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

New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

libreboot.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 111 posts

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#81

Post by Dalewyn »

djbusby wrote: post #57
Dalewyn wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your right to free speech ends where their right to free and fair elections begins. There is nothing fair about a state vote corrupted by voices outside of the state, let alone outside of the country.

A voice isn't corruption is it? If I talk to my uncle in NH about this bill am I subverting democracy or engaging in it?

If you're just discussing it with him, that's fine. If he specifically asks for your opinion, you're fine to give it to him.

But under no circumstances should you try to unilaterally influence or coerce him in some way. That's overstepping the line.

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#82

Post by Dalewyn »

gameman144 wrote: post #66
Dalewyn wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Your help is needed. With all due respect, speaking as someone not in New Hampshire, your (and the article's) request to me and others like myself is a subversion of democracy. This New Hampshire state bill is being deliberated in the New Hampshire state legislature, to be eventually voted on by New Hampshire state legislators voted in by and representing the people of the state of New Hampshire. As a strictly state…

It's not asking us to falsify votes or commit fraud or anything, just asking for people to sing the virtues of this approach. As an analogy, say Colorado passed a law that New Hampshire is also considering passing. In that case would you consider it interference for people from Colorado to speak in New Hampshire saying "You guys shouldn't pass this, it worked out poorly for us in Colorado"?

>would you consider it interference

Generally speaking: Yes.

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#83

Post by Dalewyn »

walterbell wrote: post #79
Dalewyn wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your right to free speech ends where their right to free and fair elections begins. There is nothing fair about a state vote corrupted by voices outside of the state, let alone outside of the country.

Do New Hampshire residents read HN?

Maybe, maybe not. Wouldn't surprise me if there are at least a few.

What OP and the article are asking is for someone in, say, Belgium or Canada or Texas to go and contact a New Hampshire state representative about a strictly New Hampshire state affair. Talk about making unnecessary and inappropriate noise for New Hampshire's democracy.

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#84

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

jxf wrote: post #67
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is new style PDF forms implemented with JS. Old style PDF forms should be handled by open source readers.

Truly had no idea there was JS in PDF forms now. Wild.

It is bizarre considering they intentionally ripped out a lot of Postscript functionality from PDF to make it non-Turing complete.

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#85

Post by cmurf »

Dalewyn wrote: post #81
djbusby wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A voice isn't corruption is it? If I talk to my uncle in NH about this bill am I subverting democracy or engaging in it?

If you're just discussing it with him, that's fine. If he specifically asks for your opinion, you're fine to give it to him. But under no circumstances should you try to unilaterally influence or coerce him in some way. That's overstepping the line.

That would be true regardless of residency. A NH resident doesn't gain the right to harass NH residents into voting a certain way.

What line?

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#86

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

Dalewyn wrote: post #45
leahlibre wrote: post #2

A hearing for a bill will take place in New Hampshire on February 16th, 2023, for a bill that, if passed, will require state agencies to accommodate libre software users in public-facing applications, so that people do not have to use proprietary software to access state services on the internet. Your help is needed. More information is available in the linked article.

>Your help is needed. With all due respect, speaking as someone not in New Hampshire, your (and the article's) request to me and others like myself is a subversion of democracy. This New Hampshire state bill is being deliberated in the New Hampshire state legislature, to be eventually voted on by New Hampshire state legislators voted in by and representing the people of the state of New Hampshire. As a strictly state…

Trade groups in the US routinely try to influence state legislation outside the state where they are domiciled, and sometimes outside the country.

For example, the Business Software Alliance (BSA), founded by Microsoft, operates in over 30 countries. It engages in both lobbying and litigation, around the US and around the world. Individual companies engage in lobbying outside of trade groups as well.

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240234078/Government-op...

The irony of the parent comment is that "tech" companies, the ones that disseminate proprietary software, have done and continue to do more to "subvert democracy" than any individual in history has ever done, and they do this more or less free from civil liability or criminal prosecution.

This bill is interesting because, as it currently reads, it does not force the state to use non-proprietary software. It is not stopping the state from purchasing Microsoft software licenses, for example. Instead it prohibits the state from forcing the residents of NH to use proprietary software in order to interact with the state agencies:

"21-W:1 Mandatory Use of Proprietary Software Prohibited. No person in the state of New Hampshire shall be required to use proprietary software for any interaction with the government, including, but not limited to: the filing or payment of taxes, remote appearance for court proceedings, the taking of standardized tests or the completion of coursework by school students, applying for or receiving unemployment benefits, or other similar benefits, unless the government agency has determined that the proprietary software is the only means available for the required interaction. In such cases of proprietary software use, the agency shall post a notice of its determination and the use of proprietary software on the agency's website."

This is a topic that comes up on HN with moderate frequency. For example, a website tries to force the user to use a specific client, which is effectively proprietary software under the control of a "tech" company.

The client might be a Big Tech advertising-sponsored web browser that no one except Big Tech employees ever audits, modifies or compiles, regardless of whether the source code is available. It might be a closed mobile app that pins TLS certificates to stop anyone from observing what data it records about its user and sends to the "tech" company, sometimes called "phoning home" to the "mothership".

The website might use something like Cloudflare in the name of "protection" primarily to restrict clients to a certain browsers controlled by Big Tech that can be leveraged against users (ad targets) for data collection, surveillance and advertising.

https://www.cloudflare.com/solutions/protect-websites-applic...

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#87

Post by AnthonyMouse »

nerdjon wrote: post #69
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Requiring people to use any particular software is bad. The government wanting to use libre software and passing a bill saying that it shall use libre software is not that.

How is it not given those 2 quotes? This sounds like it is requiring the use libra software even if the alternative is superior.

It's not a law that prohibits citizens from using proprietary software, it's a law that prohibits the government from doing it. But the government is the thing enforcing the law, so it's really just the government choosing not to use proprietary software itself.

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#88

Post by dotancohen »

gerdesj wrote: post #43
kerkeslager wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure of New Hampshire's stage agencies, but the most common problem I've experiences interacting with government agencies is PDFs. The format is fairly well-designed to be easy to read so many libre software alternatives can view PDFs, but forms are another story. If a PDF form hasn't been tested in libre readers, it would be unwise to assume that it works in libre readers (or even some proprietary readers).…

I recently edited a pdf form using Okular (KDE app on Linux - Arch in this case). It was a pretty involved multi page bank mortgage related form. The app that designed this beauty was running on a Mac (can't remember more but I did see Mac in some metadata on it). One field went a bit odd - it would show one number and print another after I got my data entry a bit wrong and corrected it. Clearly a bug. I passed the f…

Okular uses the poppler PDF library under the hood - and probably do most other non-Adobe implementations. Each software package is not a complete reimplementation of the standard, so it is not unexpected that they share behavior (and bugs).

If you can share the PDF we can file a bug report against poppler.

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#89

Post by leereeves »

Dalewyn wrote: post #80
htag wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of how common this type of behavior is? Where are you purposing to draw the line? Should we not even discuss local and state elections on the internet to prevent outside voices from swaying the views of voters? Should we not report on these elections? A free and fair election is about ensuring that eligible voters are informed, that they have access to the ballot box, and that those ballots are accurate…

It's fine to discuss others' affairs, but actually going as far as to contact state representatives (read: spam them) when you aren't their constituent over stuff like this is a subversion of democracy. You may or may not like what's going on in New Hampshire, but if you aren't a New Hampshire resident with voting rights you don't get to have any say in their affairs.

I'd support that principle if outside corporations like Microsoft and Adobe weren't allowed to lobby either.

Re: New Hampshire on the cusp of enshrining software freedom into law

#90

Post by [deleted] »

t0suj4 wrote: post #71
Dalewyn wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your right to free speech ends where their right to free and fair elections begins. There is nothing fair about a state vote corrupted by voices outside of the state, let alone outside of the country.

I remember my mother telling me a story of how she was dragged for interrogation after undercover cops overheard her and her friend talking about political situation in communist Poland. It's a dangerous territory you're trying to propose.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN