3 ms·
Pushing for the obligatory enforcement of unknown rules, extending the corporations embodiment into every action of their employees, and granting legislative po
by b112 3y ago
Pushing for the obligatory enforcement of unknown rules, extending the corporations embodiment into every action of their employees, and granting legislative power to private standard bodies are all very anti-democratic decisions
I agree. But at the same time, this might indicate something.
Frustration.
Try to build a bridge, a building, a factory, and see how far one gets, without a lot of clear cut rules being followed.
Then look at ... say, Debian. Where every single piece of software follows guidelines, or it's in non-free.
Then look at the node ecosystem, where no one audits anything, or even cares if they're literally infringing, who wrote it, etc.
No one even checks, if any of the 25,000 packages, have just been replaced by malware, or if the license has changed.
And beyond that, we have endless orgs running code on deprecated compilers (eg php5), with no security updates.
These things are absurd, but we accept it, merely because prefer greed over security, safety, sustainability of code.
So, some of it may be frustration. I'm frustrated with it!
It doesn't make it right, but....
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago> Then look at ... say, Debian. Where every single piece of software follows guidelines, or it's in non-free. Debian rules are not about software functionality or implementation.
- marcosdumay 3y agoWell, reacting to an emotion is a pretty bad thing for a legislative body to do. What is it, some tribal government where a trio of elders command everybody? I do agree that the situation is dire, and we should do something. Up to now, that something is almost completely on the "research" area and almost not on the "legislate" area, but some exceptions may already apply. Acting on those exceptions would be a good thing, but this is really not some "hey, this small action is proven to help" kind of law. Laws like that one always lead to less secure software and broken markets. And anyway, no legislative body anywhere should even think on doing any of the things I listed on that paragraph. Any of that is already enough to dismiss the entire thing (IMO, it's enough to dismiss the entire body too and call for replacement) even if the actual rules would improve software security.