[A2k] Obama and Free Software

[Jeffrey A. Williams]

Paul and all,

  I tried to comment on Huff, but so far it hasn't posted.  So much for
openness and transparency by Huff.  I'll remain hopeful of A2K in
this response...

  My comment was essentially that I don't believe that Barack or
his administration is interested in seeing ideology drive software development.
As a developer myself for nearly 30 years, some of which is/was free
software and much of which is in use somewhere today, and from
every thing I can tell is well liked and/or desired.  Free software has
been a useful driving force for IT and Internet usage early on, and
remains so but perhaps to a lessor degree.  I have little doubt that
I will continue to from time to time developing free software.

  Where I think the Obama administration is concerned is with crypto
software that is beyond NIST's standard, or superior to same, which
makes LEA's nervous as they have no way of breaking it, which is
of course one of the reasons such development efforts are in existance
today.  A cookie cutter approach to cybersecurity via cryptographic
means is never going to be secure enough and gives miscreants very
little disincentive to continue their activities, and in fact only acts to
some as a challenge which they find difficult to resist.

  A dictator sort of efficiency as Paul rightly quoted Turban in
regards to has little to do with what and how any administration
should reasonably select whatever software they wish to use.
Some free software is good some not so good and should be
avoided.  How one determines which is which is where the rubber
meets the road.  Where the publics information individually is
involved or effected IMO the Obama administration should
select the best that current technology can provide.  Good
enough is not expectable where the publics safety and privacy
is involved.

Paul Lehto wrote:

> Responding to Jamie's HuffPo piece linked below, Canadapundit calls it
> a "push poll" and suggests that we not "handcuff" government agencies
> in their ability to select the most efficient and efficacious
> software.  Suggesting that sometimes the "open source" that
> Canadapundit claims to support will meet the tests of efficiency and
> efficaciousness and sometimes not, Canadapundit concludes by saying:
>
> "It is the job of the administration to select the best tool for the
> job... regardless of the ideology behind it."
>
> My response is at this jump link:
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-love/obama-and-free-software_b_201166.html?show_comment_id=24089032#comment_24089032
>
> FOr those really short on time, I point out that "Freedom" is an
> "ideology" and that the business values canadapundit cites, especially
> "efficiency" don't exactly have the best freedom and democracy track
> record.  Quoting US President Harry Truman:
>
> "If you want efficiency, you'll get a dictatorship."
>
> More on why this critique of Jamie's post is so messed up, IMHO, at
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-love/obama-and-free-software_b_201166.html?show_comment_id=24089032#comment_24089032
>
> Paul Lehto
>
> On 5/9/09, James Love <james.love@keionline.org> wrote:
> > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-love/obama-and-free-software_b_201166.html
> >
> > Obama and Free Software
> > Huffington Post
> > James Love, May 9, 2009
> >
> > One of the more interesting aspects of the modern knowledge society is
> > the free software movement. The most famous and influential leader of
> > this movement is Richard M. Stallman (RMS). Richard recognized the value
> > of a new model for software development and the various risks to that
> > model. He also created a philosophical and ideological framework, and a
> > new set of slogans, legal strategies and ideas to protect and promote
> > the environment that would make free software more common and powerful.
> > If Richard had not began his work in the 1980s, the Internet today would
> > be less open, less innovative, and less useful.
> >
> > In recent years the free software movement has grown in many different
> > dimensions, and become much more diverse in terms of its leadership and
> > approach. Playing an important role are Stallman critics like Eric
> > Raymond or Bruce Perens[2], gifted software development leaders like
> > Linus Torvalds, thousands of independently managed software development
> > communities, corporate supported ventures like OpenOffice, MySql, Redhat
> > or Ubuntu, and a host of influential academics like Eben Moglen or
> > Yoachi Benkler. Today Google Scholar has 53,900 hits for the term "free
> > software."[3]
> >
> > [Pictures, clockwise: Obama ( Marc Nozell) and free software leaders
> > Richard Stallman (Leonid Dmitriev), Eben Moglen (Andrew McMillan), Linux
> > Torvalds (t3rmin4t0r), Bruce Perens (Manon Ress) and Michell Baker (Dead
> > Squid). All photos available under licenses from Author, Wikimedia or
> > Flickr]
> >
> > While free software was once considered by some as a fringe movement, it
> > is now mainstream. Fortune 500 companies are embracing free software
> > programs like R to analyse data. Linux, Apache, MySql and PhP (LAMP)
> > servers power much of the Internet. Many cell phones, Kindle 2, and
> > other devices run Linux. There is enormous interest in the development
> > of every aspect of free software tools and applications. Some of the
> > most profitable software companies today are those that are providing
> > services over free software platforms. Free software also is important
> > for empowering and protecting other social movements that routinely rely
> > upon free software for a wide range of services.
> >
> > The "free" part of the free software movement is an important element of
> > this. The ability to innovate, and specifically to create innovations
> > that serve social needs, is well served by platforms, like the Internet,
> > that are based upon openness and freedom.
> >
> > What does all this have to do with Obama? Actually, quite a bit.
> >
> > As important as free software has become economically and socially, it
> > gets almost no respect among U.S. political leaders. People should
> > insist that elected and appointed government officials be more explicit
> > about policies. I would start by asking the Obama Administration to
> > answer the following initial questions:
> >
> > Is free software important?
> >
> > 1. To what extent is free software used today?
> >
> > 2. What are the efficiency benefits of free software, in terms of
> > allowing code to be freely reused and re-purposed?
> >
> > 3. What are the benefits of having software code transparent?
> >
> > 4. What are the benefits of users having the freedom to modify software
> > to meet their needs?
> >
> > 5. Does free software play an important role in avoiding harm from the
> > monopoly control over software products and platforms?
> >
> > 6. How much money do users save by using free software solutions?
> >
> > 7. Does free software make it easier for young people to learn about and
> > contribute to the development of software?
> >
> > Next, I would ask the Obama Administration to address certain policy
> > questions relevant to procurement and government services:
> >
> > 8. Does government procurement policy recognize the benefits of free
> > software solutions?
> >
> > 9. If so, do procurement policies encourage or discourage the supply and
> > use of free software?
> >
> > 10. Does the Obama Administration recognize the strategic importance and
> > value of interoperability and open standards in the software field?
> >
> > 11. Does the Obama Administration recognize the strategic importance of
> > open standards for data formats?
> >
> > 12. Does the Administration have a strategy to support and promote
> > interoperability and open standards, including open data formats? If so,
> > what is this strategy?
> >
> > 13. To what extent can someone who uses free software fully interact
> > with government agencies, such as by editing collaborative documents,
> > using web based services, viewing multimedia content, or using
> > government funded databases?
> >
> > Grant Related Issues:
> >
> > 14. Does the federal Bayh-Dole Act provide the flexibility for the US
> > government to insert appropriate conditions in grants that would
> > increase public access to the software code developed under a government
> > grant?
> >
> > 15. Should federal grants require recipients to publish and share data
> > in open standardized formats?
> >
> > Competition Issues.
> >
> > 16. Is the impact of a merger of the free software sector relevant to a
> > proposed merger? For example, will the Obama Administration examine the
> > impact of the Oracle acquisition of Sun on the future viability of
> > MySQL, Java or OpenOffice?
> >
> > 17. Would an agreement among the owners of the two leading proprietary
> > operating systems to not distribute software on the Linux platform be
> > considered a violation of competition laws? If competition law is not a
> > good tool to address such issues, what is?
> >
> > 18. Would an aggressive effort to break an open standard for data
> > formats be considered a violation of competition law?
> >
> > Patent issues.
> >
> > 19. Should there be a zone of fair use for software patents when used in
> > free software projects?
> >
> > A lot of these issues are technical, but the issues are quite important
> > economically and socially. The trick is to make these geeky issues
> > political enough that politicians engage.
> >
> > --Notes
> >
> > [1]Yoachi Benkler, Coase's Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the Firm,
> > 112 Yale L.J (2002); Yoachi Benkler, The Wealth of Networks: How Social
> > Production Transforms Markets and Freedom (Yale University Press 2006).
> > Eben Moglen, "Anarchism Triumphant: Free Software and the Death of
> > Copyright," First Monday (August, 1999)
> >
> > [2] Eric S Raymond, The cathedral and the bazaar: Musings on Linux and
> > open source by an accidental revolutionary, 2001, O'Reilly & Associates.
> > http://perens.com/policy/open-source/
> >
> > [3]http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22free+software%
> > 22&btnG=Search
> > --
> > James Love, Director, Knowledge Ecology International
> > http://www.keionline.org | mailto:james.love at keionline.org
> > Wk: +1.202.332.2671 | US Mobile +1.202.361.3040 | Geneva Mobile
> > +41.76.413.6584
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > A2k mailing list
> > A2k@lists.essential.org
> > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
> >
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul@gmail.com
> 906-204-2333
> _______________________________________________
> A2k mailing list
> A2k@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827