Blogs

TO SUCCEED IN LIFE AND TO ACHIEVE RESULTS , YOU MUST UNDERSTAND AND MASTER THREE MIGHTY FORCES - DESIRE , BELIEF AND EXPECTATIONS.

RESEARCH IN EVERY FIELD IS THE DESIRE TO GET EVERYTHING PERFECT.
DEVELOPING FORMULAS AND ENTRIES MAKE YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE ON RIGHT PATH
EXPECTATIONS WILL ALLOW YOU TO MAKE PROPER SUGGESTIONS, A VERY IMPORTANT FACE OF RESEARCH WHICH IS A PROFF OF YOUR SUCCESS.

Resourses says that around 80% of the college students use social media in different plateforms.

and approximately 70% population using social media is around age ranging from 13 to 34 year, which is a target student population.

I believe this plateform (Social media) can be very useful if can be used for educational purpose..

"Please don't call GNU 'Linux'," says Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software Foundation. In this interview, he also asks readers whether they will fight for freedom or be too lazy to resist.

You launched the GNU Project in September 1983 to create a free Unix-like operating system, and have been the project's lead architect and organizer since then. Why did you start it in the first place? Back then it was already clear that software was becoming proprietary?

Stallman: In 1983, all operating systems were proprietary, non-free software. It was impossible to buy a computer and use it in freedom. Proprietary software keeps the users divided and helpless, by forbidding them to share it and denying them the source code to change it. The only way I could use computers in freedom was to develop another operating system and make it free software. I announced the plan in September 1983, and began development of the GNU system in January 1984.

On Feb. 3, 1976, Bill Gates wrote his famous "open letter to hobbyists" where he stated that software should be paid [for] just like hardware. Did you read that manifesto at the time? What was your impression back then?

Stallman: I never heard of it at the time. I was not a hobbyist, I was a system developer employed at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab. I had little interest in 16-bit microcomputers, because the lab's PDP-10, with a memory equivalent to 2.5 megabytes, was much more fun. Pascal is both weak and inelegant compared with Lisp, our high-level language, and for things that had to be fast, assembler language was more flexible.

I don't know how I would have reacted at that time if I had seen that memo. My experience at the AI lab had taught me to appreciate the spirit of sharing and free software, but I had not yet come to the conclusion that non-free (proprietary) software was an injustice. In 1976 I did not use any non-free software. It was only in 1977, when Emacs was ported to the non-free Twenex time-sharing system that I started to experience the nastiness of proprietary software. After that, I needed time to recognize this as an ethical and political issue.

What do you think about intellectual property?

Stallman: I am careful not to use that confusing term in my thoughts, because it does not refer to a coherent thing, although it misleadingly appears to. The term lumps together laws that raise totally different issues, as if they were one subject.

Copyrights exist, and I have opinions about copyright law. Patents also exist, but patent law is almost completely different from copyright law. My opinions about patent law are also completely different from my opinions about copyright law. Trademark law exists too and it has nothing at all in common with copyright law or patent law. If you want to think clearly about any of these laws, the first step is firmly insisting on treating them as three different subjects.

If you say something about "intellectual property," you are trying to generalize about three laws that are totally different. Whatever you say will be a foolish over-generalization, because that term only leads to such. I've decided to avoid that pitfall by never using the term. [See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html for more explanation.
What's more important to you, GNU's huge user base or its large developer base?

Stallman: I appreciate them both, but neither is what matters most. We didn't develop GNU just to make it a technical triumph, or just to have a success. Our goal was to win freedom, for ourselves and for you.

What's important about GNU is that it provides a way to use computers in freedom. But this achievement is precarious. There are hundreds of GNU/Linux distros, and nearly all include some non-free software.

In 1992, GNU/Linux made it possible for the first time to use a PC and keep your freedom. By 2000, ironically, every version of GNU/Linux included non-free software and thus invited users to surrender their freedom by installing some. Today, I am glad to say, the Ututo and gNewSense distributions are 100 percent free software.

After so many years, are you finally seeing the end of the tunnel, the time when free software will regain its original place, by dominating servers during the next decade?

Stallman: Server operators should have freedom, of course, but the computers that directly affect most users' freedom are the computers they type on. Those are the computers where the adoption of free software is most important. With proprietary operating systems increasingly designed to restrict and control the user, with digital "restrictions" management, their users are subjugated even more now than before. If you don't want chains on you hand and foot, your only escape is to switch to a free operating system.

People use terms like "free software" and "open source" as if they were the same thing. Is that right?

Stallman: In terms of ideas, free software and open source are as different as could be. Free software is a political movement; open source is a development model.

The free software movement is concerned with ethical and social values. Our goal is to win, for computer users, the freedom to cooperate and control your own computing. Therefore, you should have these four essential freedoms for each program you use:

0. To run the program as you wish. 1. To study the source code and change it so the program does what you wish. 2. To redistribute exact copies when you wish, either giving them away or selling them. 3. To distribute copies of your modified versions when you wish.

The term "open source" was promoted in 1998 by people that did not want to say "free" or "freedom." They associated their term with a philosophy that cites only values of practical convenience.

Supporters of open source (which I am not) promote a "development model" in which users participate in development, claiming that this typically makes software "better" -- and when they say "better", they mean that only in a technical sense. By using the term that way, implicitly, they say that only practical convenience matters -- not your freedom.

I don't say they are wrong, but they are missing the point. If you neglect the values of freedom and social solidarity, and appreciate only powerful reliable software, you are making a terrible mistake.
The same happens with Linux, code for which was released in 1991. People used to call Linux a synonym for GNU, much like Windows became a synonym for the PC operating system. But they are not the same thing, are they?

Stallman: I'm not sure what you mean by "the same." Windows is the official name (not just a synonym) for a user-subjugating, proprietary operating system developed by Microsoft. Linux, however, is not an operating system, just a piece of one. Linux is a kernel: the component of an operating system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. It was first released in 1991 as non-free software: its license did not allow commercial distribution.
In 1984, I launched the development of the GNU operating system, whose goal was to be free software and thus permit users to run computers and have freedom. The GNU Project undertook a job so big that even most of my friends said it was impossible. In 1992, the GNU system was complete except for the kernel. (Our own kernel project, started in 1990, was going slowly.) In February 1992, Linus Torvalds changed the license of Linux, making it free software.

The kernel Linux filled the last major gap in GNU; the combination, GNU/Linux, was the first free operating system that could run on a PC. The system started out as GNU with Linux added. Please don't call it "Linux;" if you do that, you give the principal developer none of the credit. Please call it "GNU/Linux" and give us equal mention.

The Free Software Foundation has recently issued the second draft of the GNU general public license version 3 (GPLv3). What are its enhancements and what users could expect from adopting it?

Stallman: We published the official, final text of GPL version 3 in June, and many programs have since been released under it. The basic goal of the GNU General Public License is the same in version 3 as it always was: defend the freedom of all the users. The changes are in the details.

Linus Torvalds told he thinks "the GPLv2 is a superior license," but there's "something like 50 different open-source licenses, and in the end, the GPLv3 is just another one." Does Linus collaborate with you or GNU on free software development?

Stallman: The fact that Torvalds says "open source" instead of "free software" shows where he is coming from. I wrote the GNU GPL to defend freedom for all users of all versions of a program. I developed version 3 to do that job better and protect against new threats.

Torvalds says he rejects this goal; that's probably why he doesn't appreciate GPL version 3. I respect his right to express his views, even though I think they are foolish. However, if you don't want to lose your freedom, you had better not follow him.

Microsoft has recently claimed that free software like Linux, OpenOffice and some e-mail programs violate 235 of its patents. But Microsoft also said it won't sue for now. Is this the start of a new legal nightmare?

Stallman: Software patents - in those countries foolish enough to authorize them - are a legal nightmare for all software developers. About half of all patents in any field belong to mega-corporations, which gives them a chokehold on the technology. In countries that allow software patents, that happens in software too.

Last July 5th, Microsoft published the following statement: "While there have been some claims that Microsoft's distribution of certificates for Novell support services, under our interoperability collaboration with Novell, constitutes acceptance of the GPLv3 license, we do not believe that such claims have a valid legal basis under contract, intellectual property, or any other law." Are they preparing for battle?

Stallman: Microsoft is trying to deny that their contract with Novell means what it says. This shows that our efforts in GPLv3 to make their contract backfire against Microsoft are working. I believe Novell disagrees with Microsoft about this point, and says that the deal does apply to software under GPL version 3.

Their use of the term "intellectual property" is part of the propaganda. It is meant to discourage you from focusing on the specific law, patent law, which they have tried to use to prohibit free software. For instance, they don't want Brazilians to think, "If Microsoft wants to use software patents to obtain a government-imposed monopoly over operating system software, why should Brazil give them the chance to do so? Brazil should not authorize software patents."

Do you think that the free software community could win this war against Microsoft?

Stallman: Nobody knows who will win this fight, because the outcome depends on you and the readers. Will you fight for freedom? Will you reject Windows and MacOS and other non-free software, and switch to GNU/Linux? Or will you be too lazy to resist?

Some analysts are saying this kind of agreement between Microsoft and Novell is positive for consumers and can also popularize free software. That's because consumers will have more support from vendors in terms of interoperability and could run their applications in a better way. Do you agree with these arguments?

Stallman: That's like the argument that smoking tobacco is good for your health because it will help you lose weight. I don't know whether their claim about popularity is true in a narrow sense, but I'm sure it misses the point. It doesn't matter how popular GNU/Linux gets, if it fails to give you freedom. Microsoft's aim, in the deal with Novell, was to make people scared to run GNU/Linux without paying Microsoft for permission. That is why we designed GPLv3 to make it backfire.

As for interoperability, all we need to achieve full interoperability is for proprietary software developers to stop obstructing it.

With free software, the users are in control. Most of the time, users want interoperability, and when the software is free, they get what they want. With non-free software, the developer controls the users. The developer permits interoperability when that suits the developer; what the users want is beside the point.

Microsoft has frequently imposed non-interoperability; now, for example, it promotes the patented bogus "standard" OOXML instead of supporting Open Document Format. Microsoft believes it is so powerful that it can design an incompatible format, create obstacles to its implementation by others, and pressure most users to switch to it. Do you think users are really as foolish as Microsoft predicts?

1 .  open command prompt by typing cmd . And hit enter key in dialgue box (RUN) .

2 . Type net user  and hit enter

            it will display the list of users account .

3. again type net user account name ( administrator) * and press enter key

it will ask for you for a type a new password  type the password and press enter key .

again it will ask you for a retype password  and press enter key .

                        Remember please try this in home pc not in college pc or official pc

  sometimes it will give you an error like system 5 error

Hi everybody!

The Spoken Tutorial team has put together the basic level tutorials for LaTeX, Scilab, Linux, Python, Orca, Spoken Tutorail Technology and Text Companion Project. 

If anyone wishes to get a copy of these, please visit our lab or write to us.  The contact details are available on Contact Us tab.

Spoken tutorial

Apart from free educational resources, many free/open-source packages and programmes that liberate/strengthen the educational infrastructure are in place- like the open-source statistical package ‘R', the text-processing/type-setting language LaTex and the like. Though many of these packages are quite useful and can boost the efficiency of the pedagogic process, the academic fraternity is yet to adapt them fully. A possible reason could be lack of appropriate tutorials on such programmes. This makes the spoken tutorial project (http://spoken-tutorial.org/) quite relevant and timely. Here you will find several spoken tutorials on various open source software in English and other Indian regional languages. Tutorials on open source packages such as LaTex and Python (a programming language) can be accessed from this service. The LaTex tutorial study plan includes lessons such as ‘LaTex installation', ‘letter writing', ‘report writing', ‘Mathematical equations' and so on.

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/internet/article861608.ece

The 13th ISTE Students National Convention was held at Jaipur Engineering College, Kukas, Jaipur (Rajasthan) during 2-3 October, 2010. The theme of the Convention was Nurturing Creativity Among Potential Professionals Through Technical Education.

The Spoken Tutorial team from IIT Bombay set up a stall to spread awareness about the project.  The main agenda was to recruit Campus Ambassadors for the project who would be the face of the Spoken Tutorial Project in their respective colleges.  The response at the stall was very good.  Students and faculty alike, expressed great interest in the project.  They also enquired about how they could contribute.

The Campus Ambassador Programme managed to attract around 25 enthusiastic candidates.  Around 8-10 were shortlisted from amongst these.  The word continues to spread and we have received some more online submissions from other students.
For more information click on this link Campus Ambassador Programme

Some pics have been loaded on Spoken Tutorial Album

http://loksatta.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=91452:2...

We made it to the front page of Times of India, Sunday Edition, 16th May, 2010!!!

Read about us in the links below -

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Virtual-IITs-Top-degrees-a-click-away/articleshow/5935764.cms

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Search&Source=Find&Key=TOIM/2010/05/16/3/Ar00300.xml&CollName=TOI_MUMBAI_DAILY_2009&DOCID=257127&Keyword=(%3Cmany%3E%3Cstem%3EIIT)&skin=TOINEW&AppName=1&PageLabel=3%20&ViewMode=HTML&GZ=T

How to write a script for a Spoken Tutorial - Workshop was held at IIT Bombay on the 1st of April, 2010.  Most of the participants were teachers and student-teachers from a B.Ed college in Mumbai.  6-8 members from the FOSSEE Team, IIT Bombay also attended.  Few of the participants had come from out of Mumbai as well!

Dr. J.Shah, the domain expert for Netlogo and Dr. Manojendu, the domain expert for Geogebra had kindly agreed to be present at the workshop.  Our own senior faculty member, Prof. Kannan Moudgalya, conducted the workshop, along with his team.  The morning session was held in the A1-A2 studio, CDEEP, Mathematics Bldg.

The day began with an introduction to Spoken Tutorials followed by a presentation on script-writing.  After the presentation, the participants were divided into teams of 3 each.  The hands-on script writing session was about to begin.  The participants had to choose a topic on which to write the script.  The domains given were Netlogo, Geogebra and Python.  Before lunch, most teams were ready with their scripts.

After a sumptuous lunch at Gulmohar, the teams proceeded to the KReSIT Seminar Hall for the recording session.  Teams were given time to finalise their scripts.  After this, the hands-session on recording, which involves screencasting and narration, began.  Each team was asked to record their spoken tutorial in front of the other participants.  Constructive feedback on the same was given immediately by the domain experts.  Tips on improvising the scripts and pedagogy were also given.  This exercise benefitted all the participants.

The participants were an enthusiastic lot, ready to learn a new technology.  Even though they were teachers themselves, they willingly "learnt" and participated enthusiastically in the process of creation of Spoken Tutorials.  The feedback from them was overwhelming.  All of them left with a feeling of achievement and empowerment.  The Spoken Tutorial Workshop was truly a success!!!