Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

No OLPCs for Cuba, Ever

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the can't-export-that dept.

Education 620

An anonymous reader writes "In a move going largely unnoticed by developers, the OLPC project now requires all submissions to be hosted in the RedHat Fedora project. While this may not seem like a big deal, the implications are interesting. First, contributors have to sign the Fedora Project Individual Contributor License Agreement. By being forced to submit contributions to the Fedora repository they automatically fall under the provisions of US export law. So, no OLPC for Cuba, Syria and the like. Ever."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

for always and eternity (5, Insightful)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676423)

because US laws and export restrictions never change. ever.

Re:for always and eternity (5, Interesting)

eln (21727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676485)

They probably won't change during the useful life of the OLPC. The US still is under the impression that sanctions and trade embargoes will actually cause regime change in these countries. Even though they haven't worked at all (and in fact have only served to further entrench the regimes in question) over the more than 40 years they've been in place, we're still convinced that if we keep them around just a little bit longer, democracy will flourish.

Like John Stewart said, we've given up trying to kill Castro with food poison, now we're trying to kill him with "old age poison." If we wait long enough, the regimes will eventually fall, and we can then claim it was all because of the embargo.

Re:for always and eternity (-1, Troll)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676541)

The UN still is under the impression that sanctions...
Fixed your typo. Unless you're under the impression that the US has complete and total control of the security council suddenly.

Re:for always and eternity (5, Insightful)

bloobloo (957543) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676583)

It's the US that has the draconian embargoes. In the civilized world we can visit Cuba etc.

Re:for always and eternity (3, Insightful)

UnHolier than ever (803328) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676607)

Only the US maintains an embargo towards Cuba. It never asked the Security Council to do so.

Re:for always and eternity (5, Informative)

eln (21727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676611)

I know we like to blame the UN for everything here at Slashdot, but the embargo against Cuba was enacted by President Kennedy in 1961, with the total travel ban enacted in 1963. The UN certainly has its hands in a lot of useless sanctions, but to pretend the UN is responsible for the Cuba situation, or that the US does not exert tremendous influence over the UN, is just flat wrong.

Re:for always and eternity (1)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676713)

The US still is under the impression that sanctions and trade embargoes will actually cause regime change in these countries.
My response was directed at that statement, not the Cuba situation specifically.

Re:for always and eternity (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676893)

I just wanted to have a go at the UN
There, fixed your typo for you.

Some of us ARE literate! (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#19677019)

Just to make sure you are aware that not everyone who read your post immediately jumped to the wrong conclusion and donned their flame suit... I read your post as replying to the post you just indicated as well, and it made perfect sense to me. While I might not agree entirely with your sentiment, it seemed clear enough to me that you were not specifically talking about Cuba.

-Rick

Re:for always and eternity (2, Informative)

spisska (796395) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676723)

The UN still is under the impression that sanctions...

Fixed your typo. Unless you're under the impression that the US has complete and total control of the security council suddenly.

Nope. The embargo on Cuba is purely a US matter. There was a time when the US could bully plenty of Central and South American countries into honoring it, but the US is pretty much alone these days. Neither the UN nor the UN Security Council has ever had an embargo on Cuba.

Re:for always and eternity (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676805)

The UN still is under the impression that sanctions...
Fixed your typo. Unless you're under the impression that the US has complete and total control of the security council, just like it always has.
Fixed your typo.

Re:for always and eternity (4, Insightful)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676843)

The trade embargo with Cuba is US-specific, and the nearly-complete embargoes (such as those with Iran and Syria) are often also US-specific. Europe and Canada trade fairly freely with the island nation, and Russia sells plenty of military gear to both Iran and Syria.

There are places where economic embargoes, or the threat thereof, may have significant benefit. Libya's acquiesence to UN demands regarding the Lockerbie suspects and checmical and nuclear programs probably came about in part due to economic pressures that prevented foreign companies from investing significantly in its oil fields. And Iran instituted fuel rationing a couple of days ago in response to threat of embargo of gasoline trade into the country in an attempt to build up reserves in anticipation of trade sanctions. Iran has extremely limited refining capabilities, and so imports around a third of its gasoline, and then subsidizes it to 20% of its market price. The response was the destruction of several fuel stations, some small riots, and a very divided and irritated parliament taking up the issue.

However, in order for trade embargoes to really work, they usually have to be nearly universal, though even then there is no guarantee. North Korea is a prime example here, where the leaders keep such a tight lid on the people that they don't fear uprisings, while they live in comfort that their people can barely even dream about. However, recent targeting of leadership assets overseas has brought pressure there that tangible results (a scheduled shutdown of DPRK's reactor in July) may be coming about.

Re:for always and eternity (5, Insightful)

speaker of the truth (1112181) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676671)

If Cuba wants the embargo lifted they need to provide cheap labor like China does. After all, China commits terrible atrocities and yet we continue to trade with them for our cheap electronics. Cuba on the other hand, not so bad in recent times, but they only give us cigars so we keep the embargo.

Re:for always and eternity (3, Informative)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676833)

No - if Cuba wants the embargo lifted - they need to persuade the politically strong Cuban-American groups that work so hard to keep the embargo in place. This issue, like so many others - has deeper roots and issues than your humorous comment allows.

Re:for always and eternity (0, Troll)

Schnoogs (1087081) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676869)

I didn't realize China imported Soviet nukes and placed them 100 miles off of the coast of the US. Oh wait they didnt.

Re:for always and eternity (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676855)

Cuba will be a nice place to visit when Castro dies - after private citizens can own property, build businesses and such.
The embargo also shows how lackadaisical the majority of the Cuban people (that stayed) are. Nice people but will just kinda go with the flow with whatever.
For the most part, the US embargo really did nothing as Cuba was fine until the fall of communism in the Soviet Union.

Re:for always and eternity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676503)

As the Fedora link says:

Please note: this list is subject to change.
Meanwhile, it's almost July. Has OLPC shipped a single one of the 50 billion jillion units they've been insisting they were going to sell this year?

Re:for always and eternity (2, Insightful)

Ice Wewe (936718) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676953)

because US laws and export restrictions never change. ever.

They won't change unless there is someone in the Whitehouse who isn't too busy doing the "LA LA LA, I can't hear the Commies off the Florida coast..." to change the stupid law.

We trade with China, what's the big deal? Other than dirt cheap [often low quality] products, I fail to see the difference.

Re:for always and eternity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19677005)

A few billion people? A semi-capitalistic economy?

Re:for always and eternity (1)

nelsonal (549144) | more than 7 years ago | (#19677047)

Miami, the party that reverses the embargo can count on losing the Cuban vote in Florida for at least a couple of elections, and with races as tight as they've been for as long as they've been Florida is pretty crucial to the presidency. There aren't a couple hundred thousand (million?) Chinese anti-communists living in an important swing state.

Re:for always and eternity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676981)

Untrue. Export regulations evolve at a snail's pace, but they do change. For instance, Libya was removed from the list of embargoed terrorist-supporting nations in 2006. (This was after decades of restrictions, though.) http://www.bakerbotts.com/file_upload/LibyaUpdate- CommerceDepartmentLiftsAnti-TerrorismExportControl s.htm [bakerbotts.com]

Good. (-1, Flamebait)

Mockylock (1087585) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676437)

"GEEV US OLPC OR WE KEEL YOU!"

They don't really give a shit about their people anyway. If we gave them OLPC's they'd take them and sell them, or use them for the government. Not only that, but if you were caught giving one to a little girl, they'd probably kill you, then behead the girl because it promotes learning.

Re:Good. (1)

BlueLightSpecial (898144) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676479)

I see it as a good move also, it would be awesome to get technology in the hands of the youth of developing countries, but so many times aid is intercepted by the government, or whoever the "bad guys" are, and something that was intended to aid progress, helps aid regression

Re:Good. (1)

Mockylock (1087585) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676593)

I agree. There are so many ways they could help their people with fuel and other valuable economic riches, but they don't do it as-is. In fact, a lot of these places send government funded militias to seize all incoming RATIONS for their own use, regardless of who it's for. Even some countries who aren't blocked by sanctions will probably see this happen as a common occurence.

Sad, but true.

Re:Good-idiots (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676721)

wow you guys really drank the neocon coolaid. Learn to look through the propoganda, and you might see there is a world OUTSIDE THE US. Fuck off you stupid drones.

Sanctions only exist to subjugate the peoples of these countries,increasing the death rates of the young, and lower the quality of life of the citizens. Sanctions, and withholding of technologies of these "rogue states" (read: any states that have the balls to stand up to US economic and social hegemony), only serves to bolster these regimes(many of which were installed and supported by the CIA/NSA/etc to fight other "threats").

Face it, US foreign policy is one of economic fascism, cultural indoctrination and genocide.

I'm a proud American who is embarassed by the evil imperialists who run our country.

Re:Good-idiots (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676899)

Also, nothing breaks old values faster than McDonald's and MTV.

Re:Good. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676551)

lol what the fuck do you know about Cuba that you didn't see on FOX?

Sit down, Rambo.

Re:Good. (1)

Mockylock (1087585) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676651)

I was leaning more toward Syria, but if you actually support Castro, you've got problems.

Go read a book.

Re:Good. (5, Insightful)

butlerdi (705651) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676809)

Why ? Have you been there ? They have a much better society than they would have had the American Mafia continued running it. They have good education, reasonable health care and while not so much stuff, they do not have foreclosures and bankruptcies the likes that you have been experiencing. Not to mention the next round coming on about now. Even after all these years of embargo by their ever so caring neighbors to the North, they still smile much more than anywhere I have ever seen in the US. I think sir it is you who ought to read a book.

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676917)

How do you explain people risking their lives and the lives of their families to escape? Not a challenge per-se, just an honest question.

Re:Good. (1)

ichigo 2.0 (900288) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676821)

Does supporting Cuba mean you support Castro? Does supporting Bush mean you support the US?

Re:Good. (1)

fredrated (639554) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676841)

Wow that post is really informative, you've help me meet my quota of learning something new each day.

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676673)

It's mind blowing to read a post like this, with an Archie Bunker quote in the signature.

You do know that show was making fun of people like Archie, right?

That's pretty good news (1)

The_Abortionist (930834) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676687)

The OLPC doesn't have to only teach children about turning on computers and provide them with internet access to pornography. In this case, it will teach, by its absence, the value of not being communist and/or terrorists.

Anyway, can we trust Cuba with the OLPC? Network 1 million of them and 2 years later they have an atomic bomb simulator.

Re:Good. (5, Insightful)

mujo (1083177) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676701)

"They don't really give a shit about their people anyway."

unlike the us government who gives much shit about their people, plunging 400 billions of dollars in a war for the oil industry, refuse to give health insurance to sick americans to cater for private insurance business, wiretap their citizens, ...

land of the free!

Re:Good. (0)

duranaki (776224) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676751)

so, michael moore, at least you reveal yourself!

Re:Good. (1)

Weston O'Reilly (1008937) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676785)

"Freedom from paying for goods and services" has never been one of our freedoms. That is a recent perversion of the term.

Re:Good. (3, Informative)

Elemenope (905108) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676927)

I think GP was reacting to the rather more ridiculous contention that American politicians by and large give more of a crap about the people they govern than politicans in other countries. That the countervailing evidence manifests as health insurance being inaccessible for a huge swath of the working population (when a good portion of the rest of the world has amply demonstrated is not a necessary situation), and the prosecution of an transpatently profiteering war that has killed tens (hundreds?) of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of Americans (which most of the rest of the world considered if not illegal than just plain stupid to get involved in), is simply a reflection of our own neuroses. Other countries screw over their people in different ways, according to different guiding ideologies.

I'd still rather have free beer. (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676973)

Free-as-in-liberty does not have anything to do with free-as-in-healthcare.

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676789)

how the hell did this get modded insightful? only on slashdot.. /sigh

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676849)

How did this blatant troll who calls himself Mockylock get modded insightful?

Re:Good. (1)

zx75 (304335) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676961)

Umm, may I ask how the hell this got modded as Insightful? If I had mod points I would drop this as Flamebait more than anything.

I get that the US in general has some obsessive hatred of Cuba, but were you to actually go there and meet the people you would come back with the impression only of a society trying to survive under grinding poverty because they cannot trade with a lot of foreign nations due to the embargo, NOT one of wanton cruelty as the Parent is trying to suggest.

Take it from someone who has seen it firsthand.

Oh darn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676443)

I guess Hizbollah and the Janjaweed won't get their laptops now. They worked so hard for them, it's not fair ;_;

Re:Oh darn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676591)

Hizbollah is in Lebanon. You see, muslim's don't take credit for fighting. It's an old habit. (has something to do with going after entire families instead of fighting in an army, a rich muslim tradition started by the paedophile prophet himself)

Muslims to muhammad : you've already told us we can rape the women we keep captive for ransom. Does it matter if we impregnate them ?
muhammad : no, it's in allah's hands, go ahead and enjoy

(muslims that get offended should take some "pride" in their religions ways ... or change their holy texts : e.g. this one : http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsun nah/muslim/008.smt.html#008.3432 [usc.edu]

(accepted as the literal law by both sunni and shia, so people : don't worry about raping muslima's : it's allowed by sharia, the law they prefer above america's law, of course if you get caught sharia also gives the family the right to kill you, and obviously you'll have to avoid the infidel police that somehow thinks muslims will protect them in return)

Re:Oh darn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676901)

you must be one of those effing judish c*nts...

not forever (3, Insightful)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676449)

Just the foreseeable future. Regimes change (thank god) and governments change. Little over 30 years ago we where Irans friend and traded major arms to her (including F-14 fighters and their powerful at the time Phoenix missiles) in less than 3 years they became our sworn enemy.

things change fast in the world

Re:not forever (5, Funny)

Dancindan84 (1056246) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676783)

Yeah, but Castro is some kind of immortal zombie communist.

Re:not forever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676817)

And three years later we're friends again.

Re:not forever (1)

butlerdi (705651) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676969)

Not to mention the arms to Iraq (10 years ago), Syria (Not so long ago), Osama et al (all during Soviet Afganistan) and ever so many others.

Altruism doesn't exist (0, Flamebait)

athloi (1075845) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676451)

Altruism triggers pleasure centers like a drug or sex [msn.com] , which means that we do altruistic acts for ourselves, not for others. So don't expect the OLPC folks to cry out over this one. The original OLPC group wanted to construe themselves as philanthropists, and now Intel and others are moving in to scoop up this "new market." There are no gifts without strings.

Re:Altruism doesn't exist (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676533)

Yes but in some people cruel behavior triggers pleasure centers, where as in others altruistic behavior triggers pleasure centers. Therefore is can easily be deduced that despite the cause, some people, groups, etc, are more polite and caring of others than some others.

As such, saying that because there's a chemical reaction involved altruism doesn't exist, is like saying that life itself doesn't exist because we can explain all of it's functioning through biology. The explanation of it's function and inner workings does NOT invalidate the concept.

Re:Altruism doesn't exist (1)

gomiam (587421) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676637)

Altruism triggers pleasure centers like a drug or sex, which means that we do altruistic acts for ourselves, not for others.

I find it interesting how you misread the article. Please let me refresh your memory with a couple of quotes from your own reference:

As it turns out, "That very same brain area not only tracks what is good for us, but what is good for others," he said.

Which means that the area that tracks what is good for us, tracks what is good for others. You read it as a pleasure response happening when we act altruistically (ergo altruism is ultimately egotistical), but it actually says that it tracks what is good for others (for example, it may as well activate when we watch someone succeed). But don't take my word for it, let's go back to the article:

"The fact that we find pleasurable activity in those mandatory tax-like situations strongly suggests the existence of pure altruism," he said.

Need I say more?

Re:Altruism doesn't exist (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676657)

Wow, thanks for resolving the age-old philisophical and psychological debate regarding the origins and motivations of alturism with a one-page article from MSN.com. dipshit.

Re:Altruism doesn't exist (1)

tomee (792877) | more than 7 years ago | (#19677015)

"we do altruistic acts for ourselves"

Muahahaha! I just gave some homeless guy a dollar, and now I feel good about myself! Muahahhaha!

Seriously, just because one feels good about being altruistic, that doesn't make one's acts any less generous.

A bit misleading (5, Insightful)

The Breeze (140484) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676457)

I wouldn't say "ever"...both Cuba and Syria have made steps towards getting removed from the US ban list, and with Fidel teetering on death's edge, who knows what the future will bring.

Re:A bit misleading (0)

Odin_Tiger (585113) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676539)

I thought Fidel had already died, and they were using a double? Has that been proven not to be the case now? TBH I haven't really heard anything about him or thought about it one way or another for quite a few weeks now, but now I'm curious...

When Castro dies..... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676627)

- Castro dies
- Mutual Defense Pact is unveiled between Venezuela and Cuba, and Castro's successor asks Venezuela for "help."
- Venezuela military moves in under the guise of "protecting" Cuba from invasion from other countries.
- Cuba becomes a satellite province of Venezuela.

Unless the US and other countries have the balls to throw up a naval force and cordon off Cuba so the people of Cuba can handle it for themselves.

Re:A bit misleading (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676661)

The big problem seems to be that one of the major US swing states is full of asshats who won't die. Evicted from Cuba for being corrupt they are annoyed that the US hasn't managed (through incompetence, rather than lack of malice) to get their country back for them.

The sooner they pop their clogs the better. Cuba (especially the people of Cuba) don't deserve the treatment they get from the US and the rest of the world is rather mystified why it has taken the US so long to stop being an ass about the issue.

Re:A bit misleading (1, Insightful)

giorgiofr (887762) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676965)

I guess the rest of the world hasn't had Cuban missile bases a few km off their coast and those missiles pointed at them. It tends to lead to grudges being held, you see.

Re:A bit misleading (2, Insightful)

RollingThunder (88952) | more than 7 years ago | (#19677017)

You're right, the rest of the world has just had to put up with the US and Russia pointing enough missiles at each other for the residual damage to wipe out humanity multiple times over, for decades. We couldn't possibly understand how scary it was for you to have a few missiles in place in Cuba for a few months.

My prediction (1)

DataBroker (964208) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676831)

with Fidel teetering on death's edge, who knows what the future will bring


After looking at the Venezuela-Cuba-US love triangle, here's my guess:
  • Fidel Castro will die.
  • Raul Castro (the brother) will step into "the throne".
  • Hugo Chavez will "help out with the transition".
  • Raul (the puppet) will assist in badmouthing democracy (the US).
  • President Hillary Clinton will declare them all terrorists.
  • Hillary will *cough* maintain the ban on cigars imports.
  • Hugo will torment the US with oil.
  • Hillary will declare Cuba and Venezula commie-terrorists.
  • Hillary sends nukes to Venezuela.
  • Hillary sends troops to Cuba.
  • Cuba becomes a military base (subcontracted to Exxon).
  • New "military" robots begin working the irradiated Venezuelan oil mines.
  • Despite the new sources, petrol and Cuban cigar prices increase.

This is News How? (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676469)

While this may not seem like a big deal, the implications are interesting.
It's not a big deal. Everything made in America falls under these laws. Whether it be the corn we grow or the software written (in any part) or served within the United States. Even Windows (bullet 7) [microsoft.com] falls under these restrictions.

Yet, not too surprisingly, Windows has found its way into Cuba [foxnews.com] and I'm certain the OLPC will also be found there in mass quantities if it is indeed useful/popular. Physical devices may be harder to find there than software but you'll find them there.

This isn't news. The U.S. trade embargos have been in place on Cuba, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Sudan and Syria for a while now. Furthermore, if the laptops are made and assembled outside the U.S.

So let's get creative here, you make and manufacture the hardware outside the United States. Then you ship them to restricted countries (I think the parts are going to come from China [arstechnica.com] anyway). You leave it up to people inside Cuba or where ever to install the OLPC image. Who has violated the TOS? The citizens of the country who really don't give a damn what U.S. export laws they're breaking.

And if these laws are broken, who's going to enforce them? Redhat/Fedora? The U.S. government is going to show up and stop laptops from going to children? The U.S. government is going to shutdown a free open source software hosting site? I highly doubt it.

Re:This is News How? (3, Insightful)

trolltalk.com (1108067) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676605)

There's no reason someone can't also distribute the software in another country (like Cuba, Syria, Canuckistan (Canada), Germany, France, wherever ...) The "license" you agree to is not an exclusive license.

Contributor Grant of License. You hereby grant to Red Hat, Inc., on behalf of the Project, and to recipients of software distributed by the Project:

* (a) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works; and,

* (b) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable (subject to Section 3) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer your Contribution and derivative works thereof, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by you that are necessarily infringed by your Contribution alone or by combination of your Contribution with the work to which you submitted the Contribution. Except for the license granted in this section, you reserve all right, title and interest in and to your Contributions.

The internet has been known to route around damage, you know ...

Re:This is News How? (4, Informative)

rborek (563153) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676685)

Yet, not too surprisingly, Windows has found its way into Cuba
Most likely from Canada, which prohibits complying with the US Cuba export restrictions laws. Complying with US law with regards to Cuba can land you in jail for up to 5 years.

This is a really stupid question but... (1)

technoextreme (885694) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676487)

wouldn't the laptops themselves fall under United States export laws?

Re:This is a really stupid question but... (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676559)

How many laptop manufacturing plants are there in the US?

-Rick

Re:This is a really stupid question but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676613)

You do realise that one can purchase computer hardware and software outside the US right? There is nothing stopping another country from reselling these products to Cuba.

Ever? (2, Insightful)

Speare (84249) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676493)

So, no OLPC for Cuba, Syria and the like. Ever.

Yeah, like US Law has never ever changed. Remember trade embargoes during apartheid? Castro's ill, it's not clear who will be taking over. New high-level talks have opened with Syria recently also. Not saying that either of these things are likely to change next month, but "never" is pretty long.

No Habeus Corpus For BushCo, Ever (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676497)

Why is the world's largest crime syndicate [needlenose.com] refusing to
comply with the Congress?

Hopefully, they will spend their last days in the Fuhrerbunker [google.com] .

Pax,
Kilgore Trout, ACTIVIST

Who cares about Redhat? (2, Funny)

blueroses (1121591) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676545)

Just put Centos on them...

This is another triumph of politics... (3, Insightful)

Brainix (748988) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676557)

...over goodwill.

Re:This is another triumph of politics... (0, Flamebait)

Kohath (38547) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676681)

What's the reward for goodwill towards murderous enemies again? Does it make European elites send you a birthday card or something? Can we drink organic cocktails at the enlightenment club while turning a blind eye toward the suffering that results? Do we get a 2% discount on a Prius?

That's a little bit pessamistic (2, Interesting)

also-rr (980579) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676561)

One day the US will normalise relations with Cuba. The process might not happen until after the current generation of ex-Cubans in Forida is dead, but that's hardly _never_.

In the mean time they could just funnel shipments through a neutral third party. Creative accountants can manage to hide billions from the IRS, why shouldn't they be able to do something socially useful like vanish a couple of shipping containers of laptops.

Re:That's a little bit pessamistic (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19677043)

Actually, I expect Cuba to be a US Territory before 2010, and be granted statehood by 2015.

Mexican states will voluntarily start becoming part of the US by 2015, starting from the north and working down to Panama.

Canada will begin "blending" with the US at the same time, with the exception of Quebec, who will be the last non-US holdout on the North American continent.

In short, with the Quebec exception, the entire North American continent will be united under one federal government by 2030.

Quebec will likely join the EU.

The list can change (0, Troll)

Kohath (38547) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676567)

When the regimes that control those countries stop sponsoring terrorism, then I'm sure they'll be taken off the export list.

Re:The list can change (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676665)

In that case, I am afraid USA will be on that list for the foreseeable future

Re:The list can change (3, Insightful)

fredrated (639554) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676933)

The US sponsers a hell of a lot more terrorism than Cuba. For example, what exactly did you think 'shock and awe' was supposed to be? George Bush has now killed far more innocent people that Castro could if he lived to be 200.

Re:The list can change (1)

Kohath (38547) | more than 7 years ago | (#19677049)

I'm not sure what the point of this is supposed to be.

You hate the US. Congrats. I'm sure the people in your social circle will acknowledge you and understand that you agree with them. You'll all have mutual camaraderie toward each other and mutual contempt for the "unenlightened".

But beyond groupthink and contempt, what do you have to offer?

I wonder why Cuba and Syria never seem to make some marvelous new technological advances that the US can envy from afar?

Re:The list can change (2, Insightful)

clashdot (1034936) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676987)

One statement is true. Which one?
1) Cuba sponsors terrorism directed at the US.
2) The US sponsors terrorism directed at Cuba.

That'd teach those kids... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676579)

That'd teach those kids for living in the wrong countries.

Not news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676589)

Pssh... This isn't new. OLPC has always run a modified version of Fedora, so the export restrictions would always apply to it, if they didn't already apply for other reasons (like... hardware exports?).

This is purely an organizational note for people who want their software contributions considered for official distribution on the laptops. The laptops themselves will run whatever software the user wants, whether the author signed a Fedora repository agreement or not.

Not all submissions, just Etoys (2, Informative)

rabryan21 (1024373) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676599)

According to the linked sugar list message, this restriction only apply to submissions to the Etoys project (http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Etoys). This doesn't imply (as the summary states) that all submissions to the OLPC project must be hosted on Fedora.

Re:Not all submissions, just Etoys (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676903)

Agreed... This is stupid. If the submitter actually read the article, he'd see that only projects distributed as .rpms have to be hosted at Fedora. And if he was familiar with the OLPC project, he'd know that almost all the OLPC software is *not* in .rpms -- it's in various source code repositories (git, svn, etc.). EToys is unique because it's distributed as a large Squeak (SmallTalk) image, so it has to be distributed in binary form.

Syria, fine. Cuba? Come on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676663)

Isn't it about time the US government got over their obsession with Cuba? The cold war is over, and the West won. Is there really any need to keep up this ridiculous charade of continued sanctions against Cuba? It's not like they're huge hypocrites about it anyway: how many politicians have smoked a Cuban cigar? How many US citizens now benefit from Cuban developed vaccines?

The US does business with far worse regimes on a daily basis. Time to live and let live.

yay (1, Insightful)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676677)

OLPC worse and worse everyday

Don't worry about Cuba, I am seeing a bunch of "Bolivarian computers" in their future...

Re:yay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676819)

Just how far into the future? When will Bolivaria become a country?

CUBA (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676699)

GOODING JR.

Is fedora still free as in freedom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676705)

Are this behavior and legal situation compatible with the no restrictions provisions of the GPL?

Mod parent up. (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676799)

This is an interesting question, and I too would like to know the answer. I wonder what RMS thinks of this.

what's an OLPC (0, Troll)

wardk (3037) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676735)

For those of us not in the Linux fanboy club, could someone provide an explanation as to what OLPC actually stands for?

Bonus answer would by why anyone would give a rat's behind that Syria can't participate?

I am SURE Syria is just BUSTING at the SEAMS with Open Source developers making huge contributions to the source tree, right? so sad all their hopes and dreams are dashed by US policy.

Maybe Syria and Cuba can sign up and work on Red Flag Linux?

Re:what's an OLPC (1)

coren2000 (788204) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676871)

One Laptop Per Child

The US will make sure that children will suffer for their parents disagreements.

Re:what's an OLPC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676909)

One-Laptop-Per-Child A group effort to provide very low-cost laptops for educational use in developing countries.

Middle men? (1)

Sparr0 (451780) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676761)

Why can't "we" export the software to [insert country here], and the reseller there can do whatever they want with it, including sending it to Cuba?

Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676803)

They really did piss Kennedy off didn't they...

It violates the GPL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676851)

GPL'd code can't be encumbered by restrictions. So, if OLPC distributes Linux code they can't do it in a manner that will be encumbered by extra restrictions.

OLPC has a problem.

Sanctions work so well- (1)

IWantMoreSpamPlease (571972) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676935)

Any idea how many US products are over there in Cuba and Syria?

I'll give you a hint, lots.

Just because some provision says "no", doesn't make it so

No OLPCs for Cuba, Ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19676943)

because as we all know Fidel Castro is immortal.

So? (1)

DeLanceS (187574) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676947)

You say this like it is a bad thing. The less IT infrastructure these repressive regimes have the better. I personally think the embargo against Cuba at this point is counter-productive, but I am not going to cry because they can't use this software either.

So, why do they need an OLPC? (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 7 years ago | (#19676999)

We know that the export laws work perfectly, and no third party sources will ever resell. This is why we never see any American made weapons in these countries. And this is why we never see any cuban cigars, especially among the so called patriots, in America.

What is true is that none of these machines will be sold directly to such a country, and therefore will not be as prevalent as other countries, assuming that these machines are going to prevalent anywhere. What it also means is that extraneous third parties are going to cut off the sale of these machines.

Of course if we believe that these countries are lawless and without manners, then why do they need the OLPC anyway? All the computers are made in China, a fellow red label state, and if the chinese are willing to ship poisoned food to the States, I see no reason why they would not ship reliable computers to cuba. Likewise, if cuba or syria or any of these countries run unlicensed copies of windows and other software, who is going to stop them. The copyright people are notorious about preferring soft target hard targets, so they are unlikely to mount an offensive against so-called renegade countries.

So, in the end, given their outlaw status, I bet these countries could get a fully loaded MS Windows PC cheaper than they could an stripped down OLPC.

Seems to me (1)

LarryfromMalvern (1121603) | more than 7 years ago | (#19677033)

Those are exactly the places you want computers - especially for the poor. The one commodity these government are having a difficult time controlling is information.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?