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

181–190 of 216 posts

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#181

Post by looperhacks »

jtcruthers wrote: post #159
HWR_14 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the states paid the bills so can license the result any way they want. > > How can they pay for something and not own it? Try buying a copy of Adobe Software[1], and then hosting the *.isos on your website. You paid for it, you should get to do it! The short answer is, it costs more to buy 100% of the rights, and governments rarely do so. [1] It'd have to be older Adobe Software, as modern Adobe Software is all…

If I commissioned Adobe Software to write a program, from scratch, that I specifically state I will own all rights to the program and source code itself, then I would fully expect to license it how I want. We are not talking about a single consumer. We are talking about the state itself. They will get the license they want if they believe it is needed.

> They will get the license they want if they believe it is needed.

They will also use more tax-payers money to do so. I agree that the code should be public, but I can see why that isn't the case.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#182

Post by Dracophoenix »

This would be a perfect motto for property tax assessments. It is ridiculous that no one has any idea if the value of their home is inflated/deflated by software or reflects a consistent correlation with a measurable value.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#183

Post by GoblinSlayer »

jtcruthers wrote: post #159
HWR_14 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the states paid the bills so can license the result any way they want. > > How can they pay for something and not own it? Try buying a copy of Adobe Software[1], and then hosting the *.isos on your website. You paid for it, you should get to do it! The short answer is, it costs more to buy 100% of the rights, and governments rarely do so. [1] It'd have to be older Adobe Software, as modern Adobe Software is all…

If I commissioned Adobe Software to write a program, from scratch, that I specifically state I will own all rights to the program and source code itself, then I would fully expect to license it how I want. We are not talking about a single consumer. We are talking about the state itself. They will get the license they want if they believe it is needed.

Ironically the state is a single consumer and they ever sell only one copy of the program, so business case for proprietary software doesn't exist at all.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#184

Post by einpoklum »

giobox wrote: post #21

I've often wondered if we need to radically change the State's relationship with the software it produces. As Robert Lessig famously observed, "code is law" in a world controlled by computers. There is increasingly a strong argument I feel in States directly employing software engineers much like they typically employ armies of civil servants to implement policy. Why is software treated as something to be outsourced…

> "code is law" ... Why is software treated as something to be outsourced to a private sector company?

Don't worry, many governments effectively outsource legislation to commercial lobbying bodies who feed draft and proposals to parliamentarians.

Prominent example: The American Legislative Exchange Council, which even formalizes this practice.

Why can't we have "civil programmers" who contribute to an ever growing body of public code just as the legislative process contributes to an ever growing body of laws. This body of civil programmers (terrible name but hey) could also work hand in hand with the open source community, letting stakeholders (citizens) contribute too.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#185

Post by _trampeltier »

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…

Switzerland did make it public on Github

https://github.com/admin-ch/CovidCertificate-App-Android

There is even a section "Reproducible builds"

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#186

Post by RobertoG »

ygjb wrote: post #116
worik wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but most states hired third-party contractors to build an app for them. So the states paid the bills so can license the result any way they want. How can they pay for something and not own it? Sounds to me like there are deep corruption problems

> How can they pay for something and not own it? Have you ever purchases software? Any media, recorded performance, or book? I don't mean to be rude here, but this question shows a complete lack of awareness of the problem space. There are a number of contributing factors to why most government software is not open source, but here are some of my direct observations as a consultant to government departments, an emplo…

I have read your long comment and I'm less than convinced by any of your arguments.

Specifically, I would say that number three is mostly false. The companies that receive those contracts are not, at least in my experience, small local shops (and there is an argument that they should be), but instead big consulting companies that know the correct people and procedures.

>>"Alot of folks in government (including me when I was there) wanted to release our stuff as OSS, but there is only so far you can go with opensourcing modules that depend on SAP code, IBM code, or systems that are supplied by the federal government"

The point of the endeavor is precisely to change that.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#187

Post by mordae »

HideousKojima wrote: post #59
bartvk wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see what corruption has to do with it. I'm a subcontractor and usually the contractual terms are dictated by my clients. If I get the chance however, I put forth my terms and these say that I'm the author of the code and thus the copyright holder.

When I've done freelance work and have been able to write the contract, I include a clause that the client receives "a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute the work and such derivative works, and to sublicense any or all of the foregoing rights to third parties," effectively giving them unli…

This. I always make sure both sides share in the full rights to the work. Regardless of whether I am the one doing the programming or the one paying for it.

Public sector usually makes up the rules for itself and then upholds them in the software. Very little public sector software could be resold in the private sector without significant investment into making it more general, usually to the detriment of the product. The "multiple clients => lower price" thus holds no water, because it's always just different branches of government and the usual way it ends up is that after 10 years or so the product is still used in one place only and the original programmers long left the company. And public still pays for a yearly license.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#188

Post by kortilla »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #171
sonicggg wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's hard enough for to tech companies to hire skilled developers, I can only imagine what the bar is for public work. They might even resort to hire some brain damaged people.

Here in Australia, only citizens can work for the Commonwealth (federal) government. The end result is that, due to a lack of competition from immigrants, the public sector is basically just a jobs program for those too incompetent to work in the private sector.

The same thing happens in the US with any jobs requiring security clearance.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#189

Post by mightyRodri »

KarlKemp wrote: post #105
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…

The German version is at https://github.com/corona-warn-app . It was expensive (18 million Euros I believe, but may be wrong). But other than that, it was excellent from start to finish. First release a few weeks after the API was available. The source was divided into logical components of more or less perfect size, it was straightforward, well commented, responsive to PRs, worked, and had no security issues as far…

So much this. I am not one to be proud of the place i happened to be born but this effort gave me some hope for the gov software sector.

Re: Public Money, Public Code

#190

Post by andrepd »

machinerychorus wrote: post #26
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 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", but it really just makes things less efficient.

You could say these exact words about the vast majority of PPP (public-private partnerships).

Post reply on HN