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

91–100 of 111 posts

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

#91

Post by gameman144 »

Dalewyn wrote: post #82
gameman144 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Interesting. I'm curious what you'd say the boundary here is?

Should people not be allowed to read those opinions, or should writers outside the state not be allowed to write them?

Likewise, what scale of input on elections is considered too small to ban? Is criticizing the policies or politics of other states allowed at all?

I could not disagree with your view more, but I'm genuinely curious how you're thinking about this issue and what you'd want to see in practice.

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

#92

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

imoverclocked wrote: post #77
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be quite sensible. If a private company tricked your school into training you on their stack... that's not an education, it's an ad (and corruption to boot). If you job wants to use MATLAB, they can train you on MATLAB. Your python/octave/whatever skills will transfer.

I agree in spirit but not in practice. I used to think everybody using Matlab thinks like a programmer. The problem is that many people who use Matlab are something else first. Matlab is just the tool available to them that has a very specific set of functionality and a GUI to make it somewhat accessible. Octave is a great piece of software but I stopped championing for others after knowing enough scientists that jus…

I'm not sure I care what the typical employer wants to hear. If it's a taxpayer funded education then it's more about what society gets out of it. I can't speak for everybody, but I think what society wants is people who can solve problems whether or not they've been blessed by some third party with a license.

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

#93

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#94

Post by soco »

Dalewyn wrote: post #55
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people of New Hampshire and the United States have voted to protect free speech including by people who live outside of the state and the union. Corporations from other states and countries who don't like this bill make use of that. Proponents can too.

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.

Democracy by obscurity, a new concept.

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

#95

Post by manuelmoreale »

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.

> But under no circumstances should you try to unilaterally influence Why do you believe that to be true? I'm asking as an outside observer, I don't live in the US so I have no real interest in all this.

But, since things are interconnected, and a state isn't just some lonely abstract entity, isn't in your interest to try push for things that are good overall?

Why shouldn't I try to convince people that a certain change is a good thing, even if that change doesn't influence me directly?

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

#96

Post by giantg2 »

whateveracct wrote: post #75
giantg2 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be downed hard for this, but... If it doesn't provide any benefits, then this is a philosophical change. Seems almost like a case for separation of church and state.

Philosophy and ideals are a perfectly fair argument when it comes to legislation like this. Even if it doesn't pass the MBA sniff test.

Why? There could be better ways to implement, like just applying this as systems meet their natural end of life rather than rewrites. If we're fine with ideological legislation, then why not for other things?

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

#97

Post by nerdjon »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #87
nerdjon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You’re acting as if everyone in the New Hampshire government is making this decision when that is obviously not the case.

Someone (or a group of people) decided to push a bill with their ideals that will impact everyone who works a government job in NH.

So again this very much sounds like it is forcing people to use certain software instead of allowing a team or agency to be able to determine what is best for them.

This is no better than a bill requiring the use of software from Microsoft and should not be encouraged. I would even argue it’s worse since it seems it’s being done under the idea of “freedom” when it’s obviously not actually for that.

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

#98

Post by TeMPOraL »

orbital223 wrote: post #41
lukifer wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you've never heard of Doctors Without Borders, pro bono, community theater, or the Creative Commons? There is more to life than merely maximizing one's bargaining leverage.

Doctors without borders provide free labor to needy children in war torn countries. Programmers provide free labor to first world corporations worth millions of dolars.

> Programmers provide free labor to first world corporations worth millions of dolars.

The equivalent of this for doctors is called residency. It's an early stage in their career, during which they're laboring for free or being severely underpaid, in exchange for (sometimes) some experience, and finally for a stamp that certifies they're the real deal now - which lets them start charging for their labor properly.

Software career progression is less streamlined and less credentialized - there are many paths to necessary skills, and many ways of proving you have them. Open source work is one way to credibly demonstrate the necessary skills, and can substitute for or complement your education or work history in your quest for negotiating a higher salary.

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

#99

Post by fatnoah »

cjpearson wrote: post #9

That price is going to scare away most voters. $1000 per citizen for something that few people care about. You could argue that the cost estimation is a worst-case scenario. It assumes that 90% of the affected software will be made compliant, but it's also possible that they just use proprietary exception for most applications. It would cost much less in that case, but it would do so by abandoning the purpose of the…

The bill pegs the cost at nearly $300M/year for 5 years, with the funding coming from the state's "General Fund". According to the State of NH, that fund supports about $1.7B in total spending. There's no way a state with such a limited fund and desire for taxes is going to spend such a large percentage of the budget on that effort.

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

#100

Post by fatnoah »

smeej wrote: post #27

Was a NH resident for years (recent ones, even). Can't think of a single time I had to interact with a state agency that required proprietary software. It would stand out if I had. The closest I can even think of is if they're using Zoom for remote hearings? Never had to have a hearing about anything. This seems like a solution in search of a problem.

There are many web-based things that technically require Internet Explorer, even though other browsers seem to work fine. The real issue is likely that most of the things were built with IE in mind and only formally tested on IE. I feel like the real first step is simply to audit the functionality of these things in various browsers to see if they actually work properly or not.
Post reply on HN