There is a revolution going on in Brazil.

"Opting for free software doesn't just take into account costs. It's about knowledge development," said Sergio Amadeu, the president of the government's Information Technology Institute (ITI), who is in charge of replacing proprietary software like now in federal computers with open codes like Linux.

The government is saving $2,500 for every 10 computers it switches from Microsoft: "...For the first time, we are breaking their dominance in the technology sector." Microsoft directly criticizes their President:

"I don't know if this is the best way to attract investment into the country. I know this is not the best way to create a base of development from which to export because there's no revenue from something free," said Microsoft's representative Emilio Umeoka.

And Simon Phipps puts it best:

They understand the real issue - it's about sovereignty. They no longer want to funnel Brazil's wealth abroad when they have a growing and excellent software community of their own. They want local people to provide service and write software for the government and industry. They want local skills to enrich the F/OSS world and build exportable skills. They have a vision for how to both enrich the culture and skills of their country while creating a power-house for the export of services in the future. They get it. Emilio Umeoka doesn't.

The third world will drive the adoption of open source and companies that don't support this trend will limit their market, monopoly or not.

John Doerr called the boom and bust the greatest legal creation of wealth in history. Some called this spin on was a massive destablization. Offshoring and open source combined, if you factor in the intangibles, may soon eclipse it. If you don't account for intangibles, you must at least credit the transfer of skills and technology. Since value afforded abroad can take the form of low-cost production of software components as well as low cost (or free) distribution of them, they will enable further growth in existing markets. This revolution is different, in the short term it looks like wealth transfer, but in the longer term its the greatest wealth creation in history -- with a stablizing impact.