Comment by viktorcode
12 days ago
> We wouldn't tolerate secrecy in the calculations used to keep our buildings upright, and we shouldn't tolerate opacity in the software that keeps our tractors, hearing aids, ventilators, pacemakers, trains, games consoles, phones, CCTVs, door locks, and government ministries working.
Construction industry if full of privately owned technologies and closed source software, from architectural drawing board up to the last glass panel in a window.
Building are staying upright not because of openness, but because of the enforced standards for construction. Same can be applied to software orders.
Want to prevent a government office suite to be bricked remotely? Put forth requirements for autonomous work, self hosting, multiyear coverage for critical patches and ability to export the data at any moment in the format of your preference. Whoever provides this will get the contract.
This seems to me far more realistic aim than trying to enforce global legal straight jacket to be universally applied to all software and hardware products available for purchase in your country
Legal straight jacket? Doctorow is arguing for abandoning the legal straight jacket, not creating one. It seems you severley misread the article.
He wrote “calculations”