net

[Bananatree3 (872975)]

The headers you posted are for the Bangkok post website [bangkokpost.net]. However, the Thailand Ministry of Information and Communication Technology website [mict.go.th] is running ASP.net (Microsoft) [nwtools.com]:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: 8641
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Location: http://www.mict.go.th/index.html
ETag: "4a7c5a4cef2c71:331"
X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
Last-Modified: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 04:35:20 GMT

However, it is interesting to note that it was running Linux about a month ago [netcraft.com].

In open source, one thing is always true

[Travoltus (110240)]

Necessity, not profit, is the mother of invention.

If it's needed, it'll get done.

misquote

[The Clockwork Troll (655321)]

I was in Bangkok when the announcement was made. What he actually said was:

I'M IN UR MINISTRY
MALIGNING UR SOFTWARE

Re:hmmm

[ardor (673957)]

This is correct; many OS advocates believe Open Source automatically leads to better code. The truth is that most OS coders are just average. Many OS project members believe that when experienced guru X leaves the project, others will follow (or worse, they try to compensate the guru's absence with many average coders). Turns out the good devs are NOT expendable.

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.)