Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Open Source Your Rights Online

WhiteHouse.gov Releases Open Source Code 161

Posted by kdawson
from the of-by-for-and-to-the-people dept.
schliz writes "The White House has released four custom modules for the Drupal content management system. The modules address scalability, communication, and accessibility for disabled users, and the release is expected to benefit both the Drupal community and the WhiteHouse.gov site as the code is reviewed and improved by the open source community." Reader ChiefMonkeyGrinder adds an opinion piece with a somewhat envious view from the UK: "Open source is treated as something akin to devil-worshipping in some parts of government. So, the idea that a major project in the government backyard would be based on something as basic as Drupal is pretty far-fetched. No, this side of the Atlantic would have involved a closed-tender process; a decision made [behind] closed doors based on proprietary software and we'd be completely in the dark about costs, about delays, and about functionality."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WhiteHouse.gov Releases Open Source Code

Comments Filter:
  • by Xeriar (456730) on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:45AM (#31954518) Homepage

    that our government is sliding towards communism!

    • by MozeeToby (1163751) on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:48AM (#31954558)

      Well, the mantra of communism is "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That's... pretty much exactly how open source works. Everyone sees the benefits regardless of how much work they put into it, whether that be designing the architecture the system, writing code, submitting bug reports, or even just submitting crash reports.

      • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:02AM (#31954738) Journal
        With the one significant difference of OSS being "From each according to his abilities, if he feels like it, or is redistributing modified binaries, to each according to his needs if something matching his needs happens to be available, and because the provider of that something voluntarily made it available.

        The difference between being voluntary(yes, BSD trolls, people are legally compelled to release their modifications if they distribute binaries from GPLed source; but they take on this contractual obligation voluntarily) and being a command-and-control scheme is not insignificant.

        Looked at in a slightly different light, OSS development is basically a variation on the "consortium development" model, adjusted for the fact that, since duplicating data is virtually free, lawyers and restrictions to prevent free-riding are actually more expensive than free-riders are. BSD-style OSS makes no legal effort to rein-in free riding, either ignoring the issue or depending on the fact that maintaining your own fork is often more of a POS than staying up with the mainline, while GPL-style OSS makes no legal effort to go after free-riding users; but does seek to compel free-riding developers to contribute.

        The handy thing about it is that, because it does have a slightly communistic flavor, it works for and appeals to your idealistic sharing hippie types; but, as experience has demonstrated, it is surprisingly compatible with capitalist incentive structures(just look at how much kernel development gets done, basically because large corporations find it profitable), and it involves basically zero state coercion, aside from legal enforcement of voluntary private contracts. Thus, it is largely agreeable to everyone from communists to libertarians, with the exception only of rent-seeking corporatist scum.
        • I've always wondered what would happen if I took an Open sourced project and used it in a closed source solution of my own. The only way I'd come under legal threat is if the Open Sourced community notices me, and I figure there are some weird loopholes in copyright law that I could mandate that no one be allowed to view my source.

          • Depends: If BSD, nothing(so long as you followed any attribution requirements).

            If GPL, nothing, unless you distributed your proprietary binaries, at which point you would be legally obligated to offer the recipients of those binaries access to the source for no more than reasonable costs of reproduction(this is a common misconception: lots of outfits comply with the GPL just by slapping a zipped source bundle on an FTP server somewhere, just to save the hassle; but your legal obligation is only to recipi
          • See the various busybox lawsuits, where they found strings related to the busybox source in various products. I believe you can be compelled to show your source code in response to a subpoena, but it won't necessarily become public record.

            It also scares me that you think there could be "some weird loopholes in copyright law." If you don't know what copyright does for you, why the heck are you in a creative industry? Go! Read! Learn how copyright works and how and why the GPL works within it.

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by ffreeloader (1105115)

        Well, the mantra of communism is "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That's... pretty much exactly how open source works.

        Well, except for that "small bit" of difference between enforced_by_the_government and given_voluntarily. It's sort of like the government telling you that you must build your neighbor's house, and you volunteering to help him out because he needs the help. Other than that, it's exactly the same....

        IMHO, the only people who can't see the difference are

        • Oh, for Pete's sake. The progressives/liberals name call on this site on a daily basis. There's probably close to 50 posts a day denigrating Christians, Republicans, conservatives of any stripe, etc... and they aren't modded as trolls every time they appear, even though many of them are gratuitous examples of intolerance and hatred of opposing points of view. The double standard exhibited here is incredible, especially as it comes from the group of people who preach tolerance to the point that tolerance

      • And yet Free Software's virtue of allowing users to maintain or hire anyone to maintain their software, make it the freest market. So you've got free market communism in one corner, competing with proprietary software's central-planned-economy capitalism. ;-)

      • by Blakey Rat (99501)

        Well, the mantra of communism is "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That's... pretty much exactly how open source works.

        Unless you can't (or don't) write code. In which case, your contributions are at best ignored, at worst loudly rejected.

        (It might be how open source is supposed to work, I wouldn't know about that. But it's certainly not how it works in practice.)

      • by Rayonic (462789)

        Well, the mantra of communism is "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That's... pretty much exactly how open source works. Everyone sees the benefits regardless of how much work they put into it, whether that be designing the architecture the system, writing code, submitting bug reports, or even just submitting crash reports.

        Well no, it fails on the "from each" part. There are plenty of users who could contribute to an open source project, but don't. It's not a perfect analogy, but the gist of it is that the Open Source movement doesn't require (or need) every capable person to contribute. But under a Communist system, it's assumed that everyone is contributing to the best of their abilities. (The question of motivating people is left to the reader.)

    • Burning my karma kandle at both ends.

    • by fm6 (162816)

      Funny and ironic. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the Obama administration has brought a lot of technology geeks into government. Not entirely by design: many were volunteers for his campaign that found that they'd been too fired up by winning the election to go back to their old jobs.

      Why is this ironic? Because tech geeks do not tend towards socialist ideologies. If anything, they tend towards hyper-libertarianism. An ideology that's just as detached from the real world as anything Karl Marx dreamed up, b

  • Good move (Score:5, Interesting)

    by betterunixthanunix (980855) on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:46AM (#31954526)
    I have a lot of complaints about this current administration, but I'll give them credit where it is due. This is a good move, and I hope to see similar actions in the future.
    • Agreed. I have many, many complaints about this administration, but at least they're saving some amount of money by utilizing Drupal instead of some proprietary CMS system that might go out of business at any time.

    • At the same time, on more important life and death issues (such as war and threats of war, health care, trillions for corporations while citizens go hungry, civil liberties) this administration shares a lot in common with the previous administration, an administration that even former supporters grew to dislike. In my congressional district people know that trillions on occupation hurts us at home in many ways. Drupal code contributions can't measure up to the impact of keeping that much money in our coun

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by gnieboer (1272482)

        Um, yes.

        If anyone is basing their decision on who should be the leader of the world's largest economy/military/nuclear stockpile based on whether they use Drupal for their website and release any source their team creates, then... FAIL.

        Doesn't mean it's not a good idea that shows action behind words.

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Hmmm, let's check President Obama's record after just a year in office, okay?

      -- stopped a depression in its tracks and converted it into what now clearly has been a severe, but tolerable, recession - check

      -- raised public opinion around the world of the United States, and appropriately is re-focusing the Middle Eastern wars to Afghanistan, working finally in comity with Pakistan with successful tactics against terrorists - check

      -- passed a health care bill that is far from perfect but will cut govt expenses

      • So I'm curious when you say, "I have a lot of complaints about this current administration" what are they?

        For the most part I agree with you. But I do agree with the previous poster in that I too have a lot of complaints about this current administration. Handling of the ACTA comes to mind, along with appointing RIAA lawyers to positions within the DoJ seems pretty scary. Their chiming in and interfering with the Joel Tenenbaum case on behalf of their former employees is repugnant to me and seems to directly contradict Obama's campaign promises about lobbyists and industry insiders role in his administration. H

    • But change you can run diffs against!

  • by aussersterne (212916) on Friday April 23, 2010 @09:58AM (#31954690) Homepage

    since sliced bread. Easy and damned rapid to deploy, reasonably scalable, easy to modify and customize, flexible enough to build everything from a blog to an e-commerce system to a social networking platform to a cloud-based RDBMS front-end to a personal document and photos filing system.

    A million things I used to do with my own C code, shell scripts, and hard drives are now done on a hosted domain using Drupal. More and more of the work I do for others just slides into Drupal by default because it's the easiest, most powerful, fastest, and most growth-capable way to accomplish it.

    I just love Drupal.

    • Spit it out man, what are you trying to say? Do you or do you not like Drupal? Damned kids, being so mysterious these days. Back in my day, you stated flat out how you felt about something. And we liked it that way.

    • by Monkeedude1212 (1560403) on Friday April 23, 2010 @12:01PM (#31956494) Journal

      Drupal is the greating thing since sliced bread.

      Woah, woah woah, Woah woah woah, woah. Yes, this warrants 7 woahs, now 8. Everything you mentioned can easily be done with bread.

      Its easy (water and flour) and damned rapid to deploy (Little while in the oven), reasonably scalable (just need a bigger bun-cake-pan), easy to modify and customize (dough!), flexible enough to build everything from a blog (bread-log, also known as a baguette) to an e-commerce system (ancient romans often bartered with wheat) to a social networking platform (http://www.breadtalk.com/ apply to join!) to a cloud-based RDBMS front end (okay what the hell is that? You can't just make stuff up you know) to a personal document and photos filing system (Sliced bread makes great seperators, see: Club sandwhich)

      Don't get me wrong, Drupal is pretty amazing, but lets not go around belittling the great invention that is sliced bread.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Sir_Lewk (967686)

        Taking it literally, I believe "greatest thing since sliced bread" may still indicate that sliced bread is the greatest thing, but the new thing being talked about is greater than all achievements after (since) sliced bread.

        Of course, this might still imply the possibility of things greater than sliced bread existing before sliced bread...

        In other words: 3 18 9 2 5 8 3 5 2 15 12 11 9 14

        In the above list, 14 is the greatest element since 15. If 14 where changed to a number, say 16, then it would become the

        • I think the issue I have then is that sliced bread would have a value of infinite, since there are endless possibilities for bread.

        • No you've analysed it about the right amount. That's pretty much the conclusion I came to when I thought about it.

          I would give a nice description of my thought process, but I don't want to reinvent the wheel...

      • Drupal is the greating thing since sliced bread.

        Woah, woah woah, Woah woah woah, woah. Yes, this warrants 7 woahs, now 8. Everything you mentioned can easily be done with bread.

        Its easy (water and flour) and damned rapid to deploy (Little while in the oven), reasonably scalable (just need a bigger bun-cake-pan), easy to modify and customize (dough!), flexible enough to build everything from a blog (bread-log, also known as a baguette) to an e-commerce system (ancient romans often bartered with wheat) to a social networking platform (http://www.breadtalk.com/ apply to join!) to a cloud-based RDBMS front end (okay what the hell is that? You can't just make stuff up you know) to a personal document and photos filing system (Sliced bread makes great seperators, see: Club sandwhich)

        Don't get me wrong, Drupal is pretty amazing, but lets not go around belittling the great invention that is sliced bread.

        All of your points but your last one only had to do with bread, not specifically sliced bread. Fortunately, the greatness of sliced bread is such that it still remains a greater invention than Drupal. For evidence I present this sandwich of Perfectly Normal Beast.

        • I mean to demonstrate that bread alone is great, and since it is a such an integral and derivative part of sliced bread, sliced bread must be greater or at least equally amazing.

      • by migla (1099771)

        But sliced bread is *less* versatile than unsliced bread. And slicing bread can be a little, meditational moment every day.

        Sliced bread is not only over hyped, it is the work of the devil! The devil doesn't want you to stop and think even for a second. The devil wants you to just keep running along in the rat race. /humor /truth

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Bing Tsher E (943915)

      Sliced bread actually sucks. Bigtime.

      The 'crust' on a loaf of bread protects the bread inside, and keeps it fresh. Slicing the whole loaf just promotes early spoilage. The promotion of pre-packaged sliced bread goes hand in hand with the idea that bread needs to be pumped full of chemicals and preservatives to keep it fresh.

  • by Nethemas the Great (909900) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:01AM (#31954722)
    the more impressed I am by his lack of respect for the status quo of government IT. Keep up the good work. It's about about time someone applied some common sense.
  • Um... bullshit? (Score:4, Informative)

    by nacturation (646836) * <nacturation@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:05AM (#31954772) Journal

    About the UK and Open Source:

    No, this side of the Atlantic would have involved a closed-tender process; a decision made by closed doors based on proprietary software and we'd be completely in the dark about costs, about delays, and about functionality.

    http://www.google.com/search?q=uk+government+open+source [google.com]

    Odd... seems the opposite to what the esteemed "ChiefMonkeyGrinder" claims. Of course, one of the links there is "words, not deeds" so perhaps all the noise about open source is just that.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by yuna49 (905461)

      Of course, one of the links there is "words, not deeds" so perhaps all the noise about open source is just that.

      Indeed if you read the article you would have seen a comment by a VP at Ingres that sounds remarkably similar to the criticism from the UK commentator cited at the top of the story:

      This is not the first time such platitudes have been made by the government. Over the past 12 months the office of the CIO has continually pointed to open source as the key to reducing capital expenditure on large publ

    • Re:Um... bullshit? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by aitala (111068) on Friday April 23, 2010 @11:40AM (#31956170) Homepage

      How about http://data.gov.uk/ ? That's Drupal too.

      Or is the site not really part of the Gov't?

      Eric

    • by gbjbaanb (229885)

      to be fair, the bit and we'd be completely in the dark about costs, about delays is not true. After a little while of project work, the newspapers would be full of stories about the delays, the costs, the extended deadlines, the additional costs and the failures of functionality.

      Actually, I started to put the links in, but then I got too depressed at our government's record of IT failures. Idiots.

  • When the BS is removed, some bright people can do some brilliant work. Congrats WH IT Team! Bravo!!
  • We truly have awesome hardware (as noted in the summary):

    decisions made by closed doors

    Really, does anyone else have doors that can make important decisions for them? It's no wonder other countries hate us for our freedoms; I'd be jealous of sentient doors if my country didn't have them! And you don't even want to know what our doors can do when their open...

  • Now let's make the rest of out government as open & transparent as the code that was just released. :D

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by larry bagina (561269)
      What the fuck planet are you living on? Nancy Pelosi drained the swamp and has given us the most ethical, open, and transparent congress ever!
  • "Last week hundreds of people got over a million dollars in paychecks, and others got negative values. Something about data corruption. Who is this Data and what money is he getting?"

    "Why are you telling me? Call some software people and fix it. And investigate about this money thing."

    "They said they it can't be fixed, the whole things needs replacing. The company that made it closed, and we have no sauce codes for it, and it will take at least a month, and cost a gazillion more to adapt with all the ot

  • by Col. Klink (retired) (11632) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:26AM (#31955012)

    The GPL requires copyright ownership, but work done by the Federal Government can not be copyrighted. I looked at a couple of the modules and they all include GPL v2 license. Shouldn't they be public domain?

    • Nope, do you think the NSA distributes or gives out all the code it uses.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        There's no requirement that work done by the Federal Government has to be published or released. Unreleased code can be classified or avoid FOIA for various reasons, but it cannot be protected by copyright.

        In this case, they actually did release code and they attached a copyright notice to it. They don't have to publish it, but if they do, they can't copyright it either.

        • by ProdigyPuNk (614140) on Friday April 23, 2010 @11:08AM (#31955690) Journal
          I'm sure this is a minor oversight and the person responsible just didn't realize this. Here's some more info on copyright re: the government:

          3.6) Can the government copyright its works? This one has to be taken slowly, and we'll look at federal and state governments separately, because the rules are different. With one exception, works of the United States government are public domain. 17 U.S.C. 105. The only exception is for standard reference data produced by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce under the Standard Reference Data Act, 15 U.S.C. 290e. However, there's a big loophole here: while the U.S government can't get copyright for its own works, it can have an existing copyright assigned to it. So if the U.S. government produces a work, it's not copyrighted. But if an independent contractor working for the government produces a work, it is copyrighted, and nothing prevents that contractor from assigning the copyright back to the government. This reconciles the fact that the U.S. government can't copyright its works with the fact that if you stay up late on weekends, you'll see Public Service Announcements against drunk driving that say "Copyright U.S. Department of Transportation." Also, there are some entities that might seem to be part of the U.S. government, but are not. For example, the U.S. Postal Service is no longer a branch of the U.S. government. In addition, while under U.S. control, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and organized territories of the U.S. are not considered to be part of the U.S. government for purposes of copyright law.

    • by SavTM (1594855)

      The GPL requires copyright ownership, but work done by the Federal Government can not be copyrighted. I looked at a couple of the modules and they all include GPL v2 license. Shouldn't they be public domain?

      Seconded for this question. Are public domain code snapshots subject to the license in the comments or are they truly public domain? Is the code usable by for-profits without necessity for citation or adherence to the original license (like public domain print/music/artworks)? I wonder if RMS senses a disturbance in the force.

      • by abigsmurf (919188)
        There seems to be a common perception by a lot of people that the GPL isn't just another licence agreement and that it's the same as public domain.

        It's somewhat amusing looking at some code sharing sites which allow you to specify the licence. There are scores of GPL'ed ~5 line code snippets for generic algorithms the use of which would easily be excused under fair use laws making their GPL status moot.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by yuna49 (905461)

      What an insightful observation! I'd guess the developers just followed the usual procedure and attached the GPL license text.

      Have other projects using the GPL had to deal with this issue? Can Drupal modules be released as "public domain" even if the rest of the code is GPL? Since the Federal Government has no copyright to transfer, it's probably not even possible for them to give the code to the Drupal developers and let them place it under the GPL or transfer the rights to the FSF.

      • What an insightful observation! I'd guess the developers just followed the usual procedure and attached the GPL license text.

        This is one of three possibilities. The other two being, they started using the code from open sourced modules and thus are still bound by that license or they contracted the work out and the copyright was reassigned to the whitehouse, in which case they can license it.

        Can Drupal modules be released as "public domain" even if the rest of the code is GPL?

        Drupal modules can be closed source or have any license.

        Since the Federal Government has no copyright to transfer, it's probably not even possible for them to give the code to the Drupal developers and let them place it under the GPL or transfer the rights to the FSF.

        As I said, the works are either public domain (not really a bad thing) or GPL, but it all depends upon how on the ball the white house people are with regard to federal copyright laws.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Zeinfeld (263942)
          Nope, the code was almost certainly produced by a contractor and thus the copyrights vests in the contractor in the first instance. The contract will require the contractor to relinquish at least some rights to the government, this typically extends to a general requirement to 'open source' the code. GPL is actually the most restrictive open source license that is commonly used. If you are a contractor wanting to prevent other parties from selling your code in a commercial product that is not open source,
          • Nope, the code was almost certainly produced by a contractor and thus the copyrights vests in the contractor in the first instance.

            Umm that was the third of the three options I cited. I don't see that it is by any means a certainty however. It looks like the guy running the project at the whitehouse is a coder and has employees that are the same.

            . At this point the British Government has gone way beyond open source to open data.

            Open protocols and formats (I assume this is what you mean) is a huge and important feature, although to say the British government has moved to it is a bit of an overstatement. I'd note that open source coding, pretty much leads to open protocols and formats because it means there is a referen

            • by Zeinfeld (263942)

              >>Nope, the code was almost certainly produced by a contractor and thus the copyrights vests in the contractor in the first instance.

              >Umm that was the third of the three options I cited. I don't see that it is by any means a certainty however. It looks like the guy running the project at the whitehouse is a coder and has employees that are the same.

              You posted a theory. I worked at the EOP on those systems when they were first put in.

        • by zeroduck (691015)

          This is one of three possibilities. The other two being, they started using the code from open sourced modules and thus are still bound by that license or they contracted the work out and the copyright was reassigned to the whitehouse, in which case they can license it.

          Drupal considers modules derivative works, so modules must be licensed under the GPL. Drupal Licensing FAQ [drupal.org]. Not sure if it'd hold up in court, but thats what the Drupal community understands as their obligations.

      • by yuna49 (905461)

        In reply to my own question, I'd totally forgotten about VistA [vistapedia.net], the open-sourced health management system developed by the US Veterans Administration. It's in the public domain, but only available through a Freedom of Information Act request. There are commercial and non-commercial versions [vistapedia.net] of the code as well, one licensed under the GPL and one using the Eclipse license.

      • by EvilIdler (21087)

        There's a discussion here: http://drupal.org/node/30708 [drupal.org]

        If being GPL is a problem for a piece of government code, there's still no problem with a module being of a different license. The modules are not part of the Drupal distribution.

    • by russotto (537200)

      The GPL requires copyright ownership, but work done by the Federal Government can not be copyrighted. I looked at a couple of the modules and they all include GPL v2 license. Shouldn't they be public domain?

      The part added by the government can't be copyrighted, but if they are derivative of GPL code, the original copyright holder still has copyright on that.

    • by snowwrestler (896305) on Friday April 23, 2010 @03:08PM (#31959118)

      The new Whitehouse site was developed by a team of private contractors including Acquia, Phase 2 Technologies, and General Dynamics IT. The modules are posted to Drupal.org by staff from Acquia and Phase 2, so I would assume they hold the copyrights.

      My company worked with Phase 2 on a Drupal site and the contract did make provisions for them to retain the copyright of certain kinds of work.

      • Ah, that's clear then. Private contractors working on behalf of the government are clearly allowed to retain copyrights (although they give full credit to "The Whitehouse").

    • by istartedi (132515)

      1. Clean room Drupal
      2. Incorporate modules into said clean-roomed version under a proprietary license.
      3. ???
      4. Profit? Probably not, but a fun time to be had by lawyers perhaps.

  • Until this administration, hasn't the White House been a 100% MSFT shop? Somehow the U.S. Navy manages to stay afloat with many systems running Windows server OS. Then again the Navy can afford to have lots of people massaging/patching/rebooting the Windows boxes 24x7.
  • Although I applaud this because at least the federal government didn't waste gobs of money on a proprietary system that might not be around tomorrow, I still can't help but yawn at this news. This has nothing to do with the President or probably even his CTO that he nominated. It was probably just some developer that the federal government has hired who recommended the use of Drupal and suggested open sourcing the modules that they developed.

    • Re:Tax money (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gnieboer (1272482) on Friday April 23, 2010 @11:24AM (#31955962)

      ...I still can't help but yawn at this news. ... It was probably just some developer that the federal government has hired who recommended the use of Drupal and suggested open sourcing the modules that they developed.

      True, but the interesting thing I think is that the people that the developer has the contract with took the suggestion, ran it through a government staff, and got the idea approved. A staff that gains nothing (directly) by giving the code away, has to take the time to understand the implications of their decision (since they'll be on CNN and fired if they do something dumb), and would normally consider something like this a security risk by default.

      So I think it's fairly groundbreaking for a government bureacracy. And it gives the rest of government a precedent to use when having a similar discussion with their bosses.

    • by hercubus (755805)

      ... some developer ... recommended the use of Drupal and suggested open sourcing the modules ...

      and _someone_ in the government said "yes we can" [tm] release the source

      i'm thinking no code even remotely related to the White House would have been released from the previous administration's sealed bunker

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      This has nothing to do with the President or probably even his CTO that he nominated. It was probably just some developer that the federal government has hired who recommended the use of Drupal and suggested open sourcing the modules that they developed.

      I'm curious as to why you think that. Is it because you have information we don't or do you just have a bias against the current administration so you mentally refuse to assign credit to them for acts you approve of?

      In case you're interested in reality, this project was the baby of David Cole, a well known Drupal developer and OSS supporter who was appointed by Obama to several positions in the White House technical staff (currently senior advisor to the CIO) and who previously worked as data analyst for th

      • Wow, read into my post a little more why don't you? Geez, can't a guy have a non-political opinion about a technical decision?

        • Wow, read into my post a little more why don't you? Geez, can't a guy have a non-political opinion about a technical decision?

          You made the following assertion:

          This has nothing to do with the President or probably even his CTO that he nominated.

          I asked why you believed what you believed and what basis in fact you had for forming that belief. If you're going to make assertions, surely they should have some basis. Asserting the president had nothing to do with something is not just an opinion, it's making a claim and was presented as a statement of fact. Is your decision making process so broken you can't even answer a question as to how you come by your opinions?

  • Well thank you. >:P

Practical people would be more practical if they would take a little more time for dreaming. -- J. P. McEvoy

Working...