[luau] Senator Ige and Representative Schatz respond to open source

[Warren Togami]

Ho'ala Greevy wrote:
> queue to minute 32 on the show.
> 
> http://www.thinktechhawaii.com/sounds/davidigebrainschatz.mp3
> 
> 
> world domination.  and fast.
> -ho'ala

Ho'ala, good job quoting statistics.  It greatly improved your 
credibility and peaked attention. =)

Senator Ige
34:10 "Can I get the support that I need?"

Representative Schatz
34:40 Save money and some create efficiencies
Operational choice
do not legislate every decision
Resolution - pursue as possibility, do assessment of cost & benefits

My commentary:

Regarding Legislation
=====================
Both Senator Ige and Representative Schatz were very wise in saying that 
it should not be legislated.  Everything going to government contracts 
should be put on a level playing field, going through the same bidding 
process as any other solution.  It may potentially be seen as "unfair" 
if Open Source solutions are mandated by law.  Price and technical merit 
should be the main factors in choosing anything.

http://newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=03/01/28/1829254&mode=thread&tid=3
This article is related to this topic.  What is important about DevIS 
mentioned in this article is that they do not sell "Open Source".  They 
sell technical solutions that just happen to be served well by Open 
Source solutions.  You cannot appeal to morality or emotion and demand 
"Open Source" when it comes to government and business.

Of course what I say about "level playing field" is currently not true 
as long as the general populace does not understand Open Source.  We are 
currently at a disadvantage because of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt that 
is inherent in any new concept.  What Representative Schatz said about a 
resolution pursuing the possibility, and doing an assessment of cost & 
benefits is exactly the proper course of action.  It is always the duty 
of government to find more efficient ways of using our taxpayer dollars. 
  Such an assessment of the cost/effectivness of Open Source solutions 
should be done, then knowledge of Open Source potential will be better 
known and the playing field will be more level.

(Perhaps after the general populace understands Open Source, then you 
can point at the social benefits of openness and appeal to emotion, 
although that may be an unfair advantage at that point. =)

Regarding Support
=================
Currently there are mainly IBM, HP, and Red Hat who are the largest Open 
Source service providers in America.  We also of course have many small 
business people in Hawaii who have Open Source support services.  This 
is where we can actively promote Linux as one angle of State economic 
growth.

Open Source as good for the state economy.

Why?

1) When Open Source solutions are used, much less money is exported to 
mainland companies in the form of proprietary licensing fees.  This of 
course has a direct positive impact on local service providers, but also 
an indirect effect of more money being spent in other local products and 
services.

2) Economic efficiency with fair market competition
Current IT spending goes largely to monopolies.  Introductory 
microeconomics (as does common sense) makes a clear case that monopolies 
always lead to a certain amount of economic dead-weight loss while fair 
market competition reduces overall economic loss to society.  Open 
Source promotes fair market competition.

3) Open Source reduces the potential for abuse of secrets
Another requirement for "fair market competition" in microeconomics is 
equal knowledge by all parties.  It is legally difficult to hide unfair 
practices when it comes to Open Source software due to the nature of the 
GNU (L)GPL licenses.  This makes it more difficult for abusive uses of 
secrets to be leveraged to lock out competitors.  This lowers the cost 
of entry for potential competitors, allowing firms to more freely enter 
or leave a market, another requirement of "free market competition".

Thus...

Open Source is good for our state economy.  It diverts funds that would 
otherwise leave the state back into local product and service providers 
while promoting greater economic efficiency through fair market competition.

Warren Togami
warren at togami.com