This is not news that my overriding interests oscillate between the policy (with a capital P) and technology or the computer more closely and the Open Source world.
certainly not a monster, the controller and my school after him testify, but I certainly consider myself to a stage of evolution than dell'utonto, let's say I could be a superuser, one of those who can remember the their PCs with Windows rare rare Blue Screen and who likes to google and use the terminal to configure your hardware on a Linux distro
In terms of policy, if I were to use computer terminology, I think I'd be more of a superuser, but always less than a programmer, in short un cittadino ben informato, ma che al momento non potrebbe far parte della Corte Costituzionale!
La premessa personale è d'obbligo, perchè una volta che si riesce ad inquadrare la propria posizione si sa cosa si sta per dire e se si hanno le competenze per buttare l'ennessima provocazione nel gorgo del web ed ottimisticamente penso di potermelo permettere!
Ma prima di arrivare alla provocazione, facciamo altre premesse: L'Open Source spesso erroneamente è pensato da ignari della materia come un modo per avere "Programmi a scrocco senza cacciare una lira...ehm euro", certo il mondo dell'Open Source ci mette nelle condizione di avere un intero ambiente desktop con i suoi programmi più utili, per un uso home e ufficio-standard(uso only packet-like office), completely free, the same could be said if we were to use a "slightly more professional" home (I think to a site of a small business, professional video-editing is not so demanding.), but the reality is that there are companies that live on Open Source, or at least it becomes part of their corporate policy, as there are programs to pay the Open Source world, some of my explanation is simplistic and not exhaustive, but my intention is to to understand that with Open Source you can earn.
Now it is time to give meaning to the title of this post, which until now seemed to be boring and sometimes self-referential. When called Computer Enlightened Authoritarianism mean the will (or capacity) by the national and European legislators to make law outside the closed source, not an extremist "better Linux" only because Open Source, but becomes an extremist of the Open Source, in my memory I can remember when the limit cases of corruption to pass as a standard file type only closed for commercial purposes, or to go into the technicalities, when, for hardware, profutamente paid with our pockets, not to obscure trade agreements you manage to get the correct and timely technical specifications to be able to develop the driver in any operating system, plus add a series of problems of competition is not perfect and now I do not want others to list!
At the same time are not even among those who consider "freedom" the coexistence of closed and open, this is an input value of fact to be reckoned with, but citizens (with a capital C) that wishes to push lawmakers toward a more sensible legislation computer world, what should be proposed? In the world of the blogosphere pinguinesca there is a certain unanimity in saying that the PA and public services should use those tools made available by the Open Source world, but what about the "holy $ ro € M € rcato Lib" seems to me that there is a real strategy nor among programmers, nor among the simple people, indeed it seems to me to understand what is healthy and in the private right that everyone chooses what he wants, whether, in principle, I share the idea that a company or a private individual simply have to choose between Windows, Mac and the myriad distributions of GNU / Linux, do not agree with the principle that it is the first of this maxim, that the very existence of Closed Source! Let me clarify: what will not impose further affirm, for example, OpenSuse, Ubuntu, rather than at the individual, but, and here's my challenge (but not too much provocation), require the use of Open Source to the "holy $ Lib € M € ro rcato "working through legislation and by requiring SoftHouse to market and ONLY ESCLUSIVAMENTE Open Source!
Prima di chiudere, mi immagino qualche perplessità tra chi leggerà «Ma questa è una proposta apertamente anti-Microsoft» NO! è una proposta atta a rendere standard una volte per tutte le licenze dell'Open Source, nessuno vieterebbe a Microsoft la diffusione del suo software a pgaamento, ma lo deve rendere OPEN, oltre che per essa lo stesso dovrebbe valere per le altre aziende, non so perchè ho l'impazienza di citare Adobe!
È chiaro che una legislazione in tal senso, esplicitamente o no, colpirebbe anche i produttori hardware!
Tutto ciò sconvolgerebbe il mondo dell'informatica e potrebbe(il condizionale è d'obbligo) dare un colpo a chi ha acquisito posizioni di mercato facendo leva sulla propria posizione dominante e favorire una più libera scelta individuale e aziendale
0 comments:
Post a Comment