Comments on: Why as an educator you should care about Open Source Software

By: Open Source Schools - it’s a no brainer… right?

Open Source Schools - it’s a no brainer… right? — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:17:42 +0000

[...] and open source software is a laudable cause which has my wholehearted support (read this post from Doug Belshaw), but it is not yet clear how the objective of converting from licensed software to OSS is going to [...]

By: What does it take to build a community? at dougbelshaw.com

What does it take to build a community? at dougbelshaw.com — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:25:05 +0000

[...] key question of a previous blog post of mine (Why as an educator you should care about Open Source Software) was used as a stimulus to discussion. The point was raised that actually we need to move one step [...]

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:47:14 +0000

Love the analogy of books in a library – thanks! :-)

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:47:00 +0000

Love the analogy of books in a library – thanks! :-)

By: Alan McNeil Jackson

Alan McNeil Jackson — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:27:24 +0000

This is an important and interesting article and one of the first times I've seen what I think is the REAL argument being put forward.

One can debate the total cost of ownership estimations for FLOSS vs proprietary software but I think that misses the point.

The point is an ideological one. Open Source Software treats software as knowledge - similar to scientific knowledge or other forms of knowledge, that enhance the human condition by being shared. One of the primary goals of education.

Proprietary Software sees software as product. Something that is sold for the profit of the producer. This is fundamentally at odds with the philosophy of education.

Debates about whether or not to use Microsoft in a school, I think, are analogous to debating whether the school library should only stock books from a single publisher.

By: Alan McNeil Jackson

Alan McNeil Jackson — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 16:27:00 +0000

This is an important and interesting article and one of the first times I’ve seen what I think is the REAL argument being put forward.

One can debate the total cost of ownership estimations for FLOSS vs proprietary software but I think that misses the point.

The point is an ideological one. Open Source Software treats software as knowledge – similar to scientific knowledge or other forms of knowledge, that enhance the human condition by being shared. One of the primary goals of education.

Proprietary Software sees software as product. Something that is sold for the profit of the producer. This is fundamentally at odds with the philosophy of education.

Debates about whether or not to use Microsoft in a school, I think, are analogous to debating whether the school library should only stock books from a single publisher.

By: Tracy

Tracy — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:32:05 +0000

Doug – hi.
It's been reblogged here –> http://tracyrosen.com/?p=105

It wouldn't work directly, but the program offered me some code to copy and put into a post, which I did

Nifty little link. I like it.
open source?
(kidding)

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:47:07 +0000

Interesting, Marc! Devious, aren't they? I'd recommend 'taking the plunge'
as you put it. Perhaps not with the whole operating system (i.e. Linux) at
first, but certainly with some OSS applications.

By: shefi

shefi — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:38:50 +0000

I'm not a programmer and understand almost nothing about code. But I just came across this interesting variation on the philosophy of OpenSource: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Free-Energy-an… Energy and the Open Source Energy Movement: “There are persons working in the U.S. Patent office, who have come forward with information regarding how free energy devices are often “stolen” or suppressed by the government…. This has been reported on by long-time Patent Office employee Thomas Valone, PhD, to have happened to over 4,000 patent filings. Once a patent request is filed in the United States, it is automatically and immediately studied carefully by scientists and engineers working within the Pentagon. .. Enter the Open Source Energy Movement. Herein lies the answer to the above roadblocks to bringing new energy devices into the mainstream; at least until the patent laws change. The answer is simple: Don’t attempt to patent your device: “Open Source” it with full disclosure and documentation.”
PS Thanks to you and commentes for pushing Linux and variants. One day, I'll take the plunge.

By: Doug Belshaw

Doug Belshaw — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:55:22 +0000

Excellent – thanks for sharing the software you use, Nick!