Real pleasure. 謝謝.
Thank you very much.
Yeah.
One, two, three, cheese.
Is that good? Are you happy?
CC Zero is...
Can you take one? That’s probably even better, and you can send it to me under a CC BY license.
Can you take a picture as well?
I don’t normally do this, but...
Thank you. One last thing, could I get a picture. I’d like to put a picture up.
It’s really good to see everyone.
I check it every now and then...
We can Tweet everybody.
Please be in touch. I know, Audrey, I’ve got your email. You’ve got my book on GitLab. Please keep in touch. If there’s anything else on anyone’s mind before I go today?
I’m at time with you guys. I’ve got to get to another meeting in a moment, but I’ve really, really appreciated this, and really appreciated going through it with all of you guys.
Otherwise, people just game the system with, "Oh, I got a little bit." It’s true that it’s better to have 50 percent than zero percent, but most will go, "Well, we’re using Python on Azure," or something like that. Yes, but...
Yeah, exactly. You want to score a curve like that.
Unfortunately, it’s like imagine in all those movies...has anyone seen those James Bond movies, where at the very end he just has to remove one thing from the bomb to stop it detonating? Similarly, if you have an entirely open system, but one crucial part of it is closed, then ...
The third item is percentage, basically a procurement rule where you assess the percentage of open info in a bid, and there’s a points weighting for that. By the way, the points weighting must be very heavily on 100 percent. People make this mistake that somehow 50 percent open is ...
Number two is an open fund of five percent of the IP budget. That means that money is spent on an automated, algorithmic basis, based on just what open information we use. It could be content. By the way, it doesn’t have to be software, but just of X percent.
One was stacks, just how much is spent on open.
Maybe, first, if you’re going to write it on your piece of paper, because then it’ll go into your notes, I said there were three things I would suggest.
That’s a very good point.
Yeah, exactly.
Don’t worry about the free cultural works definition. Open Definition covers all of that.
Then that’s great, but it’s like going into the discussion of all the weird freeware. I’d say open license, and then you say liberal license...
Yes. We can just say open license. Don’t say CC license. You say open license and non‑open license.
It’s up to you to say, if you’re going to spend $50,000 running X but you’re going to spend $100,000 buying Oracle licenses, the $50,000 means you’re only doing a third...
The other is to try and write a rule in about assessing the entire stack. Don’t put the burden on the government. You could say, "A vendor, when bidding, has to assess what percentage," and you could do it in value terms or something. You could say to them, "In ...
You could even limit it and say, "We’ll only spend it in Taiwan," which would be really good for the government. We’ll say, "We’ll spend it on open software, but it has to be a CKAN developer in Taiwan, it has to be a WordPress developer in Taiwan, it has ...
Two, could you try getting open funds set up, whose sole purpose was to say, "We paid for the open software we used last year." It might be open SSL Library, it might be WordPress, it might be CKAN, but run an experiment. It could be two percent of the ...
I guess my suggestion is, and I remain at your disposal, would be, one, see if you can get these numbers, which is, "How much was spent?" and "How much was spent on open?"
I got that. Yes, it is great.
The vendors are smart at hacking the system.
Without that, it doesn’t mean that much. That’s the problem. Without that...
It must be the whole stack, not just the...
How will you assess that? Do you check with the vendor? What’s the verification process to check the stack they supply is actually open?
Where’s the open fund in that proposal? Is there a proposal to A, in your procurement...how are you going to measure...let’s say procurement thing, and you’re going to have points, just to get really practical. You say, "OK, we want open software, and we’re going to give points in procurement ...
You’ve got to do it. Ideas are cheap. Implementation...
Wow, it’s so great.
"It’s completely limited to open software. We’re not paying for stuff we actually use, like a SaaS license, but we look to the software inside of it. We’re paying the core developers. If EtherCalc gets used or Etherpad or HackMD or WordPress or CKAN gets used, you pay the original ...
Start tracking use. My question to you guys would be to say, in terms of policy that you could have, one is could you start tracking use? Is there any way to set up a small, at the beginning, open fund? Say to government, "Hey, could we take some of ...
If we keep going down, we’re nearly finished. But my advice for you guys, that’s the agile and lean part, and we go open offsets, it’s the Heartbleed bug.
They are running the same model that old software...that Windows ran. It’s no different. It’s just a recurring revenue rather than a fixed...Windows, you still pay for upgrades. People think it’s so different. Windows used to upgrade every two, three, four years. You bought it at the time, and then ...
Because you’re locked in. Once you’re on their platform, once you’re on Workday for HR, you’re on Salesforce, or you’re on these platforms, you are not going to switch off easily.
No, not because they want to sell the data.
Why are they willing to do that?
If you look at the cloud providers and you go and look at the ones in California, like Workday, any of the really big ones, and you look at their revenue recognition and the way they think about it, they’re clearly willing to lose massive amounts of money to acquire ...
That’s great. The only thing I’d point out is that cloud procurement is just like traditional software buying, lock‑in. The problems of lock‑in to a cloud provider are just as big.
That’s still not open offsets.
