41–50 of 229 posts
Open Desk (since the article doesn't link): https://www.opendesk.eu/en Does anyone have any experience using it?
I’d love to see pictures. I’d love to drop MS/Google docs for something I can control myself.
I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. USA has been very hostile to the ICC under trump, but its not exactly a huge shift, bush was also incredibly hostile. It seems borderline incompetent to use a microsoft cloud offering given the political situation. Not to mention given the type of work they do, seems like hosting stuff off site at all is a bad plan.
I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. USA has been very hostile to the ICC under trump, but its not exactly a huge shift, bush was also incredibly hostile. It seems borderline incompetent to use a microsoft cloud offering given the political situation. Not to mention given the type of work they do, seems like hosting stuff off site at all is a bad plan.
> I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. There used to be this quaint idea of rule of law and things like that. We can always argue that governments were happy to get dirty and occasionally illegal, and they certainly were. But a) it was universally seen as a bad thing, and b) no country would have done it so blatantly and openly. Perversely, this narrative was impor…
Moves like this hearten me as for certain lawyers the formats and standards they now will be expected to follow has just shifted, towards open source no less.
The lack of anything at all on the roadmap page [1] and lack of a link to their code repository on a blog post touting their open-source cred [2] does not build confidence. I found their code repo link in the comments here, after not finding it easily on their site. EDIT: to be clear, I'm all for open source software, and for more options to tools from big tech firms. [1] https://www.opendesk.eu/en/roadmap [2] https:…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one thought the US would get this insane.
I dont know, when bush threatened to invade the netherlands over the ICC, that was pretty insane, and in some ways worse than sanctions.
I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. USA has been very hostile to the ICC under trump, but its not exactly a huge shift, bush was also incredibly hostile. It seems borderline incompetent to use a microsoft cloud offering given the political situation. Not to mention given the type of work they do, seems like hosting stuff off site at all is a bad plan.
Lobbying - and likely a fair amount of network pressure from legal systems in various nations that lean towards using office for internal documents as a default.
From those doing the paperwork with Microsoft procurement for Dutch government I learned there have been legal disputes going on for years about what even constitutes "telemetry". That was a decade ago, and even then there was push to move away from Microsoft in the government. Toward open source, or even Oracle.
I suppose that with the Dutch being Dutch all the lobbying M$ needed was suggesting a discount.
I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. USA has been very hostile to the ICC under trump, but its not exactly a huge shift, bush was also incredibly hostile. It seems borderline incompetent to use a microsoft cloud offering given the political situation. Not to mention given the type of work they do, seems like hosting stuff off site at all is a bad plan.
> I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. There used to be this quaint idea of rule of law and things like that. We can always argue that governments were happy to get dirty and occasionally illegal, and they certainly were. But a) it was universally seen as a bad thing, and b) no country would have done it so blatantly and openly. Perversely, this narrative was impor…
In fact John Yoo, most famous for authoring the "Torture Memos" for Dubya over 20 years ago, has been perhaps the most prominent legal thinker arguing in favor of the actions Trump's taken against the ICC:
What can the incoming Trump administration do? It could impose severe sanctions on the ICC judges and its prosecutor, Karim Ahmad Khan, who engineered this debacle, by blocking their ability to transact business through our banking system, for example. It could threaten severe sanctions against any nation that arrested Netanyahu or Gallant pursuant to the ICC warrants. It could also display its contempt for the ICC by inviting the Israeli premier to the White House and Congress.
Furthermore, the Trump administration should take action against nations that are funding and supporting the ICC so generously. Some of the ICC’s largest financial benefactors, including Japan and the European Union nations, are also dependent on the United States for their security. Yet while asking Washington, D.C., to protect them, they finance a global institution that hamstrings our ability to do so. If Tokyo, for example, wants the United States to lead a new alliance to contain China, Trump can demand that Japan eliminate its subsidy for an international institution that seeks to undermine the American national sovereignty he was elected to restore.
There's a nearly straight through-line from the logic and approach to executive power Yoo helped architect under Bush and these attacks on the ICC under Trump. It's just that many have decided to bizarrely retcon the Bush administration into respected elder statesman instead of the lawless war criminals they were and are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_Memos
https://www.aei.org/op-eds/why-international-arrest-warrants...
I think the bigger question is why they were using microsoft products in the first place. USA has been very hostile to the ICC under trump, but its not exactly a huge shift, bush was also incredibly hostile. It seems borderline incompetent to use a microsoft cloud offering given the political situation. Not to mention given the type of work they do, seems like hosting stuff off site at all is a bad plan.
The lack of anything at all on the roadmap page [1] and lack of a link to their code repository on a blog post touting their open-source cred [2] does not build confidence. I found their code repo link in the comments here, after not finding it easily on their site. EDIT: to be clear, I'm all for open source software, and for more options to tools from big tech firms. [1] https://www.opendesk.eu/en/roadmap [2] https:…
https://gitlab.opencode.de/bmi/opendesk
They have some real users too. I know of some out of my head. According to ChatGPT:
- Robert Koch Institute (RKI) – entered a contract on 11 June 2025 to use openDesk as the technical basis for the “Agora” platform for public‑health authorities.
- BWI GmbH – the IT infrastructure provider for the German armed forces (Bundeswehr); signed a framework contract for openDesk.
- Bundesamt für Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie – also mentioned as an early adopter of openDesk.
- Föderale IT‑Kooperation (FITKO) – listed as a user in the EU OSS Catalogue entry for openDesk.
I think I read that some German states use the software too.
You never know what will happen in the long run but the solution will probably be maintained for some time given it's backing by the federal government of Germany.