5 ms·

Democrats in the US House of Representatives just approved a $741 billion defense spending package. It will almost certainly clear the senate and be signed by t

Democrats in the US House of Representatives just approved a $741 billion defense spending package. It will almost certainly clear the senate and be signed by the president. Imagine taking enough of that money to support these 40 LibreOffice developers and maybe say 20 more. There would be no need for these acrobatics around source availability. I understand why the companies need to do this. But there is an existing system for funding things with widespread benefits to society. It’s called the government.

JTon 6y ago
It begs an interesting question: does defense spending have a positive ROI? I don't know the answer to this question. But I'm thinking funding R&D, trade route protections, and perhaps some nefarious things can all contribute positively to American interests and thus American society.
- wazoox 6y ago
  Ginormous defence spending is how the US do a "social state". That's pretty obvious once you see how defence money is peppered all across the country.
  - arbitrary_name 6y ago
    It's a republican jobs program.
    - hguant 6y ago
      Nah the defense industry is smarter than that - it's a bipartisan industry. F-35s have components that are built in every state for a reason.
  - zanny 6y ago
    It doesn't mean its productive. We could be spending half a trillion on civil engineering to rebuild cities, roads, high speed rail, canals, etc. That has appreciable and visible benefits to society. Occupying a desert on the other side of the world largely to disrupt oil pipelines seems less effective as stimulus.
- Fiveplus 6y ago
  Which also begs the question: How many such projects in different industries (eg, agriculture, aviation, food, healthcare, etc) would need a slice of that defense pie? --- [Note: I'm not advocating for/against the idea of the parent comment, just adding a layer to it]
- ThrowawayR2 6y ago
  > "It begs an interesting question: does defense spending have a positive ROI?" It's analogous to the question: Does homeowner's fire insurance have a positive ROI? The answer is no only if the homeowner's house doesn't burn down and it's enlightening to look up how many house fires occur daily. If that's not compelling then perhaps contemplate what would people have said the ROI for national readiness for a pandemic was a decade ago and what they would say today.
macspoofing 6y ago
>Imagine taking enough of that money to support these 40 LibreOffice developers and maybe say 20 more. There are infinite ways to spend every dollar, why is LibreOffice funding worthy? In other words, why is LibreOffice's popularity so low that it cannot find a way to fund its operations? Which then raises the question - why do you want to fund an unpopular project?
- komali2 6y ago
  I think the idea is that 1% of a b52 bomber might take LibreOffice to an unparalleled place for a libre project.
  - macspoofing 6y ago
    I get the 'idea'. There are more things to fund then there are funding dollars available ... by many orders of magnitude, so you have to make decisions. One of those decisions is whether or not to pay for a certain numbers of b52 bombers. Another, completely separate decision, is whether to fund a very specific niche open source project. Linking those two is disingenuous. If you want funding for LibreOffice, make the case to your representative. Make the case to others so they make the case to your representative.
  - buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
    But why is LibreOffice so special? Surely there are thousands of other projects that would also love 1% of the b52 bomber budget.
  - ihattendorf 6y ago
    Sure, but it could also take other projects to unparalleled places. Why does LibreOffice deserve that money over other projects?
- jacobsenscott 6y ago
  As schools move more and more online they are locking into proprietary office programs that suck funds from schools, and students can't afford. Sure, as long as they are students they can use the school's software for free, but once they graduate they can't. So in effect the government is already funding google docs and office 360. I would prefer the government fund opensource software that anyone who pays taxes can use for free.
_bxg1 6y ago
> But there is an existing system for funding things with widespread benefits to society. It’s called the government. Not if you ask the current ruling party. Even a cursory glance at the state of the Union should make it obvious there's nobody left who cares to fund things with widespread benefits to society.
buzzert 6y ago
A great example of this working for real is Ghidra[0]! Funded by the government, a spectacular piece of open source software. [0] https://ghidra-sre.org/ https://ghidra-sre.org/
einpoklum 6y ago
The funding necessary to support LO development is so tiny relative to the US defense (read: offense) budget, that it's not even worthwhile to make this reference. The US DOD's stationary budget would probably cover this.

JTon 6y ago

It begs an interesting question: does defense spending have a positive ROI? I don't know the answer to this question. But I'm thinking funding R&D, trade route protections, and perhaps some nefarious things can all contribute positively to American interests and thus American society.

wazoox 6y ago
Ginormous defence spending is how the US do a "social state". That's pretty obvious once you see how defence money is peppered all across the country.
- arbitrary_name 6y ago
  It's a republican jobs program.
  - hguant 6y ago
    Nah the defense industry is smarter than that - it's a bipartisan industry. F-35s have components that are built in every state for a reason.
- zanny 6y ago
  It doesn't mean its productive. We could be spending half a trillion on civil engineering to rebuild cities, roads, high speed rail, canals, etc. That has appreciable and visible benefits to society. Occupying a desert on the other side of the world largely to disrupt oil pipelines seems less effective as stimulus.
Fiveplus 6y ago
Which also begs the question: How many such projects in different industries (eg, agriculture, aviation, food, healthcare, etc) would need a slice of that defense pie? --- [Note: I'm not advocating for/against the idea of the parent comment, just adding a layer to it]
ThrowawayR2 6y ago
> "It begs an interesting question: does defense spending have a positive ROI?" It's analogous to the question: Does homeowner's fire insurance have a positive ROI? The answer is no only if the homeowner's house doesn't burn down and it's enlightening to look up how many house fires occur daily. If that's not compelling then perhaps contemplate what would people have said the ROI for national readiness for a pandemic was a decade ago and what they would say today.

macspoofing 6y ago

>Imagine taking enough of that money to support these 40 LibreOffice developers and maybe say 20 more. There are infinite ways to spend every dollar, why is LibreOffice funding worthy? In other words, why is LibreOffice's popularity so low that it cannot find a way to fund its operations? Which then raises the question - why do you want to fund an unpopular project?

komali2 6y ago
I think the idea is that 1% of a b52 bomber might take LibreOffice to an unparalleled place for a libre project.
- macspoofing 6y ago
  I get the 'idea'. There are more things to fund then there are funding dollars available ... by many orders of magnitude, so you have to make decisions. One of those decisions is whether or not to pay for a certain numbers of b52 bombers. Another, completely separate decision, is whether to fund a very specific niche open source project. Linking those two is disingenuous. If you want funding for LibreOffice, make the case to your representative. Make the case to others so they make the case to your representative.
- buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
  But why is LibreOffice so special? Surely there are thousands of other projects that would also love 1% of the b52 bomber budget.
- ihattendorf 6y ago
  Sure, but it could also take other projects to unparalleled places. Why does LibreOffice deserve that money over other projects?
jacobsenscott 6y ago
As schools move more and more online they are locking into proprietary office programs that suck funds from schools, and students can't afford. Sure, as long as they are students they can use the school's software for free, but once they graduate they can't. So in effect the government is already funding google docs and office 360. I would prefer the government fund opensource software that anyone who pays taxes can use for free.

_bxg1 6y ago

> But there is an existing system for funding things with widespread benefits to society. It’s called the government. Not if you ask the current ruling party. Even a cursory glance at the state of the Union should make it obvious there's nobody left who cares to fund things with widespread benefits to society.

buzzert 6y ago

A great example of this working for real is Ghidra[0]! Funded by the government, a spectacular piece of open source software. [0] https://ghidra-sre.org/ https://ghidra-sre.org/

einpoklum 6y ago

The funding necessary to support LO development is so tiny relative to the US defense (read: offense) budget, that it's not even worthwhile to make this reference. The US DOD's stationary budget would probably cover this.