Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study

[ian]

On Mon, 2003-08-25 at 09:47, Tom Coady wrote:
> Paul did not write:
> 
> >>>9. Further studies should be conducted by people competetant to do it
> >>>and who actually know what they're on about.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>The time for studies is over, there have been many and they can all be
> >>interpreted to suit the particular interest so they are largely a waste
> >>of time and effort. Better to simply put the money that would have been
> >>put into these studies into Open Source development and just sit back
> >>and see what happens.

> I assume Paul was responding to a reply that went off list, as seems to 
> be the case by default. Perhaps MJR can fix this to reply to list by 
> default, assuming others consider this a good idea?
> 
> Thanks anyway for responding to my flame-bait quote from QnetiQ; it 
> really is a pretty astonishing piece of FUD, but all the more depressing 
> to think that it is being used as the basis for "egovernment" strategy.

What strategy? The E-learning strategy consultation is a vague set of
wishes. There is no *strategy* which is a help in some ways because we
can at least push our own. They can keep marking time sending out
discussion papers and commissioning studies, but in the end FLOSS will
grow all around them and they'll have to come round. We just need to
show the leadership qualities the government lacks in as many government
sectors as possible. I'm fairly optimistic for education but it will
take a year or two.

-- 
ian <address@hidden>