[ILUG] ICT Expo 2006 update (ideas on helping the community)

[Noirin Plunkett]

On 13 Mar 2006 13:00:06 +0000, Ciaran O'Riordan <ciaran at fsfe.org> wrote:
> ILUG not able to draw a crowd?
>
> IFSO only has a grand in the bank, ~25 members, and a mailing list of 100
> people.  If IFSO can do a Stallman talk with 300+ attendees including 3 MEPs
> as quick guest speakers[0], plus the afore mentioned anti-swpat seminar,
> then ILUG can certainly do same or better.

I don't think so - for one, you're confusing member-numbers with
interest & enthusiasm. It's very easy to be a member of ILUG -
everyone subscribed to the mailing list is a member. The vast majority
of those members have never attended any event organised by ILUG,
IFSO, or any similar group. And they're never likely to. They're
people who have a problem with their computer, and want advice. Or who
just lurk, read the list, and pick up tips. Or who are subscribed, and
never read the list =)

You're also discounting the RMS fanboi effect. There are a large
number of people who see Stallman's name, and just flock like sheep. I
would like to think that most of ILUG know better.

> The software exists and is very valuable.  A massive communitiy working for
> many years made this happen.  Some companies with masses of money and
> lawyers would like to see that reversed.

I call FUD. Some companies with masses of money and lawyers would like
to have even more money. They don't care, frankly, whether software is
open source, closed source, free or libre. They want money, and as
much of it as possible.

> They would like it to be impractical for their market share to be threatened
> by free software development.  Software patents were one attempt, mass-DRM
> plans are another, FUD sent via SCO was another, proprietary document
> formats are another.

Again I call FUD. Notice projects like Apache. Last statistics I saw
put it at around 70% market-share. Why is Microsoft not putting out
its TCO numbers and the like? Because they know that's not where the
money is.

Yes, big companies with lots of money are pushing things that IFSO,
FSFE and friends don't like - and things that ultimately could be bad
news for free software. But don't kid yourself that it's on
ideological or philosophical grounds. It's not, and if you act like it
is, you'll lose. You're not even on the right playing field.

> The history of the software is pretty interesting, and even entertaining
> when told by some speakers[1].  Raising some awareness and starting some
> discussion would be a very useful contribution, and it's not being done by
> others.

I don't honestly see how this would be a remotely useful contribution.
Can you explain? The battles you reference will be won or lost on
economic grounds. Money. Not awareness, warm fuzzy feelings, religion,
or politics.

> > > Users need to know that as well as existing and being great, making the
> > > software exist has been a 22-year struggle
> > Now you just sound deranged. Linux isn't that old
> Planning began in 1983 and it was announced in September.  Software
> development began in January 1984.  For the operating system, the last major
> component, the kernel, was begun in 1991 and was released as free software
> in 1992.

You seem to be confusing Linux with GNU. Release under the GNU GPL
does not make the Linux kernel twenty-two years old. I also can't
agree that making open source software exist has been a 22-year
struggle.

You make this sound like the fight for universal suffrage - it's not.

Noirin