Mexico's government has been actively promoting and adopting open source software for over two decades, driven by cost savings, technological independence, and community engagement. This journey has included developing a national open source distribution ("Guadalinex"), promoting open standards, and fostering a collaborative ecosystem. Despite facing challenges such as bureaucratic inertia, vendor lock-in, and a shortage of skilled personnel, the commitment to open source persists, demonstrating its potential benefits for public administration and citizen services. Key lessons learned include the importance of clear policies, community building, and focusing on practical solutions that address specific needs.
Billionaire Mark Cuban has offered to fund former employees of 18F, a federal technology and design consultancy that saw its budget drastically cut and staff laid off. Cuban's offer aims to enable these individuals to continue working on their existing civic tech projects, though the specifics of the funding mechanism and project selection remain unclear. He expressed interest in projects focused on improving government efficiency and transparency, ultimately seeking to bridge the gap left by 18F's downsizing and ensure valuable public service work continues.
Hacker News commenters were generally skeptical of Cuban's offer to fund former 18F employees. Some questioned his motives, suggesting it was a publicity stunt or a way to gain access to government talent. Others debated the effectiveness of 18F and government-led tech initiatives in general. Several commenters expressed concern about the implications of private funding for public services, raising issues of potential conflicts of interest and the precedent it could set. A few commenters were more positive, viewing Cuban's offer as a potential solution to a funding gap and a way to retain valuable talent. Some also discussed the challenges of government bureaucracy and the potential benefits of a more agile, privately-funded approach.
The author recounts their experience in an Illinois court fighting for access to public records pertaining to the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request portal. They discovered and reported a SQL injection vulnerability in the portal, which the state acknowledged but failed to fix promptly. After repeated denials of their FOIA requests related to the vulnerability's remediation, they sued. The judge ultimately ruled in their favor, compelling the state to fulfill the request and highlighting the absurdity of the situation: having to sue to get information about how the government plans to fix a security flaw in a system designed for accessing information. The author concludes by advocating for stronger Illinois FOIA laws to prevent similar situations in the future.
HN commenters generally praise the author's persistence and ingenuity in using SQL injection to expose flaws in the Illinois FOIA request system. Some express concern about the legality and ethics of his actions, even if unintentional. Several commenters with legal backgrounds offer perspectives on the potential ramifications, pointing out the complexities of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and the potential for prosecution despite claimed good intentions. A few question the author's technical competence, suggesting alternative methods he could have used to achieve the same results without resorting to SQL injection. Others discuss the larger implications for government transparency and the need for robust security practices in public-facing systems. The most compelling comments revolve around the balance between responsible disclosure and the legal risks associated with security research, highlighting the gray area the author occupies.
Summary of Comments ( 42 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43579104
HN commenters generally praised the Mexican government's efforts toward open source adoption, viewing it as a positive step towards transparency, cost savings, and citizen engagement. Some pointed out the importance of clear governance and community building for sustained open-source project success, while others expressed concerns about potential challenges like attracting and retaining skilled developers, ensuring long-term maintenance, and navigating bureaucratic hurdles. Several commenters shared examples of successful and unsuccessful open-source initiatives in other governments, emphasizing the need to learn from past experiences. A few also questioned the focus on creating new open source software rather than leveraging existing solutions. The overall sentiment, however, remained optimistic about the potential benefits of open source in government, particularly in fostering innovation and collaboration.
The Hacker News post "Lessons from open source in the Mexican government" (linking to an LWN.net article about the same) generated several comments discussing the challenges and successes of open-source adoption in government.
One commenter highlighted the inherent difficulty in changing entrenched bureaucratic processes, even with the benefits of open source. They argued that open source itself isn't a magic bullet and that successful implementation requires addressing underlying organizational issues and fostering a culture of collaboration and knowledge sharing. This commenter also pointed out that governments often rely on proprietary software due to perceived convenience or existing contracts, making a shift to open source a significant undertaking.
Another comment focused on the importance of community involvement in open-source projects. They emphasized that government-led open-source initiatives should prioritize building a strong community of contributors and users to ensure long-term sustainability and avoid vendor lock-in. This commenter suggested that simply releasing code isn't enough; active engagement with the community is crucial for success.
Several commenters discussed the potential cost savings associated with open source, but acknowledged that these savings are not always guaranteed. They pointed out that while licensing costs might be lower, there are other costs associated with implementation, maintenance, and training that need to be considered. One commenter specifically mentioned that the "cost savings" argument is often less convincing to governments than the "avoid vendor lock-in" argument, as budgetary cycles and departmental silos can make long-term cost savings difficult to demonstrate.
Another thread of discussion revolved around the issue of security and trust in open-source software. One commenter raised concerns about the potential for vulnerabilities in open-source code and the importance of rigorous security audits. Others argued that the open nature of the code actually enhances security by allowing for greater scrutiny and community-driven vulnerability detection.
Finally, some commenters shared their own experiences with open-source adoption in government and other large organizations. These anecdotes provided real-world examples of both the challenges and successes of such initiatives, highlighting the importance of careful planning, stakeholder engagement, and ongoing community support. One commenter suggested that successful open-source adoption often depends on finding "champions" within the organization who are passionate about the technology and willing to advocate for its use.