• corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Watch this thread from here on in carefully separate the idealists from those who know what defence is like.

    • yes, open-source is the goal of everything that can be opened.
    • no, defence code isn’t on the list of what can be opened
    • yes, obscurity isn’t good as a sole effort
    • yes, defence in depth
    • no the funding to get it to where it’s safe to open for randos to submit changes isn’t there today

    Anything I missed?

    Yes, Virginia, it’s better to open all the things right now, but there are risks you haven’t taken into account because you’re not aware of them. The pros are; it’s their job and their work, so listen to their expertise no matter what the oppositional/defiant disorder suggests otherwise.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Defense code can absolutely be open source, even the very sensitive code that goes into guidance systems on rockets and whatnot. Open source != publicly available, it means those who receive the code get certain rights to use and modify the code. This is imperative for the US government to provide timely updates to their equipment if the vendor is doing a poor job at it.

      Yes, it’s ideal to open source everything, but not ideal to release it to the public. Once the code is no longer sensitive (i.e. the equipment is obsolete), it should be released publicly.