This is one of the best initiatives to promote open source. We should all support it as much as possible - particularly if working in IT. If you are: Keep in mind you are making the decisions & you can decide for better options than Google & Microsoft!
Public Money, Public Code
51–60 of 156 posts
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#52There are a lot of good reasons to do this, even if it's just better interop between different branches of the government, all cool. However, you then realize that the military is funded by public money. I'd wager you don't want fighter jet or missile guidance software to be open source. The idea is way too simplistic and lacks nuance.
Great, now use that clearly specialized use case to drive public policy for every single common use case. There is such a thing as bad faith arguments. By default everything public paid should be open sourced, if there are cases exception is needed like military then exceptions can be made on application basis.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
This project isn’t in need of critical feedback. The fatal problems with the proposition they’ve put forward are plainly obvious. They’ve simply chosen to try and ignore them. I also support making publicly funded code open source. But campaigning for all government licensed code to be made open source by legislation, especially with no indication of what reasonable limits you think that should include, is a fundamen…
Can you use small words and explain what about this would ever require that of Microsoft? I do not see it.
The entire video on the front page advocates for public organisations to only use software that is open source.
> Mostly our administrations procure proprietary software, this means a lot of money goes into licenses that last for a limited amount of time, and restrict our rights. We aren’t allow to use our infrastructure in a reasonable way, and because the source code of proprietary software is usually a business secret, finding security holes, or deliberately installed back doors, is extremely difficult and even illegal. But our public administrations can do better, if all publicly financed software were to be free and open source, we could use and share our infrastructure for anything, and for as long as we wanted.
It seems like you missed how stupid this proposal is. Perhaps you simply assumed that it aligned with your own, less stupid, preconceived version of this idea? In which case you should consider that this campaign is clearly targeting people who are unfamiliar with the entire concept of open source software, in order to properly gauge how harmful it could be.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am in support of it too, ultimately, but after working on federal government software projects, it is a very huge uphill battle. Consider this: your trying to build a grants management system for Defense contractors in Afghanistan. You want to make sure that public money is not going to terrorists sanctioned by the US government. There is a forensic accounting software platform widely used by firms that audit the b…
Seems like in your example they should make or buy as they see best fit, but if they make they should make it public. If it could conceivably be a military secret then I expect it would be exempt. I don't see anything about copyleft style policies here which you seem to be referencing heavily, where are you getting that from?
But that is how the government operates - what is the point of requiring the government to have all the software they develop be open source when they are contracting out all software development to contractors that develop on proprietary platforms? It's not like the government is hiring software engineers in a meaningful capacity, at least not the US government.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#55this has always puzzled me. Companies gets millions from the taxpayers to certain projects to develop their (something)
Then another company get another million to develop same or similiar thing.
Why it is not a required that if you get taxpayers' money, the results should be available for free to everyone, let's say after 12 months of grace perioid ??
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Missile guidance software isn't generally produced by public agencies, right? It's produced by private companies and licensed to the government. The same way Microsoft Windows is.
If it is actually produced by the federal government, it can’t be open source because it is already public domain. “Public money, public code” either refers, in the US, exclusively to state governments, or it applies to software developed under government contracts (and possibly other software purchased by government), not just software developed by the government itself.
So if I am closed source SaaS solution and government pays monthly fee - my code should be public domain as well?
I don’t see this working other way than government spending money rebuilding each SaaS solution on their own. Then spending more running and operating it all from ground up.
Which would be very costly and no one would like to pay for it with their taxes.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#57There are a lot of good reasons to do this, even if it's just better interop between different branches of the government, all cool. However, you then realize that the military is funded by public money. I'd wager you don't want fighter jet or missile guidance software to be open source. The idea is way too simplistic and lacks nuance.
Yes there is nuance, but public policy is not defined by the extreme. In the vast majority of digital-services-for-public it _should_ be public code as well. The areas where nuance exists can be discussed further. The extreme doesn't define the rule.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#58this has always puzzled me. Companies gets millions from the taxpayers to certain projects to develop their (something) Then another company get another million to develop same or similiar thing. Why it is not a required that if you get taxpayers' money, the results should be available for free to everyone, let's say after 12 months of grace perioid ??
and the worst:
taxpayers' 99% funded organizations for example for traveling or some other area make the same sh*t as another orgs already did 3 times, yet they do not share any of the information.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you assume that sane and common sense exceptions and nuance are off the table?
The linked site speaks in absolute terms, perhaps that's where they got the idea
They don't speak in absolute terms, but in generic terms. There's an important difference between the two. The extreme doesn't define the rule.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like in your example they should make or buy as they see best fit, but if they make they should make it public. If it could conceivably be a military secret then I expect it would be exempt. I don't see anything about copyleft style policies here which you seem to be referencing heavily, where are you getting that from?
But that is how the government operates - what is the point of requiring the government to have all the software they develop be open source when they are contracting out all software development to contractors that develop on proprietary platforms? It's not like the government is hiring software engineers in a meaningful capacity, at least not the US government.
I don't know what to tell you (tried and failed to get a number for programmers employed by the USG, its enough that they have a reputation for not paying as well as private sector), but it sounds like you made up a requirement and got mad about it?