-
Juan Arellano - Let's talk about free software in Latin America,
-
what's your opinion?
-
Santiago Hoerth - Well, actually, free software is extremely popular in Latin America.
-
It is probably the place where it is most popular, regionally.
-
There is, to begin with, Brazil and its government's
-
decision to incorporate
-
free software for public administration purposes,
-
and the support for the local development of free software.
-
Also, Venezuela, Ecuador, Argentina,
-
Costa Rica is now implementing a new system
-
where universities are required by law to incorporate free software.
-
And, in other countries, free software is also
-
growing noticeably, not only through those
-
who actually use it, who are obviously important
-
and who make free software possible,
-
but also through the support of the authorities,
-
in this case, the government.
-
The government supporting free software is
-
an important encouragement for those who
-
are trying to develop free software.
-
So, yes, the outlook of free software in
-
the Latin American region is definitely positive.
-
Even though some people still use privative software
-
on their computers, when it comes to
-
companies and public administration
-
there has been a noticeable migration towards free
-
software, and this also includes some universities.
-
What Código Sur does is to encourage
-
civil society organizations and social movements
-
to incorporate free technologies.
-
Not only free software, but also, once the free software
-
has been incorporated, move on to other types of
-
free technologies as well.
-
It is a fact that free software has become
-
a Latin American movement.
-
It is so because of the growing support that
-
free software has received from different areas.
-
So the prospects in Latin America for free software
-
are that free software will continue to grow,
-
will have an even stronger market position,
-
and will slowly replace privative software altogether.
-
What I always say is that those who are nowadays
-
working with privative software in most
-
of the information technology areas
-
have their days numbered.
-
Because in a short time from now,
-
no one will support privative software.
-
I couldn't tell you exactly when.
-
It is, obviously, a matter of years.
-
It could be 5 to 10 years.
-
The growth of free software is unstoppable.
-
JA - Free software, generally...
-
There are some criticism of it.
-
On the one hand, those who develop free software
-
are quite ...
-
how can I put it?
-
radical
-
SH- Aha.
-
JA - ...about its incorporation to the market.
-
And on the other hand, I've also read
-
that free software simply copies
-
privative software, and provides the free software
-
version, and that it lacks originality.
-
What can you tell me about all this?
-
SH - Well, the first thing I can tell you is that
-
no, that free software is original to
-
a very large extent.
-
And I'm going to use Firefox as an example,
-
a web browser of the Mozila Foundation,
-
that is free software.
-
In the struggle that took place between
-
the browsers in the world,
-
Internet Explorer had 98% of the market share
-
two years ago. Nowadays it is starting to fall,
-
it already lost 40% of the market share.
-
It approximately has 60% of the market share now.
-
When Firefox was launched, one of the
-
improvements, related to Internet Explorer,
-
was that, I don't know if you remember,
-
a few years ago with Internet Explorer 5 and 6
-
when you wanted to open a new window,
-
you had to literally open a new window,
-
and if you wanted to use several pages
-
at the same time, we had to open 30 windows
-
in our operating system, right?
-
Different windows. Each one in a different
-
Internet Explorer window.
-
Firefox said, "I think it'll be a good idea to
-
solve this with a few tabs".
-
And it started the idea of tabs for the browsing
-
of different web pages.
-
So one could have 30 tabs open
-
in only one Firefox window.
-
Automatically, Internet Explorer, on its 7th version,
-
if I'm not mistaken, what was its next step?
-
Adding tabs to its browser, wasn't it?
-
Because the way Firefox was working
-
was obviously more functional.
-
80% of the Internet, approximately, it is not an
-
exact figure, but it is around that number,
-
works through free software.
-
Apache is the number one web server.
-
Most of the e-mail addresses are free software.
-
And regarding what you said about the
-
'copying of the privative software', I think
-
it is not imitation what we could find but attention
-
to the needs of all those who use the product, right?
-
For example, Photoshop is not very similar to
-
GIMP, regarding presentation and the way some
-
things are done. But it allows you to do--
-
I mean, the results are practically the same.
-
The same happens with Inkscape and Illustrator
-
and other Adobe programs.
-
There are a lot of programs that are
-
characteristic of a certaing area, for example
-
video or audio, and therefore a large
-
number of users would be used to a specific software.
-
So the aim would be to keep the learning process
-
very close to what people already know,
-
so as not to drive them crazy and to increase the
-
potential penetration rates of the free software
-
on users of privative platforms.
-
So, I think it is not really 'copying',
-
but rather some projects trying to achieve a
-
certain level of comparison so new users
-
would not have any problems when learning
-
how to use the tools.
-
But, actually, free software is much more
-
innovative than privative software.
-
Many of the numerous developments that are taking
-
place are not even present in privative software.
-
JA- Ah, OK.
-
And I also mentioned the activists of
-
free software being referred to as "radical".
-
SH- Right, yes, yes.
-
Well, radicalization, I think, has to do with
-
being aware of what is happening with
-
companies and people who develop privative software.
-
What is it that happens when one uses
-
privative software?
-
I mean, it is not a simple matter.
-
On the contrary, one does not have any
-
control over what one is doing.
-
So the purpose of radicalization is to
-
make people understand the reasons
-
when we talk about technology, we
-
necessarily have to talk about freedom.
-
And that freedom is translated in the
-
possibilities and freedoms that
-
the software I'm using provides me with.
-
If a software does not let me see the source code
-
there is no way to audit it and know
-
exactly what that source code does.
-
There's a thing that happens--
-
I don't know if at some point, to those who
-
use Windows, for example, when trying
-
to install a program they get a notification
-
that says: "This software in not validated by
-
Microsoft. Do you still want to install it?"
-
JA- Aha.
-
SH- If us, as developers, want Microsoft to
-
validate one of our softwares,
-
what we need to do is send it to them,
-
send the source code for them to analyse it,
-
and the application that they approve is
-
returned to us as a compilation.
-
What does a "compilation" mean?
-
That we can no longer see how that
-
software is done, because we can no longer
-
have access to the code. It is a compilation,
-
it is closed, a package, we can no longer open it.
-
And that is what they allow you to introduce,
-
as a validated product, into their system.
-
JA- Which could be completely different
-
from the one that you sent.
-
SH - And you don't know what it is that
-
they changed, exactly.
-
You don't know what they they did
-
to it, because they send it as a compilation.
-
So, from this point of view, what does
-
it really mean to de radical?
-
Is being radical making people aware of how much
-
proprietary software is damaging society?
-
Or are they people that--
-
leaving aside any internal problems among
-
free software supporters, and that some people
-
can be more radical or more closed-minded.
-
I mean, generally, the free software movement's
-
main purpose is for people to see what really
-
happens when they use privative software
-
and what are the advantages and possibilities
-
of using free software.
-
And I'm not simply referring to technology, but
-
to society as a whole. With either one of them.
-
Socially, when we use privative software, we
-
depend on the person or the company
-
that develops it. We will never be free
-
from the company that develops a
-
certain software which we can't access.
-
Free software, on the other hand, can be
-
developed through a specific company
-
and if in the future, for whatever reason, you don't
-
want to continue working with that company,
-
you can hire a different one to continue
-
developing it, because the source code
-
would be available to you.
-
So, radicalization has to do with that.
-
In some places where human rights are
-
being violated, there are people who are
-
extremelly radical exactly because of that,
-
because they are defending human life.
-
We can translate this into the position that
-
the activists of free software have.
-
JA- Aha, OK. Than you Santiago.
-
SH - Pura vida