Open Source in Oregon 125
Anonymous writes "MWVLUG's coordinator, Cooper Stevenson, has asked Linux Today to post this detailed history of events surrounding the battle to get open source software legislation enacted in the Beaver State in an effort to raise public awareness for the campaign."
Re:first post (Score:2, Funny)
Parody?
Humorous (note) criticism of the government?
Oh, I forget, you live in the US... that's not allowed anymore
Re:first post (Score:3, Funny)
Re:first post (Score:1, Funny)
Re:first post (Score:1)
You see them sometimes in Greenway Park (near where I grew up)
Re:first post (Score:2)
Re:first post (Score:1)
Re:first post (Score:1)
Re:first post (Score:2)
Justifying costs isn't strange, is it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Support costs will be added no matter what. Why not justify the extra expense of licensing?
Re:Justifying costs isn't strange, is it? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's critical to divorce your processes from another corporations need for an income stream.
Re:Justifying costs isn't strange, is it? (Score:2)
I wasn't aware that any demands were being made. True, products reach the end of their supported period, but that's all that that means - the original vendor no longer supports them. Depending on your exact needs, that may or may not be a problem. Certainly, I've not heard any reports of vendors demanding that you buy the latest version.
Re:Justifying costs isn't strange, is it? (Score:2)
There've been article about this upcoming cha
Re:Justifying costs isn't strange, is it? (Score:2)
Re:Justifying costs isn't strange, is it? (Score:3, Funny)
Well, nobody pays for their M$ software anymore, everyone has a friend who has a friend who can burn him/her the latest Windows/Office/etc; I guess it is no longer considered normal to pay sw licences where applicable. Oh, wait, nevermind, that's not legal...
Re:Justifying costs isn't strange, is it? (Score:2)
What a surprise... (Score:5, Insightful)
It may be one man, one vote, but that man is the picture of a dead president printed on green paper, and the more of them you have, the more votes you have.
Re:What a surprise... (Score:1)
It may be one man, one vote, but that man is the picture of a dead president printed on green paper, and the more of them you have, the more votes you have.
He's the man, he has the vote!
Re:What a surprise... (Score:5, Informative)
Let's see: Create jobs. Save money. Why didn't anyone think of this a long time ago?
As an aside, Oregon public schools use Linux probably as much or more than any other school district. They even have their own distro!
Re:What a surprise... (Score:1, Redundant)
We have exactly 1.9 trillion unemployed IS/IT consultants in Portland alone.
I thought it was a little less than that.
Re:What a surprise... (Score:1, Redundant)
Lets see: Portland + Suburbs, ~1,000,000 people.
Unemployment: 60,000 @ 6% unemployment rate
IS/IT workers: 3,000 @ a measly 5%.
I'm assuming with the way the portland job market is right now, that it is probably higher. Like 8-10% of workers are unemployed IS/IT workers. So, it could be as high as 6,000.
So, the number might have been right. I probably just added too many zeros in my head when I posted.
Re:What a surprise... (Score:2, Informative)
1.9 trillion? (Score:2)
Re:What a surprise... (Score:1)
No you don't.
Re:What a surprise... (Score:1)
K12LTSP [k12ltsp.org]
Re:What a surprise... (Score:2)
Ahh the beauty of capitalism.
A day in the life of (Score:4, Interesting)
Interesting to see an amateur go up against a fleet of paid pros (BSA, MS, et al). It would be nice to see it work. You know, that whole account appeals to my root-for-the-underdog, iconoclastic, giant-killer streak.
Just to pick a medical nit, however, he did misspell his medication... it's Vicodin, not "Vicaden" (changing a letter or two in a medication name could cause a medication error).
Re:A day in the life of (Score:4, Funny)
Yet another peace of ammunition for anti-open source lobbyists - OSS supporters are junkies.
Re:A day in the life of (Score:5, Interesting)
He made a lot of other typos as well. Most confusing error was about halfway through: I'm pretty sure that should be:
Re:A day in the life of (Score:2)
Food for Thought (Score:5, Informative)
I regret that I have to say this, but a big part of what's so far preventing this bill from succeeding is John & Karen Minnis, a powerful but very misguided duo in Oregon's capitol. Look at this beauty from last session:
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2003/Te
This bill would define almost anyone, anywhere, as a terrorist and send them to prison for life without possibility for parole.
The Oregon open source law's failure to pass indicates that our legislative process has been quite effectively coopted by legislators who draw their power from the people, then use their power to protect and further the interests of organizations which pay them money and favors, and
Hopefully the bill will pass. Even so, the problem of our subverted legislative bodies will continue. And as it does, we are in deep, deep trouble.
Re:Food for Thought (Score:2)
Interesting that Canada has recently passed a law to prevent exactly this type of corruption. Campaign donations from corporations and even single individuals now have (relatively small) legal limits, and most campaign money will come from the public coffers in amounts linked to a candidates voter support.
I'll bet the incumbents are quite happy about this turn of affairs. Mindshare begets cash which with which to purchase more mindshare.
Re:Food for Thought (Score:3, Informative)
You see the damndest things related to terrorism. Check this out (from the second line of the bill):
Terrorism and the mark of the beast in a government do
Re:Food for Thought (Score:1)
You are indeed not really reading this right, and it is in fact simply adding the crime of Terrorism to the list of crimes in section 19 chapter 666. I read it that way too until I found Terrorism at the bottom of the list and noticed the note that says "items in bold type are new additions."
The really scary part of the bill is the very first part:
Aren't votes more important that campaign funding? (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, there's the speaker of the house arguing against savings when other equally or more urgent sectors experience budget cuts. Don't voters care about such things? Aren't the voters ultimately the people responsible for just who's up there representing them?
Is it really worth while to line your pockets with campaign contributions when ultimately nobody will vote for you anyways because you sold them out?
Re:Aren't votes more important that campaign fundi (Score:5, Insightful)
What I found most interesting was that untill the people outside of governmnet noticed that open source could help them directly they weren't interested in how it impacted the government they voted for!
Politicians might be short sighted and highly influenced by lobyists, though it looks like the voters -- and all citizens in general -- also suffer from this.
Who's in charge? Counting on human nature to remain the same, what would be necessary to change this?
There's a complex mathematical function here. (Score:1)
See, the lobbyists' money allows the candidate to get larger and more powerful advertising out to the masses, which brings in a number of votes. This is weighed by the savvy (read: greedy, corrupt) politician against the loss of votes due to voters' disagreement with his choices on policy matters. So, ax - bx = c, where a is voters influenced by political ads, b is voters influenced by decisions on policy issues, x is the amount of leaning towards the lobbyists, and c is the net votes gained or lost by t
Wouldn't it be more effective ... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's preaching to the converted, otherwise. I don't mean to sound like a troll, but c'mon guys.
Re:Wouldn't it be more effective ... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's preaching to the converted, otherwise. I don't mean to sound like a troll, but c'mon guys.
Didn't read the article, did you? This article isn't preaching to the converted, because it's not preaching at all - it's about the lobbying process, not about the merits of Open
Re:Wouldn't it be more effective ... (Score:2, Insightful)
I can support that argument (Score:4, Interesting)
The argument that open source software creates jobs for smaller entities instead of spending money on software from big companies located somewhere is a strong argument if you talk to politicians.
Re:I can support that argument (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I can support that argument (Score:1, Informative)
A sic, sic article... (Score:2)
[
Re:A sic, sic article... (Score:2)
Ummm...that was supposed to be "or SOMEBODY..."
My...err...English-major girlfriend would not answer my calls...and I didn't see what that Preview was for...and...uhh...
hey, Hey, HEY!!... (Score:1)
Hey buddy, get off his case!
PSaltyDS had a valid point about looking good in print, and just 'cause he made one eensey schmeensey error doesn't mean you have to get all hypercritical and rub it in and... [rant fades off in to the distance]
Justify USING open source (Score:4, Insightful)
How about, instead, a bill that requires:
This way, instead of the "or else" tone of the original bill, you get a more "let's level the playing field, and open the books to the paying public". That might get your legislators more amenable to passing that kind of bill.
Just a thought..
Re:Justify USING open source (Score:1, Insightful)
A bill that requires Open source to be investigate will result in exactly one thing - higher consultancy fees per acquisition.
There are certain needs that Linux today cannot at all satisfy, and, yes, sometimes it's a lot cheaper if things work out of the box (or at least everyone runs into the same problems) than that a lot of local consultants that could theoretically be retained on demand but have to be hired for lonterm care contracts due to state
Re:Justify USING open source (Score:1)
Re:Justify USING open source (Score:4, Insightful)
How about, instead, a bill that requires:
That sounds good as long as #1 includes a provision that the OSS actually be evalutated against the requirements. Otherwise the consideration given OSS will be pretty minor after the 2-hour, glitzy, high-powered, vaporware demo by the COTS marketroids (and the backslap, wink, and nod from the local lobbyist).
WHAT is the problem here? (Score:1, Interesting)
OK, so the legislators who are being coddled daily by bigtime special interests are a problem, but what's THE problem? As previously mentioned, that article is a terrible perversion of the most basic grammar and spelling rules. I realize not everyone has taken the time to gain even a basic mastery over their native language, but Christ, at least run a freaking spell check over it.
Next, let's point out that, while the Minnis crew is undoubtedly corrupt to their rotten cores, there's an enabler here: th
It's a sad day... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you live in Oregon, please (Score:5, Informative)
I had some involvement with this while it was in the house general committee. The combination of AeA lobby and the Minnis couple are what is holding this bill back.
I got a chance to speak with some legislators on a one for one basis. Most of them do consider well written / spoken input and are happy to have it.
When you do write this letter or place a phone call, be sure and ask for a response to a question. Not only is your input catagorized and considered, it will take time. They will give you some sort of answer; otherwise, they are on the defensive for later conversations.
Interestingly enough, if you mail Minnis, you get a short form indicating in advance exactly why you will not get a direct response. (Really shows where the attention is here doesn't it?) Anyway, phone calls and fax work best for her because both of those take actual time and resources from her staff. Your legislator may vary...
Example questions:
What is your position on SB 589, the Oregon Open Source bill?
Given the number of unemployed IT professionals and the potential for savings HB 589 holds, why not work to keep Oregons dollars here where they can do some good for those struggling to find work in tough times?
Can I count on your support in committee regarding SB 589?
If, they express support, ask them how you can best help them move the bill forward. --Then do it. (Won't be bad, just a couple phone calls, friendly discussion or a letter.)
If against, ask them "why?". Take those answers and do some research and get back to them.
Finally: (The guilt approach)
Cooper Stevenson along with Rep. Phil Barnhart's staff have worked very hard on this bill against a powerful lobby. Many people across Oregon, myself included, devoted time and energy to the task of education for our legislators the first time around.
After about a month of hard lobbying, phone calls, letters and appointments, I personally believed Minnis had stopped the bill. We have a second chance people! Passing a bill like this is worth it! Spend a little time, feel good today --why not?
This is damn good news coming at a time when the legislature is looking for money anywhere it can. Perhaps ongoing pressure from the people of Oregon can make a difference. There must be at least 10,000 Oregon
This is a lot of noise people. If you have never done this before, it's easy, please start now and get two other people to do the same.
This group deserves an hour or two of your time.
Cooper, Sally, others... --good job!
(Off writing and calling as you read this...)
Spell-check errors!!?! (Score:2)
and my favorite:
"I'll tell you w
Re:hee hee (Score:1)