4 ms·
The title makes this out to be worse than it actually is: SA didn't actually ban all software under permissive licenses, but requires the use of non-free softwa
by all2well 13y ago
The title makes this out to be worse than it actually is: SA didn't actually ban all software under permissive licenses, but requires the use of non-free software to complete its courses. Though I'm not extremely in-tune with SA politics/education, I can't imagine they have much money, making it all the stranger that they'd lock themselves into licensing with Microsoft instead of using free software.
- tonteldoos 13y agoRe the title: yes, and no. At first glance it seems alarmist, but if you take into account the wider implications (no exposure to free alternatives, extra cost to a population mired in poverty, and general lack of exposure to IT for large parts of the population), it's not too far from the truth. Funding for the education department has been increased drastically over the last decade or so, but misappropriation of funds, mismanagement, corruption, ineptitude, geographical separation, lack of proper oversight, and just the sheer pressure on the system in terms of the amount of learners it needs to support means this is just another thing that reduces the value for the learners from tax money.