Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Cuba Launches Own Linux Variation

Posted by samzenpus on Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:25 PM
from the the-people's-OS dept.
willclem writes "According to Reuters, it seems that Cuba has launched its own variation of Linux in order to fulfill its government's desire to replace Microsoft operating systems. 'Getting greater control over the informatic process is an important issue,' said Communications Minister Ramiro Valdes, who heads a commission pushing Cuba's migration to free software."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Jane Q. Public (1010737) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:30PM (#26823239)
    That is to say, that's one of the smarter things I have heard about a government lately.
    • by Colin Smith (2679) on Thursday February 12 2009, @05:26AM (#26825137)

      Our politicians aren't stupid either. The simply can't afford to piss off their backers, so they end up making all kinds of bizarre and unhelpful decisions in order to please them.

      I mean... Fuck. We're well into the trillions now. How big is a trillion? 1,000,000,000,000 dollars. It's a lot of paper.

      Here's a question for you... How much capital does a well run bank need?

      Answer: SFA.

      Under the existing fractional reserve system, banks don't need much money, as bizarre as that sounds. With 700 billion dollars and the existing 10% reserve ratio in the US, the American government could have entirely replaced the existing fucked up banks with clean banks able to lend, and the problem would largely have been solved by now. Instead, of allowing them to fail, they are propping up a bunch of what are effectively zombie banks, as the Japanese government also did. I assume they'll continue to prop them up until they can unload their toxic crap on the government.

      Why? Well, have a look at the campaign contributions for that answer. I mean, jesus. Geithner; New York Fed. Do you really expect anything to change?

      Oh, btw, you and your children are paying for the privilege.
       

    • by jc42 (318812) on Thursday February 12 2009, @09:33AM (#26827007) Homepage Journal

      That is to say, that's one of the smarter things I have heard about a government lately.

      But it doesn't really require any special smarts to understand that if you buy a "black box" computer whose innards are all binary blobs that your people can't take apart and study, the computer can do anything at all with your data, and you have no defense. In particular, if you plug it into a network, it can be sending all your data off to anywhere in the world.

      If someone doesn't understand this, the reason isn't usually stupidity. It's because they have some ulterior motive to not understand it. In the case of politicians, the reason is generally because they're "on the take", known in the US as "campaign contributions". This is likely to be the case with non-governmental organizations, too. After all, it has become common for organizations to let vendors know that they're looking at linux and other "free" software. The response from Microsoft and other vendors is to (publicly) offer their software at a much lower price, and (privately) offer kickback to the administrators.

      You don't need to attribute great intelligence to someone who understands this. It's the way that much of the world has always worked. We can expect to read of some vaguely-specified special agreements between Microsoft and the Cuban government, and we'll know what has gone on behind the scenes.

  • CigarOS (Score:5, Funny)

    by russlar (1122455) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:30PM (#26823247)
    Gives new meaning to the term patch rollup.
  • by TinBromide (921574) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:31PM (#26823249)
    Seeing as you have to go through great hoops, (most of them not legal), to get anything Cuban around here, how is the Cuban government running american products? I suppose they purchased from south american, european or asian retailers, but one has to wonder, how many legit copies of windows are in Cuba? Can Microsoft go in to sue the Cuban government about illegal copies? What jurisdiction would Microsoft have to keep Cuba from enjoying their cracked copies until communism dies?
    • by zxjio (1475207) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:48PM (#26823365)
      It seems likely that their government would just buy from ISVs in another country. Microsoft can't see it, can't stop it, can't be held liable. Remember the recent case of HP selling a significant amount of printers to Iran in just such a way?
    • by xPsi (851544) * on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:53PM (#26823395)

      How did microsoft get around the embargo?

      They aren't a company, man. They're their own frickn' weather system. They just need the coriolis force the tell them which way to spin.

    • by plasticsquirrel (637166) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:04AM (#26823473)
      The embargo is only between the U.S. and Cuba. They no doubt buy from another country, and there's no real reason Microsoft would want to lose them as customers. Corporations aren't really moral entities with benevolent scruples about freedom of the press, good vs. evil, etc.

      Looking at the record of foreign policy, privacy, and civil liberties in this country, we also have to ask ourselves if we really have the moral high ground to make judgments about other countries like this, as well. When was the last time Cuba started an international conflict? The expression "Physician, heal thyself" springs to mind.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:00AM (#26823453)

        I am from Finland so I think I dont have your mindset. Could you explain to me, why exactly would we ever want to hope that. Cuba isnt any threat to the safety of the world or anything...

          • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:25AM (#26823583)

            Still the same AC here... I hope you arent referring to Cuba Missile Crisis, because that indeed was very long ago. Even if you arent and there has been something later than that, it is hardly a valid argument. Doesnt USA target numerous countries with nuclear missiles? And support more countries that have those?

            I can tell that there are a lot of people who are more worried about Israel than Cuba, seeing Cuba isnt even very militaristic country. Why in hell would they fire a missile to a country they cant invade? Just because they are (nearly) communists and thus evil?

            If you wish to not answer because of it would take this too far offtopic, I can understand that and not automatically assume that you somehow lost. Just felt the need to mention that at least over here, I have never heard that Cuba would have somehow threatening imago.

              • by Asic Eng (193332) on Thursday February 12 2009, @05:52AM (#26825323)
                Doesn't happen in a vaccum, does it? I suspect children killed by Israeli cluster bombs are just as dead as those killed by Palestinian suicide attacks or Palestinian rockets. Sure one site starts, then the other side "responds", the there is retaliation to the responsce and so on. After a while it's just a continuous stream of mutual violence.

                Israel will not get peace unless it's stops it's policy of stealing Palestinian land. Steadily expanding settlements, "security areas" and the like is just stealing by another name.

                On the other hand Palestinians will not get peace unless they stop being the world's biggest morons. Shooting rockets at someone a thousand times more powerful gets you invaded and your infrastructure destroyed? Huh, imagine that.

          • by jrumney (197329) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:31AM (#26823617) Homepage
            The embargo stared in February 1962, 8 months before the Cuban missile crisis.
          • by Tellarin (444097) on Thursday February 12 2009, @04:23AM (#26824807) Homepage Journal

            I'm in no way defending Cuba's government acts here, but I really don't get this "Cuba is evil" mindset that people in the US always state and that always only shows one side.

            One need to remember that besides what Cuba did, the US supported a dictator in Cuba (Batista) before the was overthrown by the "revolution", supported a tentative to invade Cuba (Bay of Pigs), and supported terrorist and sabotage acts in Cuba.

            The US (biggest economy and military in the world) also imposes an economic embargo in Cuba (very small country) for some 40 years. And at the same time the US has a law that allows any Cubans who reach the US to become a US citizen. Do you want any bigger incentive than these two for people to live a country with a struggling economy?

            And then they claim that people just want to run away from the bad bad Castro because he is the devil or something. :-/

            Let's at least present both sides.

      • by QuantumRiff (120817) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:32AM (#26823623)

        Why did this post get labeled troll? Honestly? The US has admitted to sneaking code into valve controllers made by a company that the US knew that the russians were discreetely and secretly buying, that would cause them to go wonky when certain circumstances happened, leading to a huge explosion on one of their main siberian gas pipelines. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1455559/CIA-plot-led-to-huge-blast-in-Siberian-gas-pipeline.html [telegraph.co.uk] Why would it be different for cuba?

  • by Aranwe Haldaloke (789555) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:47PM (#26823361)
    Tell me I'm not the only one who expected its name to be Cubuntu.
  • The big deal (Score:3, Interesting)

    by moniker127 (1290002) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:58PM (#26823441)
    I dont see the big deal here. Governments would love to have direct control of operating systems, so that they can place undocumented "features" inside them. Even if they release the source code (which I suppose they have to, theoretically), 99.99% of the users who will be employing their distro will not be able to understand what source code even is, or how to interpret it.
    Well, I guess there are still people (the people who are reading this message) who will be able to report any backdoors/home phoning they notice placed into the source, but that will only make a difference provided:
    1- Cuba releases the source
    2- The distro is popular enough to have people using it
    3- People carefully examine the source code
    4- Said examiners are able to spot a problem
    5- Said problem is heard by the end users of the distro
    6- End users of the distro have options as to what operating system they are able to use, if it is mandated by the government, they pretty much have to live with it.
  • Fidel Penguin? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jtara (133429) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:58PM (#26823443)

    I'd love to see the logo be an image of Fidel dressed-up as a penguin.

    I'm pretty sure the guy has a sense of humor. When I was a kid, I was a "shortwave listener" (before I got my ham license) and sent of to Radio Havana (among others) for a "QSL" card, confirming that I had heard their station.

    Besides the card, I got other periodic mailings, including a Christmxxxx New Year card one year, bearing the cartoon likeness of Fidel Castro, laid-out on the dining-room table as a pig, complete with an apple in his mouth. I kid you not. I'll bet he had a big laugh.

    Wish I still had it - could probably sell it for a bundle on eBay!

    (Other "interesting" material I received included a copy of the Little Red Book from Radio Peking, and a subscription to China Pictorial - a beautifully-printed bled-to-edge full color magazine with gorgeous pictures of fields and tractors...)

  • by WindBourne (631190) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:02AM (#26823461) Journal
    There market is about to shrink in a BIG way. If they were smart, they would jump on a couple of distros of linux and make sure that they are the standards. Adobe, Intuit, AutoCad all have programs that are in demand. If they port to this, they can quit having to compete against MS on MS's turf. More importantly, they would get a WHOLE NEW market with minimal competition.
    • by zappepcs (820751) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:20AM (#26823547) Journal

      I said something similar [slashdot.org] regarding the Russian decision to use Linux. It wasn't received too well. I think that this sort of event truly does mean trouble for MS and proprietary software in a rather large way.

      I think that it is more likely that F/OSS developers will beat large proprietary vendors to the punch though. There will be a new market for proprietary Linux software though. When Adobe does port to Linux it doesn't have to be Free or Open Source to run on Linux, but it will be hard to sell software to people that are happy to use the F/OSS alternatives.

      It should be interesting times.

      • by WindBourne (631190) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:34AM (#26823631) Journal
        You are Right. You have red flag in China; The new one in Russia; Various South American states are talking about doing more. Funny thing is, NOW is the time to fire up new apps on Linux. The other companies like Adobe, Intuit, etc are NOT there. A start-up can make a killing by not having commercial competition. As to FOSS beating them to the punch, FOSS works GREAT for OSs and MAJOR apps. But when you have SPECIALIZED apps, like say design a deck for a house, or design your yard, etc. than Commercial really shines; Service, Market or Trade Data, etc. I would not be surprised to see a number of new start up companies around the world taking on these companies because they have the Windows system locked up. That is how it happened on the move from mainframe to DOS and then Windows. The companies that had the mainframe locked up did not move until new and better competition came along.
    • by RAMMS+EIN (578166) on Thursday February 12 2009, @01:58AM (#26824021) Homepage Journal

      All commercial software I have ever written runs on Linux. Almost all companies I've worked for ran Linux on some or all of their computers. All customers I've worked with ran Linux on some or all of their computers. And most of these computers running Linux ran commercial software.

      Linux is already big. Linux is already receiving major commercial support.

      The only reason people think Linux isn't big is that it isn't big on the desktop.

  • by Steauengeglase (512315) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:07AM (#26823485)

    Lunix can run on a '59 Eldorado? Impressive.

  • by JoeZ99 (999617) on Thursday February 12 2009, @01:20AM (#26823851) Homepage
    I've been living in cuba for the last 6 years. I've been using linux since the slackware 100 diskettes era (about 12 years ago).
    • cuba is absolutely windows friendly. everybody in everywhere uses windows. The goverment itself announced a few years ago it was going to migrate to linux. So far nothing yet.
    • cuba works around the embargo thing by means of massive pirate copies (I'm perfectly OK with that).
    • it's a usual thing to announce something with great fireworks that ends up in nothing, so I would have not so many expectations on this .
  • Free people (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tsa (15680) on Thursday February 12 2009, @01:30AM (#26823891) Homepage

    So now Cuba has free software but not free people? It's a strange world we live in.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      ...but many pirated copies can pass those checks. Have been able to do that for a long time.

      And they could have bought computers from some European retailer with pre-installed Windows.

      What I am impressed with is a country that just made having personal computers legal is developping Linux distro.

      Ever since hearing that, I have been aspiring to move to Cuba after getting my degree in CS. It will be pretty rapidly growing market there in a while.

    • by pushing-robot (1037830) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:42PM (#26823319)

      Somehow I have a hard time picturing penguins in Cuba.

      I don't. [wikipedia.org]

        • by GodKingAmit (1192629) on Wednesday February 11 2009, @11:55PM (#26823421)
          Since when is russia a communist or socialist country?
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Zencyde (850968)
          Shit, you're worried? A friend of mine has been saying Linux is Communist for aeons.
        • by iminplaya (723125) <`iminplaya' `at' `gmail.com'> on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:24AM (#26823573) Journal

          The whole thing has been cleverly orchestrated by Microsoft. And when they defeat the red menace, they shall be seen as heroes.Beautiful plan. I wish I thought of it myself.

        • by zorkerz (966191) on Thursday February 12 2009, @12:39AM (#26823665)

          I agree that the connection of open source with Socialism in peoples minds and the negative effect this could have on its adoption worries me.

          Beyond this though I am sick and tired of the irrational fear of socialism in the United States. Im not saying lets become the USSR that obviously did not work out so well but we are still stuck at a point were it is impossible to have rational discussion about anything that gets labeled as socialist. Its a giant hypocritical mess. Look at public roads thats a beautiful example of socialism central to our society.

          I think generations of Americans have been conditioned/brainwashed to attack at the first mention of the word socialism before considering what is being proposed. The irony of it all is that public schools the major institution doing this brainwashing is a socialist model.

          I don't believe that socialist systems work everywhere. I am a fervent capitalist and believe in designing free markets with appropriate incentives. All I want to do is be able to have a rational debate about plans that might contain socialist components without people freaking out.

          • by 50_1337 (929093) on Thursday February 12 2009, @02:57AM (#26824379) Homepage

            Public schools are a socialist model, as are the police, the justice system, the libraries, the firemen or the free-health-for-all (at least in Europe).

            I don't see what's wrong with this "socialism" me neither!

          • by boredhacker (1103107) on Thursday February 12 2009, @03:36AM (#26824583)

            I am a fervent capitalist

            Sorry, I just have to contribute my 2 cents regarding this statement.

            In the old days, capitalists were the people who owned the means of production and simply profited from this ownership. The Forbes richest people in the world are the people we're talking about. In fact, these capitalists don't even need to actually support capitalism as a great ideal.

            Now-a-days every layman who supports capitalism calls himself a capitalist. We lose an important distinction here, and I really think you might be better off by understanding this. Perhaps it will give you some more insight into each system and help you further refine your values.

            In a very real sense, you are probably a socialist who happens to support capitalism. For example, do you pay Geico for car insurance (socialist) or do you own Berkshire-Hathaway (capitalist)? Do you invest in a 401k (socialist) or do you own your own investment firm (capitalist)? Do you fly commercial or in a private Lear jet? Do you go to work in the morning or do workers come to your building? I think you see where I'm going.

            Anyway, I think it's an important distinction... more details here:

            Capital [marxists.org]

            and here:

            Capitalist [wikipedia.org]

            • by jabithew (1340853) on Thursday February 12 2009, @03:58AM (#26824685)

              But not owning capital doesn't ipso facto make you a socialist. Buying car insurance is a capitalist, free-market transaction.

              Besides, most people in the West are capitalists, as they own part of all of either a house or a car. A 'socialist' investing in a 401K with a stock aspect may become a part owner of Berkshire-Hathaway, which is a publicly listed firm.

              By your definition, almost nobody is a capitalist as most firms are publicly listed and hence socially owned.

              In short, I think the reason the distinction has blurred in usage is because it has genuinely blurred in reality. And a socialist is certainly not the same thing as someone with no money. Just see Polly Toynbee.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by QuantumG (50515) *

      Gah. Are you retarded or what? The whole fucking point of the article is that the Cuban government wants to be able to look for back doors in the software. They're not relying on the open source community being "more aware and quicker to patch said vulnerabilities", at all. This is simply a case of Cubans saying "why are we running software we can't even inspect?"