[CA | CN | DE | EN | FR | JA | ES | KO | PT | ZH]

Welcome to another issue of the Brave GNU World. This time focussed on current political events as many things are currently taking place that most likely remained unnoticed by many readers, as they hardly get the mass media attention that their importance would suggest.

欢迎来到另一期的《勇敢 GNU 世界》。由於目前正在发生的许多事，很有可能仍然没有被许多读者注意到〈因为它们很难如同它们本身的重要性般地，受到大众媒体的注意〉，所以这一次会把焦点放在目前的政治事件。

UDPKIT（通过网络的 IP/UDP 送出字串的命令列工具）

But before we go into politics at least one technical project shall be introduced: UDPKIT [5] by Sylvain Nahas from France. UDPKIT offers two commandline tools that may be small but offer quite a bit, because they allow sending strings via IP/UDP over the network.

但是在我们进入政治议题之前，至少有个技术工程应该要被介绍到：由来自法国的 Sylvain Nahas 所完成的 UDPKIT [5] 。 UDPKIT 提供了两个可能很小，但是却很有用的命令列工具，因为它们允许经由通过网络的 IP/UDP 送出字串。

For those readers that have not spent a lot of time dealing with networks, a brief introduction should be given, it seems. The two most popular protocols for data transmission in the network are TCP and UDP.

看来应该要作一简短的介绍，给那些并没有花去许多时间来处理网络的读者。两个在网络上最受欢迎的资料传输协定是 TCP 和 UDP 。

TCP stands for "Transmission Control Protocol" and is a connection oriented protocol for which a dedicated link is created between two points, used and then terminated. A major advantage of this protocol is reliability, as it contains means for resubmission in case of transmission problems and such.

TCP 指的是「传输控制协定」（Transmission Control Protocol），并且是一种「连接」导向的协定，〔作用的〕方式是：一个专用的链接会在两个点间建立起来，用过之后，然后结束。这份协定的一个主要优势在於可靠性，因为在传输问题以及像是这样〔的问题发生〕时，它包含了「重新提出」（resubmission）的方式【也就是，一定给你送到】。

UDP means "User Datagram Protocol" and is a connectionless protocol. Data transmitted by UDP can be read by an unlimited amount of recipients, but the protocol does not offer means of making sure that the data was received anywhere at all.

UDP 是指「使用者资料封包协定」（User Datagram Protocol），并且是一种「非连接」的协定。由 UDP 传输的资料可以被一个不受限制数量的接收端（recipients）阅读到，但是协定却也没有提供了「确定资料被哪个地方所接收到」的方式。

This obviously makes the protocol less reliable, but also offers advantages in some situations. Sylvain Nahas for instance has an internal network in which one of his machines does not have monitor or keyboard. That machine is only turned on occasionally, but it should always be turned off whenever his workplace machine is turned off.

这显然使得这份协定较不可靠，不过〔它〕也提供了在某些情况下的优势。举例来说 Sylvain Nahas 有一个内部网络，其中一台他的电脑并没有萤幕或键盘。那台电脑偶尔才会开机，但是不管何时，只要他的工作电脑关机的话，它就一定要关机。

With UDPKIT his regular work machine can post a message to the network before shutting down. Is the other machine turned on, it will see the message and also shut down. Otherwise the message will disappear into the void.

有了 UDPKIT ，他的常用电脑就可以在完全关机之前发出一份讯息到网络上。如果另一台电脑已经开了机，它会看到那讯息并且也关机。不然那讯息会消失於无形之中。

In comparison: When using TCP as protocol, the workplace machine would try to initiate a connection to the other machine. Is that machine available, there should be no major differences. In case it is not turned on, however, the workplace machine will normally wait some time for the other machine to reply/become available.

比较一下：当使用 TCP 作为协定时，工作电脑会试著启始到另一台机器的连接。如果那台机器在那，那么就不会有什么大差别。然而如果它没有开机，工作电脑正常来说会「等待另一台电脑回覆〔讯息〕」或「变得可以取得」一段时间。

So UDPKIT is specifically useful in situations where messages should be sent unspecifically without having to know where or whether at all they are being received. The situation is somewhat similar to radio, where it is also not clear who hears a message or whether it has been heard at all.

所以 UDPKIT 在「讯息应该不特定地被送出，而不必知道它们在哪或是否真的被接收到」的情况下特别有用。这情况有点类似广播：它也不清楚谁有听到讯息，或是它是否真的有被听到。

In fact the project was initiated on idea of a radio amateur who was looking for such a project on a French Debian list and didn't find one. So Sylvain decided to write it.

事实上这个工程是由於「一个广播业余爱好者在法文的 Debian 列表中寻找像是这样的工程而找不到」的想法而启始的。因此 Sylvain 决定开始来撰写它。

UDPKIT was written in ISO C, keeping an eye on the classic Unix paradigm, providing two powerful tools that can be used on the commandline or within shell scripts. In the eyes of its author, this is a major advantage of the project.

UDPKIT 是以 ISO C 撰写而成的，〔这是为了〕把眼光摆在经典的 Unix 典型（paradigm），提供了两个「可以被用在命令列或在外壳脚本中」的有用工具。从它的作者的眼光来看，这是这个工程的一个主要优势。

The project is published as Free Software under the GNU General Public License (GPL) and is already quite stable in the current version 0.6. So for the future, plans are to internationalize the project and implement CRC checksums. Also a Debian package will hopefully be provided soon.

这工程是在 GNU General Public License (GPL) 下公开作为自由软件，并且目前的 0.6 版也已经非常稳定了。对於未来，有「国际化这个工程」【中文版 README 已经可以取得】以及「实现 CRC checksums」的打算。另外，非常可能也会很快地提供出一个 Debian 包。

Help with all these tasks and particularly more testing is very welcome.

对於所有这些任务的帮忙，特别是更多的测试，都是非常欢迎的。

信息社会世界高峰会（World Summit on the Information Society; WSIS）

The earth summit "UN Conference on Environment and Development", often known simply as Rio-Conference, is certainly known to many people from the press and evening news. Less known is the "World Summit on the Information Society" (WSIS) [6], which is currently preparing itself to define the structures of the global knowledge and information society.

地球高峰会「联合国环境与发展会议」（UN Conference on Environment and Development）〈通常被简单地认识成「里约会议」（Rio-Conference）〉肯定经由报章杂志和夜间新闻而为许多人们所熟知。较不被认识的是「信息社会世界高峰会」（World Summit on the Information Society; WSIS） [6] ，它目前正在准备好它自己，以定义出全球知识以及信息社会的结构。

But the question of control about, access to and participation in knowledge will seminally shape the future of human society. Although people may rightly say that these questions are secondary as long as the basic supply in terms of food or medicine is not secured, the issue will become essential as soon as that minimum supply becomes reality.

有关於「获取（access to）与参与（participation in）知识」的控制问题，将会具有发展性地形塑人类社会的外貌。虽然人们也许可以正确地说：「只要以食物或医疗的形式表达的基本供给还未获得保障，这些问题都只是次要的了」，但是一旦最小供给变成了事实，这个议题就会变成了必要〔的事〕了。

Also access to the knowledge can sometimes help providing that basic supply. Or as Louise Szente from Africa said: "Woe is the life of the modern day student living in 'Darkest Africa' for obviously we are still being kept in the slave quarters of the world. Harsh words? My friends, try and live in a society where such Acts as the Intellectual Property Acts of the world impedes your advancement in life."

「获取知识」有时候也可以帮助提供那基本的供给。或是如同来自非洲的 Louise Szente 所说：「现今居住在『黑暗非洲』的学生，〔其〕生命真是可悲啊，因为我们仍然被维持在世界的奴隶地域之中。〔很〕严苛的字眼〔吗〕？我的朋友们，尝试并且住在一个『像是知识产权法的法案，会阻止你在生命中的进步』的社会之中吧。」

This is a quote from a study by Prof. Alan Story, which was written for the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights [7]. The commission went back to the whitepaper "Eliminating World Poverty: Making Globalisation Work for the Poor" of the UK government and was dealing centrally with the question of developing and least-developed countries.

这里是来自 Alan Story 教授为「知识产权委员会」 [7] 所写的一份研究的引用。委员会回到了英国政府的《消除世界贫穷：让全球化为贫穷而做》，并且主要是来处理开发中以及未开发国家的问题。

The study of Prof. Alan Story provided the basis for discussion of the expert workshop "Copyright, Software and the Internet" for that commission. If you are interested in the details, the protocols of the workshops, the studies and the final result are still online on the commission web site. [7]

Alan Story 教授的研究提供了给那个委员会的《版权、软件、与互联网》专家工作组作为讨论的基础。如果你对於细节有兴趣〔的话〕，工作组的议定书、这份研究、以及最终的结论仍然在委员会的网站在线。 [7]

So now the visions and rules of the information and knowledge society should be fixed in a global context until 2005. Deviating from that consensus later on national level may become very hard, so the reverberations of this summit will be with us for some time.

所以现在关於「信息与知识社会的展望和规则」直到二零零五年〔以前〕，在全球的背景之下应该是固定了。稍后要在国家的层级上偏离那项共识也许会变得很难，所以这一次高峰会的〔直接〕反响将会跟随著我们一段时间。

The WSIS is split into two phases. The first phase is to take place December 10th-12th in Geneva this year, the second phase July 15th-18th 2005 in Tunis. In preparation of the summit in Geneva there were already two preparatory conferences, the so-called "PrepCom"s. The last preparatory conference (PrepCom-3) will take place September 15th-26th in Geneva.

WSIS 现在分成两个阶段。第一个阶段今年十二月十日到十二日在日内瓦【瑞士】举行，第二阶段〔则是〕在二零零五年七月十五日到十八日於突尼斯【突尼西亚首都】〔举行〕。为了准备在日内瓦的高峰会，已经举办过两次准备性会议了〈所谓的「会前会」（PrepCom）〉。最后一次准备性会议（第三次会前会）将会在九月十五日到廿六日於日内瓦举办。

Between these preparatory conferences there are also working conferences, so-called "intersessional meetings" in which major work on the documents is done. The last of these intersessional meetings took place July 15th-18th in Paris, hosted by the UNESCO, and was to get the documents into a shorter, more concise and clear form, because they had become bloated and unreadable by numerous comments and addendums.

介於这些准备性会议之间，也有一些工作会议，〔也就是〕所谓的「会期间会面」（intersessional meetings），〔这些就〕是文档的主要工作完成的地方。最后一次这些个会期间会面〔已经〕在七月十五日到十八日於巴黎举办〔过了〕，它是由 UNESCO 所主办的，〔目的〕在於使文档成为更短、更简洁、以及更清楚的形式，因为它们已经〔过於〕膨胀，并且由於大量的注解和补遗而变得无法阅读。

As an event of the United Nations, only governments are admitted as fully accredited participants of the WSIS and the connected conferences. Although it seems relatively common in this context to have emissaries of companies appear as part of the governmental delegations. Especially in very complex areas requiring a lot of specific knowledge the large companies usually have a lot of freedom to implement their policies.

作为联合国的一个事件，只有政府才被允许作为 WSIS 完全受到认可的参与者，〔也〕才能参与会议。虽然在这个范畴内看起来「有公司的代表〔参与〕」相对来说较为一般性，〔但是〕似乎〔这〕是作为政府委任的一部份。特别是在需要大量的特定知识的相当复杂的领域中，大公司通常拥有〔较〕大的自由来实现它们的政策。

According to inside information, it is for instance the case that in another forum on UN level, the WIPO ("World Intellectual Propert Organization"), the U.S. delegation regularly contains a significant amount of direct Microsoft representatives.

根据内部信息〔来源〕，以在另一个联合国层次的论坛「世界知识产权组织」【http://www.wipo.org/cn/index.html】（World Intellectual Propert Organization; WIPO）为例，美国的委任〔名单〕中包含了数量可观的微软直接代表。

Small and medium sized enterprises only have very limited influence through the industry associations, in which the large companies again have most influence.

经由产业商会的中小型企业只有非常有限的影响力，再一次地，大公司拥有最多影响力。

The third leg of the political process are the so-called civil society. Generally, this term includes all non-governmental organizations that are to a large extent forming or being an expression of public opinion. That includes chruches, unions, schools, foundations, clubs. Organizations like Greenpeace, the WWF and also the Free Software Foundation (FSF) are classic examples of civil societies.

政治运作的第三势力（The third leg）是所谓的公民团体。一般来说，这个术语包括了所有「在最大的范围内，形塑或是成为公众意见的一种表达」的非政府组织。那包括了教会、公会、学校、基金会、和俱乐部。像是「绿色和平」（Greenpeace）【http://www.greenpeace.org/ ，它在香港设有 办事处】、「世界自然基金」（World Wildlife Fund; WWF）【http://www.panda.org/ ，它在中国的办公室有 志愿者网页】、还有自由软件基金会，〔都〕是公民团体的经典例子。

Within the UN hierarchy, civil societies traditionally have a difficult position. In some of the preparatory conferences of the WSIS the civil societies were at times even banned from the room, so they could not even listen to the considerations that were to shape the information age. It seems that most governments consider this to have been a mistake, however.

在联合国的阶级〔体系〕里，公民团体传统上有著艰难的地位。在 WSIS 的一些准备会议中，公民团体有时甚至会被排拒在外，所以它们甚至无法听到用来形塑信息时代的考虑理由〔为何〕。然而，看起来似乎大部份的政府认为这是一项错误。

But including the civil societies remains difficult, as they still do not have the right to speak at the substantial discussions about issues. In Paris all of civil societies were given half an hour in the morning to address the delegates, for instance. This allows for general comments, but is only of limited use for substantial discussions.

不过包括公民团体在内仍是困难的，因为它们仍然没有权利在关於议题的重要讨论中发言。举例来说，在巴黎，所有的公民团体都在早上被给予半个小时让代表们讲话，但是这对於重要的讨论只有著有限的用处。

Among the governments seeking better inclusion of civil societies is also the German government, which is represented by the ministry for economy and labour (BMWA) in the WSIS process.

由经济与劳工部作为代表的德国政府，也在 WSIS 运作之中，於政府之间寻求著将公民团体作一较好的纳入。

So in planning meetings it was agreed to have not only a representative of economy -- in this case Dr. Rainer Händel of Siemens in representation of BITKOM -- but also add a representative of the German civil societies to the German governmental delegation for Paris.

所以在规划会议中，〔各国〕已经同意了不只〔包括〕有经济〔体〕的代表 -- 在这个例子中， Siemens 的 Rainer Händel 博士代表了 BITKOM -- 〔另外〕也加入了由德国政府委任到巴黎的德国公民团体代表。

The coordination circle of German civil societies for WSIS then created a ranked list of candidates that should participate in the German delegation with the mandate of the coordination circle. In the end, Georg Greve, president of the FSF Europe -- and author of this column -- was admitted to the German governmental delegation. [8]

针对 WSIS 的德国公民团体的协调圈，接著建立了一份「应该参与到协调圈中具有正式委任，并且分好级别的」候选列表。到了最后，欧洲自由软件基金会的总裁〈以及本专栏的作者〉 Georg Greve ，被接受成为德国政府的委任代表 [8] 。

This makes Germany one of the few countries together with others like Switzerland or Denmark, that formally include civil societies in the WSIS process.

这使得德国〔成为〕与其它像是瑞士或丹麦等，正式包括公民团体在 WSIS 运作中的少数国家。

在巴黎的「会期间会面」

Trying to give a detailed report of everything taking place during the intersessional meeting would surely go beyond the scope of this column. But some of the most crucial topics discussed should at least be introduced here.

试著给予一份在「会期间会面」期间内所发生的每一件事的详细报告，肯定超过了本专栏的〔讨论〕范围之外。不过一些讨论过的最重要议题，应该至少在这里介绍〔一下〕。

通讯权？

Among the questions most hotly debated was the question of "Communication Rights" or even a "Right to Communicate". Many countries -- for instance Egypt, China or the U.S.A. -- were eloquently contradicting formulating such a right. Only Brazil really stuck up for explicitly speaking about Communication Rights.

在〔所有的〕问题之中，争论地最为激烈的是「通讯权」（Communication Rights），或甚至是「进行通讯的权利」（Right to Communicate）。许多国家 -- 举例来说埃及、中国、或是美国 -- 在公式化这样的一种权利时，〔都同时〕展现了针锋相对而具有说服力的观点。只有巴西真的明确地支持谈论关於「通讯权」〔的观念〕。

The countries contradicting the formulation mostly argued that such a right was not defined anywhere and the WSIS was not equipped to define new human rights.

对於公式化产生矛盾的国家，大部份都主张：这样的一种权利并没有在任何地方被定义，而且 WSIS 也不是用来定义新的人权的〔会议〕。

They unfortunately don't seem to have understood that information technology allows invalidating some rights even though you may still have them on paper.

它们看起来很不幸地没有了解到：信息科技允许了〔得以〕「无效化一些权利」〔的方式〕，即便你可能在纸面上拥有它们。

An example for this is the European Copyright Directive (EUCD), and its equivalent in the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), both going back to the TRIPS agreement of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which allow such invalidation in for fair use rights. [9]

关於这个的一个例子有「欧洲版权命令」（European Copyright Directive; EUCD），以及它的美国对等物「数位千禧年版权法案」（Digital Millennium Copyright Act; DMCA），两者都回到了世界贸易组织（World Trade Organization; WTO）的 TRIPS 协议，这允许了针对「合理使用权利」（fair use rights） [9] 的如此的无效化〔作为〕。

Owing to making the crossing of certain lines -- usually referred to as "technical protection measures" -- an offense to be prosecuted by courts, the provider of these technologies is given power to take control over previously public spaces and remove them from the control of democratic legislation.

由於造成了特定层面〔上〕的交错 -- 通常称作为「技术保护手段」（technical protection measures） -- 那是一种可以被法庭加以起诉的犯罪，这些科技的提供者被给予了权力，〔因此〕得以控制到先前〔属於〕公众领域（public spaces）〔的地方〕，并且将它们自民主立法〔机制〕中移除。

The DMCA for instance provided the grounds for censorship of Scientology critical web sites, since the information provided on these pages was only available within technical protection measures, so they could only have been acquired through violation of the DMCA. Drastically speaking, DMCA and EUCD both replace democracy through company-controlled technocracy in essential areas of public life.

举例来说， DMCA 提供了「给予『批判科学教派（Scientology）的网站』审查〔机制〕」的立足点，由於在这些页面上所提供的信息，只有在技术保护手段中才可以取得，所以它们可能就只能经由「违反 DMCA」才可以获得。严厉地说来， DMCA 和 EUCD 两者都将民主，以「受到公司控制的」技术治国（technocracy）於公众生活的〔一些〕必要领域，给替换掉了。

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) [10] states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

《世界人权宣言》 （Universal Declaration of Human Rights; UDHR） [10] 〈第十九条〉陈述到：人人有权享有主张和发表意见的自由；此项权利包括持有主张而不受干涉的自由，和通过任何媒介和不论国界寻求、接受和传递消息和思想的自由（Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.）。

As these rights are increasingly dependant upon control over the medium, they are as much in danger of becoming hollow as article 27, which gives every human being the right to participate in cultural life.

由於这些权利愈来愈依赖於「对於媒介的控制」，〔使得〕它们面临到成为空言的危险，如同〈第二十七条〉【第一款】所给予的：人人有权自由参加社会的文化生活…。

Speaking clearly of Communication Rights would therefore not have meant defining new rights but rather protecting existing rights from technocratic erosion.

因此「把通讯权说清楚」并不意味著定义新的权利，而比较是「保护既有的权利，以避免受到技术治国主义的侵蚀」。

工业的信息控制

The area of industrial information control, usually referred to as "intellectual property" was grounds for lots of discussion.

工业信息控制的领域〈通常是被指为「智慧财产」〉是许多讨论的立足点。

Many sides -- especially the USA, but also the German ministry of justice during the coordination meetings before Paris -- demanded to keep this area out of the WSIS entirely, since that area is dealt with in other organizations, especially WIPO and WTO.

许多方面 -- 特别是美国，但是也有「在巴黎〔会〕之前协调会议的期间内的」德国司法部 -- 要求保持这一个领域完全在 WSIS 之外，因为那个领域是在别的组织〈特别是 WIPO 和 WTO〉中加以处理的。

That would mean the failure of the WSIS.

那可能代表著 WSIS 的失败。

The questions cannot be separated, as the question of control about knowledge and information is obviously central for the knowledge and information society.

这个问题无法被分开〔来看〕，因为关於知识和信息的控制的问题，显然是知识和信息社会的中心〔点〕。

With or without the internet: without revising legislation in that area not only single-mindedly pursuing the interests of the rights holding industry, but also those of artists, authors and society as a whole -- especially those in developing and least-developed countries -- the social divide between poor and rich will only get larger and also become more pronounced in the financially stronger countries.

不管有没有互联网：在那个领域〔如果〕没有修订立法，不只是一意孤行地追求「持有工业的权利」所获取的利益，同时也是〔追求以〕那些「艺术家、作家、以及作为整体的社会」〈特别是那些处在开发中以及未开发的国家〉〔作为代价〕的〔利益〕，分开成贫穷和富有的社会分裂将会更为巨大，并且也会在经济强势的国家中变得呼声更高（more pronounced）。

These are only two of the topics that were discussed. In case you're interested, there is a more detailed debriefing about the events and political currents during the intersessional meeting in Paris available on the web page of the FSF Europe. [11]

这些只是两个被讨论到的议题。如果你有兴趣，有一份关於「这些事件以及在巴黎『会期间会面』期间内的政治趋势」的详细结论，可以在欧洲自由软件基金会的网页上取得。 [11]

〔世界〕需要你

Hopefully I was capable of at least giving you an idea of the importance of that topic. Working on this area in fact requires stamina, a good amount of tolerance against becoming frustrated and a lot of work.

希望我至少〔已经〕能够给你〔关於〕那个议题的重要性的概念。致力於这个领域事实上需要持久的毅力 -- 能够十足地忍受「变得让人沮丧」〔的事〕以及「大量的工作」。

As individuals living within a society, we really cannot afford trusting in "someone" to work on these issues if we remain inactive ourselves.

作为生活在社会之中的个体，我们实在无法承担「〔只是〕信任『某个人』致力在这些议题上〔的风险〕」，如果我们自己〔对此〕仍〔也只〕是不积极的。

All organizations active in this area require help in lots of ways -- even if "just" by showing public support.

所有活跃於这个领域的组织都在许多方面上需要帮忙 -- 即使是如：「只」〔以〕显示公众支持〔的方式〕。

There are many ways of getting involved and a good contact point for the FSF Europe is probably the discussion list. [12] If you would like to get directly involved in the WSIS process, you can also find information on the web. [13]

有许多方式可以参与，而对於欧洲自由软件基金会〔而言〕，一个好的联系点可能是讨论列表 [12] 。如果你想要直接参与到 WSIS 运作中，你也可以在网上找到信息 [13] 。

And of course this work also is dependant upon money -- and be it only to cover the travel expenses, which many activits are paying from their own pocket. Regarding my trip to Paris, I would like to take the occasion to thank the Linux-Verband, which covered most of the travel expenses, as well as the Böll-Foundation, which also substantially contributed to them.

当然，这项工作也依赖於金钱〔的支持〕 -- 并且让它只提供到旅行的开支〔就好〕，许多活动是从他们自己的荷包里支付的。关於我到巴黎的旅程，我想要藉这个机会感谢 Linux-Verband ，它提供了大部份的旅行开支，另外还有 Böll-基金会，它也相当地捐助了它们。

德国的「桥接想法」网站（Bridge-Ideas.de）

Readers living in Germany also have another possibility to deal with these issues. Recently the bridge - citizen rights in a digital society foundation was established in Berlin, Germany. [14] The founder was Frank Hansen who cooperated with the Bewegungsstiftung ("Movement foundation") to start this foundation to create awareness for exactly these issues.

住在德国的读者也有著另一个可能，得以〔用来〕处理这些议题。最近，「桥接」这个「在一间数位社会基金会的公民权」在德国柏林被建立了起来 [14] 。创办人 Frank Hansen 与 Bewegungsstiftung （行动基金会； Movement foundation）合作而开始了这间基金会，以建立完全地针对这些议题的「认识」（awareness）。

As the first action, a call for ideas was started. Until October 1st 2003, any group or person can submit ideas to plan and make a campaign about the lurking reduction of citizen rights in the digital domain.

作为第一次的行动，一项徵求想法〔的活动〕〔已经〕开始了。直到二零零二年十月一日〔为止〕，任何团体或个人〔都〕可以提交出想法，以用来规划和发起一个关於「在数位领域中，潜伏著缩减公民权〔的作为〕」的活动。

The best idea will be presented by the jury on November 1st 2003 and will receive up to EUR 15.000,- from the foundation to implement that campaign.

最佳的想法将会由评审委员在二零零三年十一月一日展示出来，并且最多会自基金会处收到一万五千欧元，以用来实现那场运动。

This does offer the possibility to make a difference and hopefully many ideas will be submitted.

这确实提供了「做点不同事」的可能性，也希望许多想法会被提交〔出来〕。

足够了

Enough Brave GNU World for now from this rather remarkable summer in Europe. As usual I would like to encourage everyone to get in touch with comments, questions and ideas to the usual address. [1]

来自於欧洲这一次酷暑的《勇敢 GNU 世界》现在已经足够了【据统计已有二万人死於这次欧洲热浪，其中法国就占了近一万四千人】。一如往常，我想要鼓励每一个人经由送来意见、问题、和想法到通常的地址来〔与我〕联系。 [1]

Especially authors of Free Software should feel pushed to get in touch with their projects. They don't have to be large or finished in order to be interesting to other people.

特别是自由软件的作者应该对於〔与我〕联系他们的工程有〔一些〕迫切感。它们不必一定要是大规模或是已经完成的，才能让其他人觉得有趣。

So far -- see you next month.

到此为止 -- 下个月再见。