Slashdot Mirror
Defense Dept. Memo Explains Open Source Policy
TonyStanco writes "Big news. DoD issued a policy statement leveling the playing field for Open Source. We have the memo on the Center of Open Source & Government site." The requirements listed in this memo make me think of a company policy along the lines of "You can bring your baby or toddler to work, so long as it can talk, feed itself and stick effortlessly to the ceiling like a spider." See this PDF for more information about National Security Telecommunications and Information Systems Security Policy (NSTISSP) number 11.
The letter mentions Linux, and the GPL *specifically*.
The BSD license wasn't mentioned, because BSD is dead.
I'd like to think of myself as fairly open minded, but lets be honest, as far as operating systems go, Linux doesnt really have much weight these days. It has been so increadibly wrong about, well, pretty much everything, that it is rapidly fading.
I say this because it has become an ammendable operating system, and over the years the kernel has had to be "interpreted" in new ways to stay compatable with modern knowledge and not be out of touch. So much so infact that the kernel is now seen as a "metaphore" and not to be taken literally. How can you beleive in something with absolute faith that has to be updated every so often to iron out the embarasing errors?
Well, this may be the case, and if indeed it is, then possibly linuxism is a metaphore too? This would seem like a nice way the GPL advocates could accept science and work along side it without alienating people. In fact I am surprised that people are still to this day arguing in favour of linuxism, which is, i would like to add, impossible. As linuxism (and the operating system it stems from) is based on faith, and you dont question the ways of Linux Torvalds, etc. The only evidence for linuxism is a cyclical one, based on you already accepting the operating system.
I have noticed this in various faiths actual, and with risk of being flamed to death, i think that anyone that has such a great deal of faith in their operating system, whether it be windows, Macintosh, BEOS, and even Amiga, are so blinded by their faith that they cannot argue outside the box, each operating system relying on its existance to prove itself.
I have to emphasise that this is just my point of view at the moment, and the most irritating thing in the world is people getting on their high horse and preaching thier righteousness, whether linuxism or windows-ity. People believe what they want (or have been brought up) to believe, and your never going to convince them otherwise!
Anyway, to sum up my rather rant-ish comment: Windows is based on computer science, to accept Windows is to accept the scientific principles it is based on, many of which will contradict Linux. Linuxism is based on Windows, to accept linuxism is to accept the kernel, and gospel truth, which will contradict accepted computer science. Therefore neither party will ever conceed and never agree.
What I will say to the Linuxists is: Don't worry, give it 50 years and your operating system will be dead.