Slashdot Mirror
Federal Technology Czar Proposed
Alien54 writes: "The E-Government Act, which Sens. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) introduced Tuesday, is designed to make it easier for citizens to access federal information and services online. As reported in Internet Week, the bill [S.803]will create a federal chief information officer and allot $225 million annually to improve government services over the Internet. The Bill text has yet to be posted to the web, but should be up in a week or so."
To make the list as short as possible, a subset of vendors will be chosen based on product cost, stability, market share, ease of use, and standardization (i.e., market share).
This will be in the summary from a 2000 page report on the infotech industry, comparing best practices, software development methodologies, license structures, IP property issues, etc.
The report will be written with the assistance of industry (read Microsoft) and most of the lawyers who co-authored the DMCA and UCITA. It will strongly support IP protection at the expense of fair use. It will not permit the use of GPL software except on a case by case basis and after a complete security and risk audit (read a 1500 page report and 1 year). It will demonstrate that the TCO of Word is cheaper than that of Open Office, especially since Word was free with the last computer you purchased. It will demonstrate that .NET saves you money and reduces risk as it consolidates all your data on secure servers.
The bottom line:
Alternate product list (with special approval):
Banned product list:
MAKE MONEY FAST!
You're not going to believe this!!
If I start getting magic Tweetie birds and Neiman-Marcus cookie recipies from my senators and representatives because they got $225 million to start reading their e-mail I'm going to get upset.
--
Presumably this is exactly why we need a technology czar. The senators are probably preparing the bill electronically anyway, so why does it take so long to post it?
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
"Welcome to the Tech Czar's site. You MUST be running at 1024x768 resolution or higher, be using Windows XP, Internet Explorer 6 or later, have Flash 5.0 or later installed, have Java and Javascript enabled, have an IPP printer shared via Personal Web Server, you must accept cookies from any server, your connecting IP must match your MAC address from your XP key validation, as well as the street address on record at your ISP, and you must accept the EULA on the next page to use this site."
"Click here to continue to EULA. By clicking this link you fully agree to all terms currently included in the EULA on the next page."
CLICK!
CLICK!
"Please enter your Active Directory name and password for the following Object: Lieberman_Carnivore."
Clickety-click
CLICK!
"Pay no attention to the man outside your window. Or the one on your roof. The beeping which will accompany all your phone calls from now on means nothing. Enjoy your documents."
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Like, say, a "standard" server. I've seen everything from mega-Sun boxen, to 486's as servers, running everything from Novell 3 and NT 3.5 to RedHat, BSD, and Solaris boxes. . .in some cases, mixes of NT and Unix, with no SAMBA, and zero configuration managment (i.e. Mail is one department, Users a second, Fileservers a third, and all run independentely. . .). We're talking some real nightmare networks, from an admin standpoint. . .
Now imagine a caveat, from the top down: a standard Federal Webserver (Apache), a standard Federal Mailserver (Sendmail) , on 2-3 standard platforms (say, Solaris, OpenBSD, and [insert your favorite distro here]. Desktops are Mandrake with StarOffice or OpenOffice.
Yes, Uncle Sam would need a lot of new admins. But imagine the savings in software costs. Consider a central Federal security site: "Here are today's patches for Config X...". Imagine the chagrin of BillGatus of Borg. . .
I filed my taxes online this year. I'm filing for student aid online this year - did you know you could do that? They do the whole process online, right down to your digital signature. I can renew my Texas driver's license online.
In fact, I can't think of a single interaction I've had with state or federal governments in the last year that I haven't been able to do entirely online. I'm not quite sure where that $225 million is going, but I don't like it. Instead of making more services accessible, they should give Senators and Representatives e-training classes to make them more aware of current issues and get them to check their friggin' e-mails. Start there, before throwing more money at the problem.
What's your damage, Heather?
Okay, I know the commies were against the Czars. But that doesn't mean czars are good. Why is it that in this democracy, we appoint a czar everythime we want to fix something? Geez, if they called him a king, exerybody would be against it. How about a dictator? Strongman? Capo di Tutti?
What the hell is the difference?
Actually, no you can't. The problem is that the government can't afford to compete with Nortern Virginia based high tech industry in terms of salary. While the government does offer a pretty good benefits package, the salaries its allowed to offer to recent college grads are a joke. There was a recent effort to boost starting pay for computer specialists, but even after that, the best that a recent grad can get is the high 30's. Of those that start off in the government, probably half leave after 6 months for double the salary.
The high tech 'down turn' may help a little, or we may be able to pick up some older tech workers that are ready to kick back some and work 40 hour weeks so they can start to raise families, however, these workers still have to pay exhorbitant housing prices to live in the area, and that makes it hard to live off a government salary. At least for a few more years the government will be dependent on contractors.
One solution that is starting to pay off, is to decentralize the IT function by setting up data and call centers in various location all over the country. This may work, but unfortunately it is being done while we are still dependent on contractors and so many of these new data centers are being run by contractors instead of feds.
Work for Change & GET PAID!
I'd much rather see $225 million alloted annually to public schooling.
That's 7,500 Teachers making $30,000 a year to educate students.
That's 450,000 $500 computers for kids to learn computers.
That's 9,000,000 $25 desks for more/better places to sit.
That's 56,250,000 $4 paperback books for students to read.
I have a feeling the internet will be fine without a "Federal Technology Czar."
if they do as good a job as the Drug Czar, the Internet will be back in the money in no time!
No way! Your new Federal Standard will be MS Windows for the OS, MS IIS for the web server, MS SQL Server for the database, MS Visual C++ as the main development language, MS Office for productivity apps, and so on and on and on....
This is not just your standard anti-MS rant, because I have been-there-done-that with Gov't "standards" efforts, including representing the US Navy on IEEE POSIX committees, only to watch it all go to waste in the last 7 years of Microsoft's ascendancy.
The movement to an all-Microsoft world in US Gov't IT has been going on for some time now, at least in the Dept. of Defense, all in the name of supposed cost savings from using COTS (Consumer Off-The-Shelf) products. And don't even say that you can buy Linux off the shelf. In the minds of 99% of management types, off-the-shelf means Microsoft, and gov't management is the same as corporate management, only more so in all the bad ways.
And if there is any significant IT standardization across much of the US Federal Gov't, watch out. The US gov't is the single largest procurer (both dollars and volume) of software in the entire world. Overall US Federal Gov't procurement in products and services makes the largest multi-national corporations' all look like piddling chump change. You're dreaming if you think that any Federal CIO would pick a free or open source product for any significant Federal IT standard.
Could you explain how it will "bridge the digital devide between the rich and the poor"?\ =\=\=\=\
=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=
For hundreds of years the term "Czar" was synonymous with a corrupt autocrat. (Hmm, come to think of it, that makes sense where the Drug Czar is concerned). But why, in a supposedly free country, should we think it's a good deal to create "Czars." And has any federal "Czar" actually accomplished anything?
InstaPundit! Ahead of the Curve Since 30 Minutes Ago
Here's the URL for the bill:
http://cio.gov/egov/s803/050101_press-bill%2520tex t.pdf
"Shut up! Be Happy! Your government has taken care of this for you"
Pithy, yet ultimately meaningless, phrase expressed with gusto!
Good point, but couldn't this be done by just giving the still functioning but 'old' computers that are scrapped today to the poor instead.
One of my frieds is working a sysadmin in a company that is dumping dozens of functional computers every week. The only reason this is done is that the computers can not be used with the latest versions of Windows and Office. Now, the "Czar" should step in and add a Linux Installation CD.
I think this would be a better way of bridging the digital divide
*sigh*
The government is NOT there to hand out things. The point of any government in a free society is to protect its citizens in their pursuits of live, liberty and property... not to provide any of those. We are free to choose how we want to spend our lives... but we are not free to demand that any folks, rich or not, MUST give us their money for computers.
If you want to give your money to a computer charity, fine, just don't force me to. If you have the government use my tax money to give stuff to people, i have no control over it. I either pay my taxes just the same or get arrested.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
this czar idea is really important if such a czar embraces one more big important idea other than just "gee i can get my driver's license online!": make tech something other than the domain of rich white guys.
/. readers i think that it would become rapidly apparent that an overwhelming majority of us are the same.
i am rich (moderately so relative to the average american and certainly the rest of the world), i am white, and i am male. if someone did an analysis of
this is not good.
if anything, the computer/ pc/ web revolution promised to be egalitarian, and i'm sorry, i just don't see it!
government usually does very little while at the same time rapidly spending a lot of our money. if the government allocated some money to the digital divide problem under such a technoczar i'm sure 99% of it would get chewed up by talking heads and some offices shuffling papers around and no real world effect, but i still hope terribly that something really can be done to empower the poor if such a czar is set up.
such a czar should have the government buy pcs and handhelds for the poor, that's what i say. even if 90% are resold/ used to play games/ view porn/ insert your own waste of time, it's the 10% that are used to turn minds that are otherwise wasted on the street into genius that makes all the difference.
do any of us technophiles really want to see the majority of americans view tech as just another toy of the rich? something to not empower lives, but just something rich people have and use, and therefore just another symbol of a classist society? is tech something that helps keep the poor poorer and the rich richer? tech can elevate anyone up the economic food chain... let's see government realize what kind of social ills can be solved with that truth.
i'm sorry, but compared to the digital divide, who cares if i can get my electronic refund from the irs faster...
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it