[NTLUG:Discuss] Open Source

[Daniel Hauck]

Greg Edwards wrote:
>> From: discuss-bounces at ntlug.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at ntlug.org] On
>> Behalf Of Kenneth Loafman
>>> Seriously, I hope everyone on this list takes Linux more serious
> than
>>> this.  Otherwise, I don't see it advancing much more than it has.
>> Many years ago I committed to replace 100 Windows systems with Linux
>> systems, both at work and for friends.  Its been a battle in some
> cases
>> and a real pleasure in others, but I made it and kept on going.  If we
>> all did the same thing, we could make progress.
>>
>> Word-of-mouth advertising is the most potent form of advertising.
>>
>> ...Ken
>>
> 
> One of the aspect of the Boy Scouts open source project that has me
> excited is the opportunity to spread the word about OSS.  We'll be
> building a section of the site called "About Open Source" that will be
> dedicated to educating the world about open source.  The About Open
> Source section will be a Wiki and the open source community (NTLUG
> included) will be invited to build the content.
> 
> --
> Greg Edwards

Open Source Religion

The movement of open source is important because it's a return to where 
we have been in the beginnings of the IT industry.  Software was the 
stuff that made the computer useful... it was the computer that we paid 
for.  The business of selling software as a product is a bad idea and 
everything that has followed since then to support that business model 
has become disastrous.  And movements in the direction of "software as a 
service" is even more dangerous as important data and information has 
even greater potential of being locked away from users and/or accessed 
by other parties.  Open Source restores power and control to those who 
need it most.

But evangelizing F/OSS is a pretty big turn-off for most people and I 
believe it does more harm than good.  If your first exposure to F/OSS 
came in the form of some crazed enthusiast, or some religious sounding 
zealot, the significance of F/OSS would be over-powered by other 
impressions left on the people being presented to.  (This is largely why 
I have loved the Linux ads sponsored by IBM... IBM is nothing resembling 
a crazed enthusiast nor a religious zealot.  And if people first hear 
about Linux from the likes of IBM, people are more inclined to associate 
Linux and F/OSS with established and powerful business.)

'Spreading the Word' is an idea that is worrisome to me for some reason 
and I think it's because it reminds me of religion.  We're talking about 
information technology, software and data formats that can be trusted 
and breaking vendor lock-in.  And I'm sorry to put it this way, but when 
F/OSS is presented as if it were a religion, people start to question 
how much of your knowledge is factual and how much is 'faith' because 
whether or not we acknowledge it directly, people associate some things 
with other things such as "faith" and "religion" are words closely 
related just as "faith" and "facts" are related as opposites.

I like Chris Cox because he's all about presenting the facts, about what 
works and about what is functional and practical.  I dislike Chris Cox 
because he's right too often and he knows too damned much.  But one 
thing he never seems to come across as being, is 'religious.'

I'd be a horrible spokesperson for Linux as I lean in the direction of 
the 'crazed enthusiast' and it doesn't help that I'm something of a 
well-known Microsoft hater.  Any presentation or information about Linux 
or F/OSS that I demonstrate is inherently colored by my other 
attributes.  The same is true for anyone else with a tint in their 
public face.  I'm tinted and I know it all too well and if I were to 
push Linux the way some people would like, I would invariably do a 
disservice to the community by associating myself with the movement.

So I have to wonder and ask if anyone else is pushing their position in 
a way that colors Linux and F/OSS in ways unintended or in ways that 
might even put people off.

People always have and always will associate the message with the 
messenger.  If someone has bad teeth or bad breath when discussing the 
virtues of Linux with someone, what impression of Linux will the other 
party come away with?  Seriously.  You can't fix human nature; you can 
only work with it.

You probably already know if you're a good messenger or not.  I'm not! 
So I only put it where it works well and am generally quiet about it 
unless someone asks.  Leadership by example is humble and never wins any 
awards or recognition, but it's the best contribution I can make without 
causing much harm.