3 ms·

Ehh, I don't disagree with where you start but I do with where you end. If it is a money thing then it probably has more to do setting up "standards" and "comp

Ehh, I don't disagree with where you start but I do with where you end. If it is a money thing then it probably has more to do setting up "standards" and "compliance" requirements that you must me to use FOSS software in the government. Then federal contractors and other big FOSS organizations repackage their existing solution as "Government ISO-MITRE, PCI, Whatever-BS-Acronym-we-can-come-up-with" compliant and charge a premium over something they already sale. I don't think this will hurt FOSS, at the end of the day FOSS is nothing more than someone saying "here's something I wrote or whatever." and sharing it, anything that tries to make more than that isn't talking about FOSS anymore.

yesbut 4y ago
These corporate sponsored legislators are really good at writing policy that sounds good to the public but really helps their corporate sponsor's bottom lines in practice. This bill wouldn't exist if it wasn't designed by large corporate software firms looking to taint, or profit from, FOSS in some way.
- themitigating 4y ago
  100% sure? Why not find out if that's true because I'm sure there are exceptions.
  - yesbut 4y ago
    100% sure.
- staticassertion 4y ago
  Isn't it very obvious that the US government has a vested interested in software security? I see no reason whatsoever to believe that this is some sly attempt to make FOSS more expensive as opposed to the US trying to solve a very real problem.
  - Xelynega 4y ago
    If it were truly about software security it wouldn't be limited to open source. Whatever standards make a piece of software secure doesn't change when it's developed by a company or a community, so what's the reason they're making the distinction in law? For that reason I agree with the conclusion of the person above, things don't happen in capitalist societies without someone getting paid for it.
    - yesbut 4y ago
      well, we can't leave it to pesky kumbaya, drum circle, communist software devs that work for free to do good security. only corporate capitalist software devs care about security. duh! now help me get this encryption bill passed so we can put back doors in our encryption, you know, for the kids' safety. /s
    - staticassertion 4y ago
      > things don't happen in capitalist societies without someone getting paid for it. Yeah? Someone paid you to post this?

yesbut 4y ago

These corporate sponsored legislators are really good at writing policy that sounds good to the public but really helps their corporate sponsor's bottom lines in practice. This bill wouldn't exist if it wasn't designed by large corporate software firms looking to taint, or profit from, FOSS in some way.

themitigating 4y ago
100% sure? Why not find out if that's true because I'm sure there are exceptions.
- yesbut 4y ago
  100% sure.
staticassertion 4y ago
Isn't it very obvious that the US government has a vested interested in software security? I see no reason whatsoever to believe that this is some sly attempt to make FOSS more expensive as opposed to the US trying to solve a very real problem.
- Xelynega 4y ago
  If it were truly about software security it wouldn't be limited to open source. Whatever standards make a piece of software secure doesn't change when it's developed by a company or a community, so what's the reason they're making the distinction in law? For that reason I agree with the conclusion of the person above, things don't happen in capitalist societies without someone getting paid for it.
  - yesbut 4y ago
    well, we can't leave it to pesky kumbaya, drum circle, communist software devs that work for free to do good security. only corporate capitalist software devs care about security. duh! now help me get this encryption bill passed so we can put back doors in our encryption, you know, for the kids' safety. /s
  - staticassertion 4y ago
    > things don't happen in capitalist societies without someone getting paid for it. Yeah? Someone paid you to post this?