Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Public Money, Public Code

publiccode.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 216 posts

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#161

Post by chii »

bumper_crop wrote: post #122

Suppose you are on a committee where you are evaluating 3 different offers to build a website for your city. Bid A is for $10m, Bid B is for $9.5m, and Bid C is for $9m. The company that made offer B knows that they will likely lose the contract so they counter. "If you let us keep the source code and it remains private, we will bid $8.5m for the contract". Since all three vendors are offering equivalent service, and…

> How can you justify spending a half million more on software principle when there are other more pressing needs?

if those other pressing needs are so pressing why aren't they looked into already, and is only mentioned when a tender offer is on the table?

The gov't ought to consider each individual need individually and budget it individually.

As for the company B offering 8.5m for keeping the source code private, i would argue that they are getting a better deal out of the gov't than the gov't is receiving.

Imagine if the company B can resell the software for money to another govt. This means the initial gov't paid for the research and development of the software, but the company B is reaping the benefits - all for paying a measly $500k. If the software can sell for more than $500k to the 2nd customer, they'd have made pure profit.

Therefore, the gov't who initially paid to do the R&D should actually own an equity stake in the software if it is to remain private. After all, the taxpayer funded the risk of R&D, and should partake the benefits of that risk.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#162

Post by datavirtue »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #29
postalrat wrote: post #10

The state I lived in developed one of those covid tracking apps. I asked for the source code and was told it wasn't available and would never be. I talked to people working on other software developed for the state and they all think that software shouldn't be public. It seems crazy to me that taxpayers pay for this software but it doesn't belong to them. Knowing what I do know I gotta wonder if it's just about those…

I don't know if it exists for where you live, but you might be able to make use of a public information law (FOIA-like)

I'm stunned that I had never thought to use a FOIA request for source code until seeing your comment. This is very tempting.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#163

Post by datavirtue »

atx42 wrote: post #104
ldoughty wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the kind of issue that causes all that government bloat... If I was a state employee and I wrote the app, and I had to release the source code, then I'm making it very easy for a bad actor to find a vulnerability and exploit it to leak the data of citizens. One might respond: "Well software shouldn't have those holes! Just because it's closed source, doesn't mean that won't happen anyway Also true, in an idea…

I find it bizarre that anyone familiar with software development would think this is a good idea. I mean if gov't creates a useful API (eg. weather), or creates some reusable useful module (eg. something like hibernate), that would be nice. But, just generally publishing everything? REALLY BAD IDEA.

Sort of like too much information being "dangerous" and leading believers astray?

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#164

Post by softgrow »

I greatly appreciated the source code (probably FORTRAN) that I found in a university library in the late 80's. I seem to remember a book of microfiche with many basic algorithm's published on the basis that it was developed with US government with federal money and hence needed to published. So as an Australian I was very grateful for the implementation of Hungarian method (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_algorithm) that I used to write a Turbo-Pascal implementation for rostering problems.

Anyone remember the name of the book/folder and the publisher?

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#165

Post by kingcharles »

datavirtue wrote: post #162
EMIRELADERO wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if it exists for where you live, but you might be able to make use of a public information law (FOIA-like)

I'm stunned that I had never thought to use a FOIA request for source code until seeing your comment. This is very tempting.

From a very experienced FOIA litigator, most of the time your FOIA request will be denied and then you'll have to sue to get the records. Typical time for these cases is 2-4 years of court appearances in trial court, then another 2 years in appellate court to get a favorable decision.

A buddy of mine just won one that finally set the precedent that database schemas are not security:

https://twitter.com/foiachap/status/1215388081378988039

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#166

Post by datavirtue »

gehwartzen wrote: post #106
UncleEntity wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And just to throw in a silly extrapolation... I would love an M109 Paladin tank... my tax dollars pay for them :-) If they give you a tank they have one less tank to do stuff with but if they give you a copy of software they still have the ability to do stuff with the software. There’s a whole bunch of software out there that has been open sourced by government agencies like nasa and you don’t see satellites fallin…

I'm not in software so maybe my viewpoint is just different but I also wouldn't expect NASA to give me the mechanical blueprints for a rocket, or even a concrete launch pad nor would I expect the local government to give me the the electrical schematics for the stop light systems, even though doing so would in no way prevent them from continuing to use these systems/items

I expect the rocket plans. Why the fuck wouldn't you expect the rocket plans? Unfortunately, letting companies own plans they were contracted to develop is actually a form of payment to those companies. GE's entire best-in-class commercial jet engine line was built from military blueprints they own and control but who's design was fully funded by the American people. This is bragged about openly within the company.

Elon had to go to Russia to get rocket plans. We have truly dropped the ball on this.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#167

Post by machinerychorus »

3np wrote: post #156
toolz wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is touted as "small govt", but it really just makes things less efficient. The total number of people involved stays the same. Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you suggesting big government is more efficient than small government? If so I wonder if there are some good examples of that, because previously I wasn't aware anyone would ever argue that could be the case.

The way I'm reading it, no, that's not what they're saying. Govt doing the same things but having them done by contractors does not make it "smaller".

right, this is what I meant. Running a covid tracing app requires a certain number of people. Splitting those people into "govt employees" and "contractors" doesn't reduce the number of people involved, it just adds an arbitrary boundary between them, which hinders their efficiency.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#168

Post by softgrow »

softgrow wrote: post #164

I greatly appreciated the source code (probably FORTRAN) that I found in a university library in the late 80's. I seem to remember a book of microfiche with many basic algorithm's published on the basis that it was developed with US government with federal money and hence needed to published. So as an Australian I was very grateful for the implementation of Hungarian method ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_a…

Actually had the source code still kicking around on my laptop and it had a comment {ACSM Algorithm 415} which I think means, Communications of the ACM, Volume 14, Issue 12, Dec. 1971 pp 805–806 https://doi.org/10.1145/362919.362948 , its Pascal-ish pseudo-code with jumps/labels. So maybe the ACM was being generous not the US government.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#169

Post by machinerychorus »

jonhohle wrote: post #151
machinerychorus wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was tangentially related to the covid app stuff so I can offer some insight there: most of those apps weren't built by the state. Google provided an open-source "base app" that could be customized by the states, but most states hired third-party contractors to build an app for them. I've worked in public sector and this is typical. the states can't open source it because they don't own it, they just pay a third-par…

> This is touted as "small govt" Small government doesn’t have anything to do with outsourcing functions. Small government is about not doing those things to begin with. There is definitely a case to be made for a government, big or small, tracking a pandemic. I’m not arguing it shouldn’t. Outsourcing that function to a contractor, however, does not “shrink” the role of government.

Right, that's what I'm trying to say. As another commenter put it,

> Govt doing the same things but having them done by contractors does not make it "smaller".

There's a crucial distinction between "privatization of govt" and "smaller govt" which usually gets lost in the public discourse.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#170

Post by dragonwriter »

machinerychorus wrote: post #167
3np wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I'm reading it, no, that's not what they're saying. Govt doing the same things but having them done by contractors does not make it "smaller".

right, this is what I meant. Running a covid tracing app requires a certain number of people. Splitting those people into "govt employees" and "contractors" doesn't reduce the number of people involved, it just adds an arbitrary boundary between them, which hinders their efficiency.

> Splitting those people into "govt employees" and "contractors" doesn't reduce the number of people involved.

It increases it, because (even optimally) you need the same number of people doing the main work, and as supervisors, HR support, etc., for the main workers, plus you have additional contracting and contract management overhead on both sides.

Post reply on HN