5 ms·
> How would you implement a right to repair for software in 2023? What has 2023 do to with anything? The four essential freedoms for software were written mor
by enriquto 4y ago
> How would you implement a right to repair for software in 2023?
What has 2023 do to with anything? The four essential freedoms for software were written more than thirty years ago and today are more relevant than ever: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#four-freedoms https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#four-freedoms
To answer your question: any government mandated software, or software used, or bought, or promoted by, or paid for by the government should be free software.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoI used to work in defense, should that software be open source?
- schwartzworld 4y agoSecurity by obscurity is the weakest form.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoEveryone loves this phrase but it's far from a universal truth. Sure, it applies to shipped software, but I'm not sure that it applies to military hardware. Regardless, you really think that military hardware should be open sourced?
- schwartzworld 4y agoFirst of all, the GP comment was talking about software, not hardware. Something made by the military to be consumed by only them probably doesn't need to be open sourced. Same thing as if you write a program for yourself that only you use. Once something is intended to be consumed by the public, it should absolutely be open sourced. Voting machine software, tax filing software, etc.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoWhat about software that simulates hardware? That's a thing. I agree though, I just don't think it's an absolute rule. Voting machines and other stuff that the public uses probably should be.
- pabs3 4y agoJust because military software isn't released publicly, doesn't mean it shouldn't be open source (the OSI definition, not the "public source" definition).
- predmijat 4y agoOne counterexample - changing SSH port from default one reduces login attempts by 99.999%. I can go on :) Yes, if someone is after you specifically it won’t help, but you avoid automated stuff.
- dlahoda 4y agoand why avoiding such automated stuff is good?
- nibbleshifter 4y agoAbsolutely.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoCould you explain your reasoning?
- nibbleshifter 4y agoTaxpayers money pays for a huge amount of defense industry software development.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoSounds circular. - All taxpayer funded sw should be open source - what about defense? - yes - why? - because it's taxpayer funded
- enriquto 4y ago> I used to work in defense, should that software be open source? Software that is used internally and not distributed need not be free software. That was not my point. That said, I do work in defense now (writing software for a defense partner that finances the research of my lab) and the contract requires that all our production be published under an open source license. Only the data is secret, and we don't really get to see most of it.
- pabs3 4y agoWhen you say "published", do you mean released publicly on GitHub or just released to the defense partner?
- pabs3 4y agoIf you mean the OSD/FSD definition of open source, yes. The military should have access to the source code for the software it is running on the devices it owns/uses. If you mean "public source" then thats a bit more murky.
- pabs3 4y agoThe world of software is larger than government related software. Even the world of effectively mandatory software is larger than government related software.