61–70 of 156 posts
The point where it always breaks down for me is that I've never seen anyone lobby for moving more in the "VC Money, VC Code" direction. Labor has value and needs rewarding, not just capital.
There 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.
There 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.
> I'd wager you don't want fighter jet or missile guidance software to be open source. I'd be OK with that.
The largest branch of the Norwegian government, Labor and Welfare Administration (NAV), have adopted this this policy since 2018 and now we have over 2000 public repositories on https://github.com/navikt and https://github.com/nais (last one is our platform organization)
/a
Earlier 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
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd wager you don't want fighter jet or missile guidance software to be open source. Why not? I can think of some reasons but they mostly devolve to security by obscurity and a whole lot of assumptions to even get there. The actors who want to know are already in the know. At least open sourcing the rest would be a compelling lever to avoid accidentally escalating conflicts.
Signatures are carefully protected and used for targeting. If you disclose everything about how a targeting system or sensor system operates, it becomes easier to defeat. But I think there’s a happy medium where the framework and general missile/sensor code is disclosed — but truly critical information like the sonar signature of enemy submarines is protected.
Your comment makes little sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd wager you don't want fighter jet or missile guidance software to be open source. I'd be OK with that.
DIY missiles incoming.
this 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 ??
I am fully in support of such initiative. So I am interested to hear what the possible downsides are? Please share your opinions on the matter as I can only see upsides to this.
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…
Yes. Companies would comply with whatever requirement to have the US government as a customer.