Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: sincerechoice.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to sincerechoice.org.

Comments · 15

  1. Re:Neither side are perfect, here by Roblimo · · Score: 1 · on A Press Junket To Redmond

    I don't agree with everything Bruce Perens says or does, but I like and respect his Sincere Choice ideas, including a level playing field, interoperability, and letting software developers and software publishers choose their own copyright policies without yelling at other software developers and software publishers for choosing different ones.

    As I said, a lot of software companies *do* follow these ideas. I believe that if Microsoft did, too, it would be good for all of us -- and probably even better for Microsoft shareholders and employees.

    - Robin

  2. Ideals ... by zonix · · Score: 1 · on Bruce Perens Tells Linus Torvalds To Cool It

    Someone should tell zealots like Perens that in the real world, people compromise so everyone can be happy. Also that there is nothing wrong with with proprietary or comercial software. If it didn't exist free software would have nothing to 'libarate'.

    Perhaps you're not aware of Mr. Perens' ideals, and his Sincere Choice project?

    z
  3. FUD? Nay... by Lysol · · Score: 1 · on Apple Rejects RealNetwork's Pleas

    Think about this: when Apple attempted to license its OS, it sales were immediately cannibalized by its licensees.

    Yes, but Apple is not licensing the iPod or its OS. They're licensing only part of a file format that was invented by someone else - Dolby.

    So this is totally different. Real will not start making iPods, but, the Creative Zen will play the same stuff as an iPod. Hmmm, a standard...

    While I buy stuff off iTMS, I either playfair it or burn to cd and re-rip as I know MP3 will still be around and decoders will exist for a long time on any platform I decide to use. Not sure about AAC. However, if AAC was ever as widely accepted as MP3, then it would be a different issue.

    It's all about the file formats.

  4. Re:Misread? by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1 · on CCAGW Misreads Mass. Policy, Open Standards Generally


    I agree. Government policies that close doors to competition are bad. Linux might work in some situations, but not in others. There are plenty of good software packages out there to use, and plenty of specific packages for government, that wont exist in OSS until someone is paid (gobs of cash) to write them.

    But what exactly is the (proposed?) law? Does it say "all funding must be spent on Linux"? I've yet to see anything substantial. Instead we have to scrape around hearsay. So let's start digging.

    The original Slashdot article links to a rather fact-light article. It states:

    Massachusetts, the lone holdout state still suing Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) for antitrust violations, will become the first state to adopt a broad-based strategy of moving its computer systems toward open standards, including Linux, the rival operating system to Microsoft's Windows.

    Note the use of the term "open standards, including Linux." It is the reporter's own analysis that links that phrase to "nonproprietary software".

    It wasn't easy to find additional references to this activity. Oddly enough, the only other reference came from the Initiative for Software Choice (a lobbying group with dubious intent). The Group published a talking paper document in response news of Masachussets' initiative. It begins with:

    On Thursday, September 25, 2003 Massachusetts CIO Peter Quinn announced the state's "Freeware Initiative" - an effort requiring that all IT expenditures in 2004 and 2005 be made on open source/Linux software/platforms if possible.

    Once again, we lack a direct quote. But it does mention Linux. And it includes the phrase "if possible".

    Again - this is all scant evidence to make a judgment. But then, not even the critics are providing specifics. So its hard to tell exactly what we're dealing with.

    One thing that seems to be coming out is that this Initiative is not demanding Linux. It may be mentioning it as an example. And it seems to be aimed at favoring the Open Source. But there is an implication that the intent is to enforce open standards. And there seems to be a possibility where a developer can make their case for a proprietary software package using its own proprietary standard being the best, or even only, option.
  5. Open standards are more important by pointwood · · Score: 4, Insightful · on Lobbyists Urge South Australia To Drop Open Source Bill

    I would rather have a law that made open standards a requirement. Exactly as Bruce Perens says with his Sincere Choice initiative as a response to "The Initiative for Software Choice".

  6. Re:why do we care? by pointwood · · Score: 4, Insightful · on Linux for Home Electronics

    I don't. I care about whether it is open. Do it use free, open standards, protocols, etc.? That's what is important. What I'm talking about is http://sincerechoice.org/.

  7. Re:heh by DarkVein · · Score: 2 · on Software Choice Group Tells DOD Not to Use Open Source

    The Initiative for Software Choice was featured on Slashdot a while ago, when their opposition was formed: Sincere Choice . More than a tad tounge-in-cheek.

    Don't be so surprised. When in politics, label yourself the opposite of your intention. Remember the "non-discriminatory" RANDs licensing that certain W3C members were promoting a while back? I particularly like the prefix "non-", as opposed to "anti-". Consider it.

    Then there's the "homeland security" bill. A bill genuinely about "homeland security", but without the prepositional explanation of who's being secured.

    Really, it's pretty easy to spot when people try this. Remember, organizations, people, or bills, act. They are not "about terrorism" or "about protecting". They do things. When someone says this [noun] is about [noun], the preposition is not the verb. When they say "[noun] is about [noun]", they're avoiding answering you by stating "[noun] is". It exists! Don't question it!

    They're always actions. Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory licensing proposed to slacken the W3C's vigilance against proprietary siezure of W3C recommendations. Initiative for Software Chioce proposes choices to improve the economic conditions of its members. Homeland Security proposes intercommunication with agencies and increased surveilance of the populace for the purpose of securing the homeland against threats. Now, I can't stress this enough. Fuck the prepositions. They're there to tell you about intentions and ideas, not about what's actually going to happen.

    Ranting? You bet! I bet you never thought that high-school grammar would ever be useful!

  8. Re:Microsoft at al? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful · on Software Choice Group Tells DOD Not to Use Open Source
    Especially these guys. They are lobbying against your right to choose Open Source. They dress their campaign up as if they seek equality and no preferences, but read the fine print. They want to lock us out of industry standards by using patents - it's right there in their "principles".

    See SincereChoice.org for a platform that really would give you choice.

    Bruce

  9. A few more by The+Original+Yama · · Score: 3, Interesting · on Reducing the TCO of IT with Linux?

    Sincere Choice
    Open Source Initiative
    Why Free Software's Long Run TCO must be lower
    Open Source is good for America - US military advised (This is about the military, but parts can also apply to business. Read the report linked at the end of that article.)

  10. Copyright extension and Open standards for USG by Gerry+Gleason · · Score: 1 · on Political Issues of the Tech Community?
    I hope the Supreme court makes this moot, but if not the copyright extension should be repealed.

    U.S. Government agencies must use open standards in all data transactions and data archives. Sincere Choice states this clearly.

  11. Re:Excellent strategy by jukal · · Score: 2 · on SF Gate on Open Source Government
    > And you credit me with more political sophistication than I have, so far.

    ;) conspiracy theories make good stories. Seriously, the Sincere Choice is a masterpiece - the best part of it is that I believe it is easily adoptable for other purposes than state/government use --> companies could(should?)(already do?) base their decisions on these principles. They make sense - not only ideologically but businesslogically too - , and I am hoping policiticians could make sense, atleast every 42nd day.

  12. Story at The Register by fatwreckfan · · Score: 3, Interesting · on "Software Choice" Campaigns Against Open Source
    There was a story at The Register almost a week ago about this.

    Most interestingly is Sincere Choice, created by Bruce Perens and Michael Robertson.

    From their main page:

    We stand for these principles:

    • Open Standards

    • Intercommunication and file formats should follow standards that are sincerely open for all to implement, without royalty fees or discrimination.
    • Choice Through Interoperability

    • No user should be required to use a particular product simply because other users do. Competing products should interoperate with each other through open standards.
    • Competition by Merit

    • Software vendors should compete fairly on the merit of their products, rather than by attempting to lock each other's products out of the market.
      Research Availability
      The people pay for government-funded research, its fruits should be available to all of them equally. We promote Open Source / Free Software licensing as a means of distributing research results fairly.
    • Range of Copyright Policies

    • We support a broad range of copyright policies, from Public Domain through Open Source and Free Software to Proprietary. We support use of the GPL and LGPL licenses when appropriate. We assert that Open Source and Proprietary models can be used together effectively. A number of our companies deploy software under the GPL license and proprietary software in the same product.
    • Freedom to Set Policy

    • Individual users, businesses, and government should all be free to set their own policies regarding what sorts of software they will acquire and use. They should not force their policies upon others.

  13. Update/append Article by Trevelyan · · Score: 1 · on MS "Software Choice" Campaign: A Clever Fraud

    I think the SincereChoice link from parent, should be appended to the mainpage article summery.
    1) for those who dont read any or all the linked article.
    2) incase ppl miss it in comment
    because its important, if no-one contradicts an opinion then it essentaily becomes a fact.

  14. BRUCE: Web site error? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2 · on MS "Software Choice" Campaign: A Clever Fraud


    Bruce: Your web site for Sincere Choice is excellent.

    There seems to be a page missing, however. The page The Initiative for Software Choice Decomposed is, as I write this, empty.

    I hope you continue to work on the Sincere Choice material. We really need a comprehensive source of information about this. It's great when I can simply give someone a URL.

  15. BRUCE: Web site error? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2 · on MS "Software Choice" Campaign: A Clever Fraud


    Bruce: Your web site for Sincere Choice is excellent.

    There seems to be a page missing, however. The page The Initiative for Software Choice Decomposed is, as I write this, empty.

    I hope you continue to work on the Sincere Choice material. We really need a comprehensive source of information about this. It's great when I can simply give someone a URL.