Op/ed about Free Software in Danish newspaper Information
Paul Boddie
paul at boddie.org.uk
Wed Aug 31 14:32:51 UTC 2022
On Wednesday, 31 August 2022 10:39:39 CEST Carsten Agger wrote:
> Øjvind from our Danish FSFE team had a feature/opinion piece in the
> Danish newspaper Information the other day, print edition and online:
>
>
> https://www.information.dk/debat/2022/08/baeredygtige-it-fremtid-benytte-fri
> -software-microsoft-google-apple
>
>
> Its headline is: "Our sustainable IT future must use Free Software, not
> Microsoft, Google and Apple".
>
> If you don't read Danish you could use a translation service to read the
> actual article.
I can read Danish, but it just takes a bit longer for the words to sink in
that it would if it were Norwegian. (Bokmål, that is: I also experience a
performance penalty with Nynorsk!)
Having rushed through the article somewhat, I think it is pretty well argued,
touching on the freedom aspects of Free Software, and I think that the
transparency of Free Software is definitely a selling point in this age of
surveillance. However, there were a couple of things that weren't quite
accurate or that risk being inaccurate.
Firstly, there was a remark about needing to use the Zoom application when one
could use Jitsi Meet in the browser. While I don't feel like defending Zoom,
having been obliged to use it for remote work, I did only ever use it via my
browser. Initially, it only worked with Chromium, but later on also seemed to
work with Firefox.
More significantly, there was a remark about using Linux on older computers.
However, the ability to run Linux distributions on older hardware is
imperilled by developer attitudes. With the likes of Fedora starting to
require a Web browser just to run the installer [1], and with general system
requirements gradually being elevated and demanding more memory than can
conveniently be managed on 32-bit systems, a lot of old or lightweight
hardware is being rendered obsolete unnecessarily. Admittedly, the escalation
in system requirements is also due to "Web culture" where the browser has
finally become the environment for running programs that Netscape wanted to
deliver in the late 1990s.
Even distributions like Debian are seeing a certain amount of pressure on the
32-bit platforms with regard to how packages can be built and how these
platforms can remain supported, and this in turn puts pressure on minority
architectures that then risk being demoted to lower levels of support.
Although many people would argue that 64-bit machines have been mainstream for
many years, and that 64-bit ARM systems have become more widely available, we
now risk a lot of 32-bit systems being needlessly thrown away. Then again,
many of the same people might remark that many of those systems (Raspberry
Pis, for instance) were "cheap" and therefore not worth saving.
So, to summarise the above, I think that some of the traditional arguments
made for Free Software (transparency, control) work very well in the modern
era where surveillance is a concern for many people. However, other arguments
do not stand up particularly well any more. Interestingly, it is the
"pragmatic" arguments that are falling down - you can re-use old computers,
for example - but they were often the weaker arguments, anyway.
I think that Free Software advocacy can be a struggle purely due to the
economic forces at work. Delivering Free Software environments that are
resistant to consumerist trends in institutions (where people want the
satisfaction of a shopping excursion) requires a strategy and a level of
investment that many players in our political systems are reluctant to pursue.
Governments, their institutions, and supporters of certain parties seem to
regard investment in software infrastructure as "reinventing the wheel" and
that such things can be bought "off the shelf" for far less.
At the same time in many countries, central government tends to have a habit
of defunding local government and then blaming it for the poor state of public
services. When schools are told that there is no money for anything, it
becomes tempting for them to acquire the cheapest solutions, and if there
happens to be free-of-charge services to use, these will quickly become
adopted regardless of whether they should be or not. Considerations of privacy
and control are then portrayed as unaffordable luxuries. This phenomenon is
happening at absolutely every level of childcare and education.
It is hugely concerning that current economic conditions will only drive these
trends further and more strongly. For a decade or more in countries like the
UK where "austerity" has been official economic policy, many people will have
been told that there is "not enough money" and to "make do". Even in wealthier
countries like Norway who could afford to invest in public infrastructure, the
tendency to emulate the idiocy of larger countries means that even modest
efforts to promote Free Software were eliminated as soon as the former, right-
wing, government got into power, because business and "the market" supposedly
solve all problems.
But even if we take a step back and look at how "information technology" is
used in education, instead of focusing on our own specific interests with Free
Software, it is enlightening to see how people regard the widespread use of
tablets and other such devices in the classroom from a very early age.
Educators, parents and child development professionals may be concerned about
such proliferation of technology and whether it is harmful, but in response
you can see some familiar tendencies on display: new toys have become
available, are "convenient", and "the kids like them". Also, cheap technology
is cheaper than paying wages for more teachers, assistants, and so on.
Perhaps the one area where Free Software might make progress is in being able
to offer a genuinely better experience. But again, without investment, this
will be difficult to achieve, and it also doesn't help that many of the people
designing user interfaces these days seem to be obsessed with copying the
arbitrarily confected and increasingly absurd elements of established
corporate products. Such tendencies have arguably stalled the progress of
Linux on the desktop for over a decade, but that is another story.
Paul
[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/880973/
More information about the Discussion
mailing list