Live data from Hacker News

European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

lwn.net

171–180 of 380 posts

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> … public good to be freely used, modified, and redistributed That doesn’t mean “free as in beer,” but “free as in speech.” I do understand the potential for misinterpretation, but one could easily add “after paying for it” and those freedoms don’t change.

> That doesn’t mean “free as in beer,” but “free as in speech.” It occurs to me that this is a rather US-centric analogy.

I see it as English-centric, rather than US-centric. That differentiation isn't necessary in most (all?) languages.

Adopting the word "gratis" when the speaker means "at no monetary cost" also helps clarify things.

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#172

The EU has Schleswig-Holstein (a German state) as an example; office software and email replaced by open source alternatives. Look overthere, I would say. But overthere is a politician who actually understands what he is talking about. I don't feel the need to provide governments/politicians with open source software who think like this: "open source – which is a public good to be freely used". Start understanding ho…

They also have a major german city (Munich) who moved to Open Source, gave up and moved back. The SH project is rather new.

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#173

The EU has Schleswig-Holstein (a German state) as an example; office software and email replaced by open source alternatives. Look overthere, I would say. But overthere is a politician who actually understands what he is talking about. I don't feel the need to provide governments/politicians with open source software who think like this: "open source – which is a public good to be freely used". Start understanding ho…

> By the way, don't come lazily asking for input. Go out proactively and find the answers yourself. The EU very regularly asks for input on new policy initiatives, it's one of the better aspects of the legislative/policy-making process. They are asking citizens' opinions on a policy that will potentially affect them, if you tell them to f off and do it themselves then don't be surprised when you hate the policy that…

> The EU very regularly asks for input on new policy initiatives, it's one of the better aspects of the legislative/policy-making process.

And then it basically ignores all the input and moves forward with policies like chat control that are widely unpopular anyway. So much for consulting the people and asking for feedback.

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a European made operating system I can purchase for my computer?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46552049

But this is US operating system, Linux trademark is registered to US citizen(Linus T.), it is being mainly developed by US companies and complies with US sanction laws.

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#175
My view is that there is commodity software and niche/specialized software. You find commercial solutions for both. But OSS is great for commodity software.

Everything becomes a commodity eventually. There's a lot of niche software that then goes mainstream, gets imitated by others, and becomes important to a wide range of sectors. A lot of that software usually ends up with very decent OSS alternatives. If it's worth having in OSS software form, usually somebody ends up working on it.

A lot of OSS projects are already leaning heavily on contributions from individuals and companies inside the EU. That's a good thing for the EU and something to stimulate and build on.

What the EU should do is keep an eye out for commodity software where it relies on non eu commercial software. Identify key areas where that is risky, e.g. communication software, IOT, or finance. And then stimulate members to switch to OSS alternatives if they exist and invest in the creation/support of such alternatives if they are important. OSS software doesn't just create itself, it needs backing from companies which could use the support in the form of grants.

That could include support for non EU OSS projects. There's nothing wrong with OSS from abroad. As long as this software is properly governed and vital to the EU, the EU should ensure those projects are healthy and future proofed. It should ensure local software companies get the support they need to do the right things here. This should ensure projects that are important don't run out of funding. And the EU can stimulate OSS development into strategic new areas with incentives. And make sure that EU companies that back this are successful internationally. This turns the tables on other countries maybe depending more on EU sourced software. The EU doesn't have to follow; it can lead.

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#176
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they once again go for creating their own forks, instead of financing development of existing software then I'll know the initiative failed. Once again? When did they do that? They have been funding various open source projects (like VLC, Libre Office) for quite a while:

Things like LiMux, I guess

Was that really a fork, or just a distribution with all the configs and packages that Munich wanted and needed?

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#177
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they once again go for creating their own forks, instead of financing development of existing software then I'll know the initiative failed. Once again? When did they do that? They have been funding various open source projects (like VLC, Libre Office) for quite a while:

I think Bavaria developed their own Linux distro instead of using an established one. It failed horrendously.

> I think Bavaria developed their own Linux distro instead of using an established one

Yes, with all their configs, packages and certifications that were needed. Not really a problem.

> It failed horrendously

Because Microsoft came in, promised to relocate their HQ to Munich, and surprise, it was decided to come back to Windows. This was after reports found that although it took longer than expected, adoption was widespread (only a small minority of desktops remained on Windows for the few Windows specific apps they had), things were working well, user happyness was good, stability was good, and tons of taxpayer money had been saved.

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#178
post #44
post #18

Europe does not need more open source, it needs its own healthy and competitive software industry. It doesn't matter if the email platform a government uses is open source, but it should be able to pick a local alternative. It does not matter if the e-ID or payments app is running on an open source mobile OS, but it should be possible to run it on a non-US one. Policy may help the European software industry, at least…

> it needs its own healthy and competitive software industry Because it struggles to compete with the US monopolies doesn't mean that it doesn't have a software industry. It's hard to compete with TooBigTech when they are being anti-competitive, and whenever the EU tries to apply antitrust laws, they get bullied by the US. > It does not matter if the e-ID or payments app is running on an open source mobile OS, but it…

> Because it struggles to compete with the US monopolies doesn't mean that it doesn't have a software industry. It's hard to compete with TooBigTech when they are being anti-competitive, and whenever the EU tries to apply antitrust laws, they get bullied by the US.

Is there anything that stops today anyone from starting a new Google or a new Microsoft or a new Apple in Europe? Concretely no. What's stopping this is that most governments in Europe are taxing companies to death to fund social services that end up in deficit anyway.

It's getting tiring of hearing of the big bad Microsoft that stops poor Europe from competing properly.

The EU tech salaries are ridiculously low and the tax burden is unreasonably high. Add on top of that an aversion to risk from the banks and VC funds in Europe and this is what you get.

Re: European Commission issues call for evidence on open source

#180
I see some people donating money to open source. I'm currently discussing with my bookkeeper but she says it's all personal, so I pay income tax (in the Netherlands) and then I can donate. Is this really true? Why can't I just give some money to the devs that develop the software I use in my business, as a business? It makes it twice as expensive.
Post reply on HN