I'm French, doctor, specialized in medical informatics and Free software enthousiast.
I think most of the people are paranoiac about what are medical software, there's little place where lives are directly engaged.
Free Software is not a synonym of bazard developement. Free software is about source, not model of development (it's a confusion based on the Open source terminology of ESR, who insist on the technical aspect of the development and not on the philosophy/ethic behind the software).
Medical informatic is mostly academic, and the pricipal aim is to put medical knowledge into the software, the bigger problems in medical informatic are the developement, diffusion and use of standards. There's alternatively a lack or a profusion of candidate. Medical Software are commercial in 99% , but a lot of medical sotware have very little medical contents, they are mainly management software.
In France there's a mailing for medicine,free software and Linux : http://lists.invivo.net/pub/listservers/medecine -linux/
There's international mailing list for open source medical project : http://www.mail-archive.com/openhealth-list@mino ru-development.com/
There's two "big" project of free patient management sotware. http://www.paninfo.com.au/intro/littlefishprojec t_homepage.htm http://www.freemed.org/
there's at least one compagny impliqued in free medical software. http://www.minoru-development.com/
About the reliability and responsability, I'm sure that most of the commercial software have an EULA who force the user to agree that the vendor is not responsible for any hazard cause by his software. The NO WARRANTY in free software is less hypocrite. But American love lawyers, and they want someone to charge (and medical lawsuit are the niccer ), but if they want, there's nothing in the GPL against responsability. extract from the GPL : "You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."
I think it's better to separate code and service, and like Free Software are not about developement model, Free Software are not about price : Free Software are all about information.
Excuse me for my bad english it's not my mother tong:), and no USA are not the center of the Universe.
Slashdot Mirror
NO, criminal behavior DON'T fit the common model for schizophrenia. Perhaps in the movies but not in the real life.
Hervé
I'm French, doctor, specialized in medical informatics and Free software enthousiast.
e -linux/
o ru-development.com/
c t_homepage.htm
:), and no USA are not the center of the Universe.
I think most of the people are paranoiac about what are medical software, there's little place
where lives are directly engaged.
Free Software is not a synonym of bazard developement. Free software is about source,
not model of development (it's a confusion based on the Open source terminology of ESR, who insist on the technical aspect of the development and not on the philosophy/ethic behind the software).
Medical informatic is mostly academic, and the pricipal aim is to put medical knowledge into the software, the bigger problems in medical informatic are the developement, diffusion and use of standards. There's alternatively a lack or a profusion of candidate.
Medical Software are commercial in 99% , but
a lot of medical sotware have very little medical contents, they are mainly management software.
In France there's a mailing for medicine,free software and Linux :
http://lists.invivo.net/pub/listservers/medecin
There's international mailing list for open source medical project :
http://www.mail-archive.com/openhealth-list@min
There's two "big" project of free patient management sotware.
http://www.paninfo.com.au/intro/littlefishproje
http://www.freemed.org/
there's at least one compagny impliqued in free medical software.
http://www.minoru-development.com/
About the reliability and responsability, I'm sure that most of the commercial software have an EULA who force the user to agree that the vendor is not responsible for any hazard cause by his software.
The NO WARRANTY in free software is less hypocrite.
But American love lawyers, and they want someone to charge (and medical lawsuit are the niccer ), but if they want, there's nothing in the GPL against responsability.
extract from the GPL :
"You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."
I think it's better to separate code and service, and like Free Software are not about developement model, Free Software are not about price : Free Software are all about information.
Excuse me for my bad english it's not my mother
tong