Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 233 posts

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#31

Post by dependenttypes »

md5person wrote: post #22

What's wrong with having to pay for software? Or learning to accept that some software is proprietary? Or even with learning to use the right tool for the job, even if that "right tool" may sometimes come at a cost? Students are required to pay for their education at MIT. Were the costs of this course offset with the costs of the non-free software used in an otherwise "standard course"? People put immense effort into…

> And in many cases, proprietary/commercial software really does outperform the equivalent FOSS/Libre solution

And in most cases, it does not. Why are we teaching people to reach out for the suboptimal tools in these situations?

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#32

Post by md5person »

logane wrote: post #24
md5person wrote: post #22

What's wrong with having to pay for software? Or learning to accept that some software is proprietary? Or even with learning to use the right tool for the job, even if that "right tool" may sometimes come at a cost? Students are required to pay for their education at MIT. Were the costs of this course offset with the costs of the non-free software used in an otherwise "standard course"? People put immense effort into…

Sussman means free as in freedom, not free as in beer :) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software )

> "Sussman means free as in freedom, not free as in beer :) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software)"

Sure, but conveniently enough, the software listed in the parent article [0] all happens to be "free as in beer".

What examples of "free as in freedom, but we had to pay for it before we could use it" software was used during the course?

[0] https://www.gnu.org/education/teaching-my-mit-classes-with-o...

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#33

Post by dependenttypes »

raister wrote: post #20

I will probably get downvoted a lot, and this is more or less pertinent to this, so here's a rant: I am quite sick to make software work these days: someone coded something using Python3.6 and numpy1.18.5 then three years pass. Now, it's Python3.8.9 and the software is incompatible with it, so now I have to download Python3.6.5 (not Python 3.6.1) e try to make things work. But then TLS/SSL was discontinued and I'm ge…

> I will probably get downvoted a lot

Because this is not relevant with the topic at all?

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#34

Post by kkylin »

p4bl0 wrote: post #26

That is nice and all but I fail to see how it is particular: the situation described here is also what me and most of my colleagues did during this period (except we used instances of these software hosted by our own university). I believe it is the same in most universities.

I think most universities (MIT included, and certainly mine) went directly to Zoom or something like it. GJS wanted to show you can do this with FOSS.

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#35

Post by wiz21c »

badsectoracula wrote: post #8
gcatalfamo wrote: post #4

While commendable, I don’t think this approach is useful. I also had a professor that only wanted to use FOSS for its students but the reality is that university should prepare - at least to a certain degree - for work. The radicalization of this approach leads to students that land their first job without knowing how enterprise commercial software work lacking therefore a very useful entry level skill.

I do not think the job of universities is to teach how to use any specific piece of software - be it enterprise, commercial, proprietary, free or not. That software changes and often different between companies, so what should be learned is knowledge that applies regardless of software. And TBH i do not see why a university should provide free (or worse, paid[0]) advertisement material for a commercial product. [0] i…

It is the job of university to participate in what our future will be. In that sense, I'm all for universities to push student in a direction or in another (provided that direction doesn't put them in difficulty later in their live).

IMHO, you don't advertise free software. Because free software is not commercial per se. Advertisement is for commercial products (and with a bit of sarcasm, I'd say that most commercial software need advertisement either because they don't have enough value either because they just want to be bigger than the other; in both case, the mankind is not well served).

>>> the taxpayers paid money to have their children advertised to

spot on.

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#36

Post by zelphirkalt »

raister wrote: post #20

I will probably get downvoted a lot, and this is more or less pertinent to this, so here's a rant: I am quite sick to make software work these days: someone coded something using Python3.6 and numpy1.18.5 then three years pass. Now, it's Python3.8.9 and the software is incompatible with it, so now I have to download Python3.6.5 (not Python 3.6.1) e try to make things work. But then TLS/SSL was discontinued and I'm ge…

I think an example might be in order, because the case you mentioned sound like a quite unlikely case. Python 3.6 had some of the most frequently code affecting changes of how one writes code in Python, while 3.8 did not have that much of frequently code affecting changes in my experience. Although I have not used async much yet. I am using Python almost every day at the job and have no issue with 3.8 at all and also did not have to port anything, although writing for 3.6 before. I think they are doing a great job of avoiding incompatibilities.

For the case of numpy, some pretty obscure functions must have been used then. Usually there will be deprecation warnings ahead of time and a bit ofsearching will clear up, what you should use instead, going with later versions. Also they don't simply remove the dot product or something.

So that's why I think an example would help your post and make people understand that specific case.

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#37

Post by kleiba »

kkylin wrote: post #34
p4bl0 wrote: post #26

That is nice and all but I fail to see how it is particular: the situation described here is also what me and most of my colleagues did during this period (except we used instances of these software hosted by our own university). I believe it is the same in most universities.

I think most universities (MIT included, and certainly mine) went directly to Zoom or something like it. GJS wanted to show you can do this with FOSS.

In my university, it's Microsoft all the way.

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#38

Post by gspr »

md5person wrote: post #32
logane wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sussman means free as in freedom, not free as in beer :) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software )

> "Sussman means free as in freedom, not free as in beer :) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software)" Sure, but conveniently enough, the software listed in the parent article [0] all happens to be "free as in beer". What examples of "free as in freedom, but we had to pay for it before we could use it" software was used during the course? [0] https://www.gnu.org/education/teaching-my-mit-classes-with-o...

I'm struggling to understand your reasoning. If the author had said "I only drink fair-trade coffee" would you also object if it happens to be the case that the fair-trade coffee is the cheapest type at his local supermarket?

Re: Teaching my MIT classes with only free/libre software

#39

Post by kleiba »

md5person wrote: post #32
logane wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sussman means free as in freedom, not free as in beer :) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software )

> "Sussman means free as in freedom, not free as in beer :) (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software)" Sure, but conveniently enough, the software listed in the parent article [0] all happens to be "free as in beer". What examples of "free as in freedom, but we had to pay for it before we could use it" software was used during the course? [0] https://www.gnu.org/education/teaching-my-mit-classes-with-o...

> What examples of "free as in freedom, but we had to pay for it before we could use it" software was used during the course?

None. But I really don't get your point.

Post reply on HN