Slashdot Mirror
Open Source in Government: Newport News, Va.
Sam Hiser writes "Open source in government is getting real. Tom Adelstein, in this penetrating interview with Andy Stein, the CIO of Newport News, Virginia, gets to the heart of why the opportunity to build collaborative software pulled the former chief IT architect of Capital One into the public sector. Police, fire and EMT early responders -- and the IT systems that support them - are under Sisyphean pressure to perform, while budgets are sagging. Something's gotta give, and it's going to be the aging software infrastructure in our towns and cities. Are Open Source platforms the only economically viable alternative? Maybe not, but collaboration will have to occur if we want to build the systems to save our lives."
Are Open Source platforms the only economically viable alternative? Maybe not, but collaboration will have to occur if we want to build the systems to save our lives."
And while we are at it.....in addition to city management and taxation for those issues, if we want to reduce the cost of medicine, an open source alternative to the current software with open standards is the way to go for medical health care, health insurance and billing. How much of our current medical system is devoted to billing, reimbursement and trying to transfer and manage data? It's a lot.
A standard open source health care database and form that is managed by the federal government that can be accessed by hospitals, insurance companies, states and individuals is the way through the nightmare that has become managed care. It could even tie into other open source government databases discussed in this article to improve the documentation of medical emergencies which may result in a further reduction of costs to governments and private citizens while also increasing the quality of care.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I personally would prefer that a government use an open system of well, anything, when it comes to running our vital services, as long as that information doesn't compromise security. The idea of a widespread open source initiative sounds like one of what may only be a small number of ways of getting our cities into the new millenium in these number-crunching times. That's just my take on it, and IANACIS (I am not a city infrastructure specialist).
Latest implementation of the Halloween Memo can be found here
If you have been exposed to Economics 101 you will have a field day reading this pseudo Research unfortunately published by a real university.
You will be glad to know that FOOS will fail as there is "No market at the core" and it does not provide an optimal allocation of resources.
He kind of forgot the benefit to the user of lower cost but who is counting.
Read more over at Groklaw by the way
Help fight continental drift.
I am a God fearing hardworking (computer engineer no less) American. I support opensource. It has been nothing but a benifit to me. I have learned more from the ideals of open source than from any class or text book I read in college. I dont think you really understand what open source is all about. You should do a litte more research before you make such comments. People in the OSDN are volunteers because they believe that if everyone on earth had some input into something then it would be as close to perfect as possible. Its the difference between some guy at a desk in oh say redmond under a deadline and turning out code quick enough to meet his deadline with no regard to the quality. Now say if he had about 300 teammates that process would go much better and the code would be more efficent. These people also belive that knowlage should be free. How is that such a bad thing?
If I wanted easy I wouldnt be an engineer or a patriot.
Open source in government is getting real.
I assume that you mean the United States government. Open Source has been chosen in implemented by governments all over the world. I, for one, am eager to see the United States follow the international example for a change. I hate to nitpick, but it seems that people all-too-often mistake government to mean the U.S.
I think that this would be an excellent test case for Open Source in the U.S. government. Considering the number of U.S.-based lawsuits over open source products, I think that this could finally bring the viability of using open source as a cost-saving measure to light so that local and state governments all over the United States will jump on the bandwagon and learn what we already know. Frankly, we need Open Source to be given more legitimacy in the United States as, outside of geek circles, it is all-too-often seen as a communist OS made for hobbyists... I know, I know, this makes no sense, but does most things?
I can see the wheels turning now:
"Wow. If a government deeply rooted in capitalism and who has good reason to demand security is willing to implement an Open Source product, it must be good."
When asked if the SCO case concerned him, the interviewer answered: "It further complicates the decision-making process and promotes uncertainty" and I have to agree. That is why this would be such an important, powerful move. A government opting to use Open Source software is what will promote Open Source certainty. We need folks with power standing up and saying the same thing he did when he said: "Linux has shown itself as a stable and a solid performer in the server area." What a great opportunity for this to be heard!
Software will break and the process of bringing it back to operation needs to be reliable. With open source software, the support structure is not always clear.
I can't resist. Yes, M$ software breaks. That off my chest, I think that Linux has shown itself to have a very strong, if slightly disjointed support structure. And, where there is a need, a solution will be forged. Perhaps they can take the money they were throwing into the software and support structure, and use it to financially support an organized Open Source Support structure. Less money, better software, better support.
The final point they made was a great one:
"Citizens can call their City Council representatives and voice their opinion. It is their tax money at stake. The promise is more and better services for less."
What a great idea. Not just for the places concerned in this article, but in our government as well. Perhaps if enough people called their representatives (who may or may not be tech savvy and who may or may not even know what Open Source is), we might possibly see this realized.
LOL. Creating The Slashdot lobby? Neat.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
"We are Linux. Resistance is measured in Ohms."
>where Governments could publish their requirements for software now and in the future.
:)
Haven't worked on goverment projects?
If they could do that, it would be over half of the battle right there.
If its small enough project then they would just hire a student or two or three and implement it that way.
Oh how I know this is going to get me flamed! Mention VB, and get ready for Slashdot Hell. But anyway...
One problem that Linux has is a smooth development platform with a great IDE, and widgets (widgets make the "enterprise" IT world go round!) Borland C Builder is very nice, but please keep in mind that the sucsess of VisualBasic is not only because an idiot can make an exicutable. It is also because it is in fact possible to build good apps in a very intuitive way.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
They also like to go with the biggest back-handers so don't write Microsoft off too quickly.
Throw this idea of collaborative open source development in local government in front of the voters and they'll love it. This is a great opportunity for the open source movement to get some real popular sentiment behind it, and any politician that jumps on it will find it an even safer way to get elected than rigging, sorry, 'redistricting' his own electoral boundaries.
The cash-strapped cities will benefit. The citizens will benefit. The open-source movement will benefit. Everyone's a winner. Apart from Micro$oft.
It's such an elegant idea. Think of the amount of duplication that will be eliminated!
Drill baby drill - on Mars
...How about you?
I read the article, went to my city's home page (www.weho.org) and submitted a comment to the city council. Short and to the point: I have long wanted governments to increase use of OS because it will lower costs and improve transparency of government operations. Here's a collaborative project they could get involved in (article link). Please consider. And since I actually live in a city that's small and progressive enough to think about it, maybe something will happen.
But seriously, that's what the article asks us to do. So if you like the idea, don't just say so here... tell your City Council. Tell them even if they're a bunch of decrepit morons firmly entrenched in a monolithic and incomprehensible government bureaucracy. Tell them even if it's a couple guys who meet on weekends to go over the problems of a tiny population. But *especially* tell them if, like me, you live in an urban municipality with a progressive, community-supported government and a decent median income.
Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
...Open Source.
SLG admins + managers are in it for the pension. Risk usually does not bode well for those who are lookin for security and retirement after 25 yrs of service.
For Newport News this looks like he was able to make a mark for himself and got lucky. Most admins and managers that I talk to do not have this luxury.
To advance and therefor get a bigger pention they need to be able to pass on the torch.. Open source is "too complex" to pass the torch on to risk averse admins and managers.
Finally; 'free' does not look good to those who do not spend their own money (they spend our money). You need to spend budget to get budget.
Personally I think that ease of use and simplicity need to be priority #1 to get Open Source into Government.
Despite all the wailing, I'm betting you'd be hard pressed to find many governmental entities that are actually going to get less money this year. When a bureaucrat says "cut," that generally means less of an increase than expected, not less actual dollars. During the '90s, goverments got used to fat increases each year and built those expectations into each successive budget. Then when the good times ended, suddenly instead of 5, 6, 7, or even 8 percent increase, they got 1 or 2, and it looked like the end of the world.