Comments on: Obama shows interest in open source http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2009/01/22/obama-shows-interest-in-open-source/ Technology news Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:15:02 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Ken http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2009/01/22/obama-shows-interest-in-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-156758 Ken Fri, 23 Jan 2009 02:47:57 +0000 http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2009/01/22/obama-shows-interest-in-open-source/#comment-156758 No, actually having the code freely available gets issues resolved and allows customization. Microsoft is closed source and doesn't seem to be especially secure. This CTO idea is more stupid window dressing propping up the false premise that motion is the same as productivity. You won't get one that isn't slanted in one way or another, most of the people he will reporting to aren't going to be able to judge if the premise is true or not and dealing with commercial and government is vastly different. It's relatively simple to get a decent idea if a project is going to pay off in a private enterprise because the metric is more geared toward individual accountability. It would be great to have this Czar of Tech but it needs to be kept clear of serving at the pleasure of the Prez. The responsibility over herding cats, which is really what we're talking about with the scope and length of time, should not be someone who is leaving every 4 or 8 years. This is how we end up systems who have incompatible architectures. If it is an empty window dressing PR move why bother? The President can easily appoint a council and get several recommendations. I know all the gushing about the "digital President" is amusing, but Clinton and Gore actually put Whitehouse on the web, Dean actually made the solicitation and raising funds on the web important, and if you think he is going to be twittering or writing his own blog entry very long, you are deluded or we are in deep do do. Being able to flip a light switch and preferring the ones with the little light at the tip doesn't mean I'm an electrician. If you want to give the post actual teeth get a solid apolitical low public profile ops guy/woman who looks past ephemeral shiny glint with a thick skin and give them the freedom from the need to pander. A person like Jobs who is a true genius is really not a good fit, think about how Perot fit GM. No, actually having the code freely available gets issues resolved and allows customization. Microsoft is closed source and doesn’t seem to be especially secure.

This CTO idea is more stupid window dressing propping up the false premise that motion is the same as productivity.

You won’t get one that isn’t slanted in one way or another, most of the people he will reporting to aren’t going to be able to judge if the premise is true or not and dealing with commercial and government is vastly different.

It’s relatively simple to get a decent idea if a project is going to pay off in a private enterprise because the metric is more geared toward individual accountability.

It would be great to have this Czar of Tech but it needs to be kept clear of serving at the pleasure of the Prez.

The responsibility over herding cats, which is really what we’re talking about with the scope and length of time, should not be someone who is leaving every 4 or 8 years. This is how we end up systems who have incompatible architectures.

If it is an empty window dressing PR move why bother? The President can easily appoint a council and get several recommendations.

I know all the gushing about the “digital President” is amusing, but Clinton and Gore actually put Whitehouse on the web, Dean actually made the solicitation and raising funds on the web important, and if you think he is going to be twittering or writing his own blog entry very long, you are deluded or we are in deep do do. Being able to flip a light switch and preferring the ones with the little light at the tip doesn’t mean I’m an electrician.

If you want to give the post actual teeth get a solid apolitical low public profile ops guy/woman who looks past ephemeral shiny glint with a thick skin and give them the freedom from the need to pander. A person like Jobs who is a true genius is really not a good fit, think about how Perot fit GM.

]]> By: Roger Milson http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2009/01/22/obama-shows-interest-in-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-156753 Roger Milson Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:37:02 +0000 http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2009/01/22/obama-shows-interest-in-open-source/#comment-156753 There are certainly many applications where the Govt would be much better off with open source. For example, I see little need for Government departments to be using Microsoft Office, when Open Office is so good, and getting better every day. There are certainly many applications where the Govt would be much better off with open source. For example, I see little need for Government departments to be using Microsoft Office, when Open Office is so good, and getting better every day.

]]> By: TJ Kirchner http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2009/01/22/obama-shows-interest-in-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-156724 TJ Kirchner Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:02:48 +0000 http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2009/01/22/obama-shows-interest-in-open-source/#comment-156724 That's fascinating. Its a huge sum of money that could go back into helping our economy (or used to maybe pay those stupid coupons for the digital transition :P). However, I feel a little reluctant to put sensitive federal information on programs who's source code is freely available to the public. That makes it easier to hack, does it? As far as the cabinet position, I think it makes a lot of sense. Surely the CTO would know more about the technology that the federal government wants to implement than some politician. "...whether such an official could deal with the bureaucracy involved in enforcing such decisions" Oh please... I can understand wanting someone with a strong political background as well as a strong technical background, but this seems like a really poor reason to simply not create the position. That’s fascinating. Its a huge sum of money that could go back into helping our economy (or used to maybe pay those stupid coupons for the digital transition :P). However, I feel a little reluctant to put sensitive federal information on programs who’s source code is freely available to the public. That makes it easier to hack, does it?

As far as the cabinet position, I think it makes a lot of sense. Surely the CTO would know more about the technology that the federal government wants to implement than some politician.

“…whether such an official could deal with the bureaucracy involved in enforcing such decisions”

Oh please… I can understand wanting someone with a strong political background as well as a strong technical background, but this seems like a really poor reason to simply not create the position.

]]>