Live data from Hacker News

US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

k7r.eu

11–20 of 110 posts

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#11

It seems like they've cut a wide swath for (probably) exempting the most interesting of the software that could have been developed in the open. > Applicable exceptions are as follows: > The release of the item is restricted by another statute or regulation, such as the Export Administration Regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, or the laws and regulations governing classified information; > The…

Sure it's wide, but it also seems pretty reasonable to me

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#12
post #7

It exempts prior work from this clause though it says it encourages vendors to adhere to it. I have a hard time seeing that anything really interesting will be ever released because it will likely have national security exemptions in it and like taxes many companies will find a way to avoid it.

Yeah.. just about anything can be declared under the umbrella of "national security" if you reach hard enough.

For a true to life example, look at the NSA.

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#13
Several companies have been started by using software developed by people working in governments and it's only fair as it's all funded by the taxpayers

Because many governmental projects are politically sanctioned, done properly, this could become a great way to do R&D where the private market doesn't.

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#14

I hope this includes voting software.

I could be wrong, but in most cases the US government buys appliances from companies like Diebold and they don't develop or contract software for voting. The best that can be done is regulation to force audits of the appliances like what Nevada does with casino slots. Even that would be a huge step up.

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#16
(Next step, open source the government policy, procedure, etc.)

Laws like requiring all commits to be submitted by the author. Authors must disclose potiental conflicts of interest, affiliations, etc. Submitting commits on behalf of another entity is treason; meaning if a funder wants a policy written, they post the funds, select another entity, selected entity assigns staff, staff submits policy, etc.;

All public, all real-time.

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#17

It seems like they've cut a wide swath for (probably) exempting the most interesting of the software that could have been developed in the open. > Applicable exceptions are as follows: > The release of the item is restricted by another statute or regulation, such as the Export Administration Regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, or the laws and regulations governing classified information; > The…

Sure it's wide, but it also seems pretty reasonable to me

My main disappointment is that I'm not sure it will be reasonably applied, as so many things could be interpreted as having national security implications when in reality they're only used with security-sensitive data.

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#18
post #9

Looking forward to https://github.com/nationalsecurityagency/PRISM et al

It's funny you say that because that's the one NSA did voluntarily:

http://www.informationweek.com/applications/nsa-submits-open...

https://accumulo.apache.org/

;)

Re: US government commits to publish publicly financed software under FOSS licenses

#19

I hope this includes voting software.

I could be wrong, but in most cases the US government buys appliances from companies like Diebold and they don't develop or contract software for voting. The best that can be done is regulation to force audits of the appliances like what Nevada does with casino slots. Even that would be a huge step up.

Might be a reason to long-term require all software used be open source and for that matter make it easy for a user to confirm that the system in use real-time is the system that's open-sourced too.
Post reply on HN