I was at the Mil-OSS conference this year where this memo was discussed quite a bit, and I just want to mention some things in response to some of the comments. Most of this was in David Wheeler's blog (the first link), but some might have been missed.
Most government program/project managers are very slow to try new things like OSS. Generally, this is not due to laziness or not being technically up to date, but rather because the number of rules and regulations that they can get hammered for failing to follow is so large that they tend to continue to follow a safe path unless it is incredibly clear that they won’t get in trouble. This memo is designed to give top cover and make clear to all PM’s that using OSS is more than acceptable, it is actually preferred.
1) Although I can't say for sure how much the new administration's personnel in the Pentagon had to do with being signed, it probably was very little since the memo had been in production for years (rumor was that Dr. Pepper was going to give a free soda to everyone if it came out before 2010, but I don't think that's true). Over beers, one of the people involved with its writing told the story of being asked whether the memo would be out before Thanksgiving and responding, "Without a doubt." That was in 2007!! It probably emerged more from the "Open Technology Roadmap" by John Scott, Mark Lucas, and JC Herz for Sue Peyton in 2006 than any political changes.
2) Much of the memo just clarifies parts of the DoD's official position on OSS, especially areas that were major targets for FUD by contractors who are trying to sell proprietary systems to the government. For example, they would claim that procurement law requires commercial software to be used, and OSS wasn’t COTS. This was addressed by the 2003 memo, but still the misinformation persisted. Additionally, procurement law requires that software either be warranted or the source code available. Vendors would claim that since OSS isn’t warranted, it couldn’t be used, neglecting the second part of the requirement about source code.
My doctor told me to quit caffeine, alcohol, or overeating, and caffeine was the logical choice. (I later found out he said "AND" not "OR", but that just wasn't happening, and doesn't affect the story.)
Now that I no longer drink caffeine at all, if I do accidentally ingest some, I get very similar symptoms to those who don't get their regular fix of the stuff: that night, I can't get to sleep, and the next day I have a killer headache originating from the back of my neck, I am completely lethargic, and I can't concentrate to save my life.
Joel Spolsky (of Fog Creek software) has recently launched a new web site for programming questions, http://stackoverflow.com./
It has lots of good answers to questions, and is well designed to be very easy to search and find results.
Why are you limiting this to voice processing? Consider a camera based system which records your hand gestures to control your computer. You should see the work of Juan Wachs for an introduction on this technology:
http://www.movesinstitute.org/~jpwachs/index.html
Slashdot Mirror
Zed's dead, baby. Zed's dead. We're riding his chopper.
Well Hell then, you need to speak up louder when we're drinking beer so I don't misquote you!!! ;-)
Sorry about that.
I was at the Mil-OSS conference this year where this memo was discussed quite a bit, and I just want to mention some things in response to some of the comments. Most of this was in David Wheeler's blog (the first link), but some might have been missed.
Most government program/project managers are very slow to try new things like OSS. Generally, this is not due to laziness or not being technically up to date, but rather because the number of rules and regulations that they can get hammered for failing to follow is so large that they tend to continue to follow a safe path unless it is incredibly clear that they won’t get in trouble. This memo is designed to give top cover and make clear to all PM’s that using OSS is more than acceptable, it is actually preferred.
1) Although I can't say for sure how much the new administration's personnel in the Pentagon had to do with being signed, it probably was very little since the memo had been in production for years (rumor was that Dr. Pepper was going to give a free soda to everyone if it came out before 2010, but I don't think that's true). Over beers, one of the people involved with its writing told the story of being asked whether the memo would be out before Thanksgiving and responding, "Without a doubt." That was in 2007!! It probably emerged more from the "Open Technology Roadmap" by John Scott, Mark Lucas, and JC Herz for Sue Peyton in 2006 than any political changes.
2) Much of the memo just clarifies parts of the DoD's official position on OSS, especially areas that were major targets for FUD by contractors who are trying to sell proprietary systems to the government. For example, they would claim that procurement law requires commercial software to be used, and OSS wasn’t COTS. This was addressed by the 2003 memo, but still the misinformation persisted. Additionally, procurement law requires that software either be warranted or the source code available. Vendors would claim that since OSS isn’t warranted, it couldn’t be used, neglecting the second part of the requirement about source code.
My doctor told me to quit caffeine, alcohol, or overeating, and caffeine was the logical choice. (I later found out he said "AND" not "OR", but that just wasn't happening, and doesn't affect the story.) Now that I no longer drink caffeine at all, if I do accidentally ingest some, I get very similar symptoms to those who don't get their regular fix of the stuff: that night, I can't get to sleep, and the next day I have a killer headache originating from the back of my neck, I am completely lethargic, and I can't concentrate to save my life.
They are sapping our Precious Bodily Fluids. Luckily, there is an answer:
"I do not deny myself women, Mandrake, but I do withhold my essence from them...."
Joel Spolsky (of Fog Creek software) has recently launched a new web site for programming questions, http://stackoverflow.com./ It has lots of good answers to questions, and is well designed to be very easy to search and find results.
Why are you limiting this to voice processing? Consider a camera based system which records your hand gestures to control your computer. You should see the work of Juan Wachs for an introduction on this technology: http://www.movesinstitute.org/~jpwachs/index.html