On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 13:56, Kevin Cole <kjc...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On 03/11/2010 04:33 PM, Danny Piccirillo wrote: >> For me, the main challenge in explaining FOSS is that you also have to >> explain what software is, and how it is created. >> >> >> This is exactly what i'm talking about > > When explaining this to people I use the analogy of a car: Many people > drive but do not care to fine-tune their own car. Often they will know > both the professional mechanic, and the enthusiast who can make anything > with four wheels do something marvelous. Then I ask "What if both the > professional and the 'hobbyist' had no permission to look under the hood? > What if they could look -- if they paid a fee -- but could not improve upon > the original model. What if they could not explain what they learned to > others?" > > I then often throw in a bit about some of the proprietary diagnostic > software that mechanics pay for. But, I don't have a car, don't drive and > can only carry the analogy so far. > > Still, for many people a light in the brain seems to flicker in response, > and we begin to have the glimmerings of understanding.
I think we should aim for more than the beginning glimmerings of understanding. Isn't there a list of promises we can make? You will always be free to share the software You can be sure there's no hidden malware We will not tell you how you can and can not use the software We will not for you to pay for perpetual upgrades Our software evolves much faster Our software is developed in the interests of users We will use open formats that don't lock you into our products etc, etc, etc *Something* along these lines? except more eloquent -- .danny ☮♥Ⓐ - http://www.google.com/profiles/danny.piccirillo Every (in)decision matters. -- loco-contacts mailing list loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
