11–20 of 67 posts
There are still arguments going on to make sure the entire Swiss Digital National ID (e-ID)[1] code will be open source. [1] https://github.com/e-id-admin/open-source-community/blob/mai...
Should be an EU wide mandate at this point, as it's mostly pros with little cons. Since the options are 1), keep spending EU taxpayer money to boost Microsoft's and other US big-tech market cap, or 2), spend EU taxpayer money on FOSS and local companies implementing and maintaining that FOSS for local infrastructure, then the correct choice seems obvious to me. The only cons are the short term costs, teething issues…
After the war? To which do you refer?
Should be an EU wide mandate at this point, as it's mostly pros with little cons. Since the options are 1), keep spending EU taxpayer money to boost Microsoft's and other US big-tech market cap, or 2), spend EU taxpayer money on FOSS and local companies implementing and maintaining that FOSS for local infrastructure, then the correct choice seems obvious to me. The only cons are the short term costs, teething issues…
>they also started switching to Linux for their infrastructure after the war, After the war? To which do you refer?
I wish they spoke english, id consider moving there.
Should be an EU wide mandate at this point, as it's mostly pros with little cons. Since the options are 1), keep spending EU taxpayer money to boost Microsoft's and other US big-tech market cap, or 2), spend EU taxpayer money on FOSS and local companies implementing and maintaining that FOSS for local infrastructure, then the correct choice seems obvious to me. The only cons are the short term costs, teething issues…
You can see how it worked it Munich: https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-not-windows-why-munich-i... Spoiler alert: it didn’t work well. The world is not perfect and decision makers are greedy. Edit: I see I am being downvoted. Is there an objective reason for moving back to Microsoft? Is there any objective reason to ditch implemented and working open source software project? As Wikipedia tells most of city computer…
There are still arguments going on to make sure the entire Swiss Digital National ID (e-ID)[1] code will be open source. [1] https://github.com/e-id-admin/open-source-community/blob/mai...
First approach (by Swiss Post) was rejected by swiss citizens. https://sarahjamielewis.com/evoting/
This is E-id which we voted on not to have the private sector operate.
The current solution proposed are quite good, the biggest issue that remains is that currently the law is not clear who can require the ID and this should be tightened so I don't need to show my ID to use a pay toilet.
Should be an EU wide mandate at this point, as it's mostly pros with little cons. Since the options are 1), keep spending EU taxpayer money to boost Microsoft's and other US big-tech market cap, or 2), spend EU taxpayer money on FOSS and local companies implementing and maintaining that FOSS for local infrastructure, then the correct choice seems obvious to me. The only cons are the short term costs, teething issues…
The biggest con is IMO the most obvious one. What if a third party non-open source product does something that FOSS can’t do or is dramatically behind on? And are companies going really source local maintainers for FOSS versus the standard maintainer? Eg, is Switzerland really not going to use Canonical for supporting Ubuntu because it is British?
Should be an EU wide mandate at this point, as it's mostly pros with little cons. Since the options are 1), keep spending EU taxpayer money to boost Microsoft's and other US big-tech market cap, or 2), spend EU taxpayer money on FOSS and local companies implementing and maintaining that FOSS for local infrastructure, then the correct choice seems obvious to me. The only cons are the short term costs, teething issues…
You can see how it worked it Munich: https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-not-windows-why-munich-i... Spoiler alert: it didn’t work well. The world is not perfect and decision makers are greedy. Edit: I see I am being downvoted. Is there an objective reason for moving back to Microsoft? Is there any objective reason to ditch implemented and working open source software project? As Wikipedia tells most of city computer…
from [1]:
In 2018, journalistic group Investigate Europe released a video documentary via German public television network ARD that claimed that the majority of city workers were satisfied with the operating system, with council members insinuating that the reversal was a personally motivated decision by lord mayor Dieter Reiter. Reiter denied that he had initiated the reversal in gratitude for Microsoft moving its German headquarters from Unterschleißheim back to Munich.
Should be an EU wide mandate at this point, as it's mostly pros with little cons. Since the options are 1), keep spending EU taxpayer money to boost Microsoft's and other US big-tech market cap, or 2), spend EU taxpayer money on FOSS and local companies implementing and maintaining that FOSS for local infrastructure, then the correct choice seems obvious to me. The only cons are the short term costs, teething issues…
The biggest con is IMO the most obvious one. What if a third party non-open source product does something that FOSS can’t do or is dramatically behind on? And are companies going really source local maintainers for FOSS versus the standard maintainer? Eg, is Switzerland really not going to use Canonical for supporting Ubuntu because it is British?
That's almost the best side effect: in a place where open source is mandatory, they will have to fund the missing features and it will be available to everyone, once and for all. If everyone does that, we rapidly get great software, sharing the costs, very efficiently, and it's all open source.
The alternative being everyone paying their own little license on their side ad vitam eternam.