Slashdot Mirror
Advocating Open Source Within the Gov't
There's an interesting piece running on Newsforge concerning advocacy of Open Source within the (US) Federal Government. The Feds, as we've talked about here before, are caught in an interesting cross fire - and based on personal experience, I can tell you that they are looking at it. Carpe Diem, folks.
from above:
"but it seems in this country that the people who end up working for the government are the ones who couldn't cut it in the private sector, especially in the IT field"
Uhm, how bout those guys that pretty much invented the architecture of the net as we know it today?
There are TONS of highly skilled people working in the government, you just never hear about them. And, believe it or not, when the government gets its hand on a genius IT guru, he or she is VERY WELL compensated, since the government knows they can go else where at any given time.
Sent from your iPad.
May I be the first to say Bull$hit!
_I_ work for state government, I'm a pretty bright bulb, and choose to do so for less pay because I LIKE the environment. I LIKE making change in a large governmental system, and I LIKE having a stable paycheck with a good retirement.
Yeah, there's a bunch of F*ck-ups in the Public sector, but they're just as prevalent in the Private Sector.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
You really think that all the oil/health care/tobacco/technology industries are going to keep quiet over this type of thing? It impacts them too, you know.
The government will not change because the corporations (who own the government, figuratively speaking) will not let them change. Until we get rid of campaign contributions and begin doing public funding of campaigns, the corporations will continue to control the government and the open-source movement (and all other movements) will get stomped on.
I can't imagine the 'best and brightest' out there would really be interested in working on some of the most boring code available...
Actually, the government agencies (specifically, the "Alphabet Soup" agencies - you know who I mean) get some of the best and brightest specifically because they've got some of most exciting code to work on. Where else could you write code that deploys missiles, cracks encryption, and spies on people and not get arrested? If you're looking for the guys with the fun toys, that's who you wanna sign on with.
If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
The biggest problem is support. The government runs mainly on HP-UX and Solaris, and they do that because they know that if something goes wrong, it can be fixed by tomorrow at the latest. Linux needs solutions providers - one company that sells the hardware, the operating system and the support. Someone the government can call if it breaks and say "fix it!" - and have someone working on it less than 4 hours later. If some Linux company can provide that, then we have a chance.
Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
I'll assume that you've never worked in a government IT shop; it would explain much of what you've typed. If you had, you'd know that many states index their pay for IT job classes to keep the people they want to keep; for certain job classes, I know that my ex-coworkers at the State of Ohio are making more than my private sector coworkers here. (Not true for me of course... like Al Pacino said in The Devils' Advocate: "Negotiate? Always!") And of course, fat benefits and real paid vacation, that you can actually *take* if you want to.
You'd also know that many government agencies utilize the latest tech to do what they need to do, especially in geological and engineering capacities. They also work, where possible, with local universities for exchange and cost-sharing of such tech. Cost-sharing and cost cutting is the prime limitation to what governments can do as far as IT goes; you'd probably be appalled to know what little hardware and software is behind the curtain, making everything run.
I could go on, but I suspect this FP troll will already have more than its share of replies.
I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
The biggest problem is support. The government runs mainly on HP-UX and Solaris, and they do that because they know that if something goes wrong, it can be fixed by tomorrow at the latest. Linux needs solutions providers - one company that sells the hardware, the operating system and the support.
For high-performance, specialized servers maybe, but you can get commercial-off-the-shelf support for x86 machines from just about anyone. As for the OS, I think RedHat has the Linux support market covered, enough at least to get IBM's attention.
So the gov't may not have ideas of replacing EVERY machine with opensource, but I don't see much of a barrier with replacing low-traffic servers, databases and desktop machines (negating the obvious MS Office file format issues). The support is already there.
----- rL
All the rest of the vital infastructure required to conduct business is maintained by some form of government or another, why not a PC operating system? In the past century, a business needed electricity, plumbing, and roads to survive. In the past couple of decades, computers have become just as important as the preceeding to most businesses. I think the government should be using my tax dollars to help benifit all commerece, not to stuff Microsoft's coffers. I realize the government is full of red tape, and terribly inefficient at times; but surely they could hire enough people to maintain a Linux distrobution that contains all the basic software needed for most business or home uses. If done correctly it could do wonders for allowing small businesses to compete with the Wal-Marts of the world. Of course that means it will probably never happen, but it is a nice thought.
I agree with that stance more than any other, support open standards and the rest will fall into place. Interoperability in the long run will be governed by how well open standards are supported. Well designed, well planned, more secure openly built upon systems.
If some Linux company can provide that, then we have a chance.
:-)
Yes, that company goes by the initials I-B-M.
Given IBM's heavy investment in Linux and their reputation for quick service for their biggest customers, if you have a roomful of IBM made server machines running Linux having problems an IBM technician should be on-call for service within a few hours to fix that problem.
After all, IBM wants to make Linux available on all their big iron platforms, so this could mean that IBM could end up being the larger supplier of Linux-based products and services in the world within a few years.