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

EU to fund bug bounty programs for open-source projects

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 153 posts

Re: EU to fund bug bounty programs for open-source projects

#61

Post by Jonnax »

qha wrote: post #53
gronne wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats a nice way of putting cronyism, lobbyism and tech-iliteratism.

That's true, there was cronyism. For example, they used the worse, slower KDE instead of better options like MATE because KDE has a considerable European (and even German) legacy. I imagine they took many decisions like that. Take a computer that used to run Windows 2000 and install KDE on it, it's no wonder people got pissed and they had to revert their decision.

KDE is not worse than MATE. A full featured desktop environment with software suite compared to a fork of GTK 2.

Re: EU to fund bug bounty programs for open-source projects

#63

Post by interfixus »

conanthe wrote: post #56
vertex-four wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU has been funding the development of open source software through grants for many years now.

The EU funds nothing, it is the tax-payer.

Careful! Any EU criticism, scepticism, or disdain, however soft and tentatively phrased, will unleash an army of downvoters in these hallowed halls.

Re: EU to fund bug bounty programs for open-source projects

#64

Post by qha »

Jonnax wrote: post #61
qha wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true, there was cronyism. For example, they used the worse, slower KDE instead of better options like MATE because KDE has a considerable European (and even German) legacy. I imagine they took many decisions like that. Take a computer that used to run Windows 2000 and install KDE on it, it's no wonder people got pissed and they had to revert their decision.

KDE is not worse than MATE. A full featured desktop environment with software suite compared to a fork of GTK 2.

MATE is a fork of GNOME 2, which is a full featured desktop environment as well. MATE runs orders of magnitude faster and is much more stable than KDE. Especially on the old workstations where they installed LiMux.

I'm not going to say that the project failed entirely because of technical reasons, but at first glance it really looks like they took bad decisions. It's hard to defend a move where you end up with worse software and a worse experience for users, no matter how much money you save.

Re: EU to fund bug bounty programs for open-source projects

#65

Post by Jonnax »

conanthe wrote: post #54

EU or the tax-payer without being asked? They are getting really smug with their propaganda and have no accountability.

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what the EU does.

Each country funds the EU, it creates laws and also has programmes across the member countries.

Each country elects Members of the European Parliament.

No country in the EU is a direct democracy where the public vote on every decision. They elect a politician to make those decisions for them.

Do you complain when your local government builds a road to someone you don't want to go?

Re: EU to fund bug bounty programs for open-source projects

#66

Post by Jonnax »

interfixus wrote: post #63
conanthe wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU funds nothing, it is the tax-payer.

Careful! Any EU criticism, scepticism, or disdain, however soft and tentatively phrased, will unleash an army of downvoters in these hallowed halls.

Tax payers fund all governing bodies. What's the criticism?

Re: EU to fund bug bounty programs for open-source projects

#69

Post by justinclift »

qha wrote: post #53
gronne wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats a nice way of putting cronyism, lobbyism and tech-iliteratism.

That's true, there was cronyism. For example, they used the worse, slower KDE instead of better options like MATE because KDE has a considerable European (and even German) legacy. I imagine they took many decisions like that. Take a computer that used to run Windows 2000 and install KDE on it, it's no wonder people got pissed and they had to revert their decision.

I still use KDE (4.x) on CentOS 7, with older hardware.

It's not quite as as snappy as XFCE, or probably MATE, but it's still easily good enough to get the job done.

On CentOS, being a stable platform, KDE itself is also really stable. (important to me, as I have better things to do that screwing around just keeping a desktop updated)

Post reply on HN