[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study
From: |
Paul |
Subject: |
Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study |
Date: |
Sun, 24 Aug 2003 23:39:42 +0100 |
Hi,
> > 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.
That would require three things;
1. A willingness to do something which would be seen (quite possibly) as
an act of old labour (the state supporting something instead of it being
self funding sort of thing)
2. A government with half a brain to see the waste of time, money and
most importantly, resources in it's current idealogy and thinking
3. A PM who doesn't have his tongue firmly up BG's arse and is also
willing to listen to his advisors (a number of which are definately not
promoting MS)
> You can tell when the Government has no clue about what action to take,
> they commission studies
You're not seriously considering the QnetiQ a true study are you?
> and procrastinate hoping that someone else will
> make the decision for them. Fortunately other governments and industry
> around the world are doing just that.
There inlies the problem - our Govt is a little Britain one. We can see
this over our contributiosn and following of Europe. If ever a line of a
song held for this country it's this "we are the 51st state of the USA"
(The The, Infected). Without a radical rethink which listens to all
sides and is not prejudiced by vast wodges of dosh (in either software,
goods or anything else) from anyone, this will carry on.
TTFN
Paul
--
One OS to fool them all
One browser to find them
One email client to bring them all
And through security holes, blind them...
- [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, Tom Coady, 2003/08/23
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, Paul, 2003/08/24
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, Chris Croughton, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, ian, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study,
Paul <=
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, Tom Coady, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, Richard Smith, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, Tom Coady, 2003/08/25
- [Fsfe-uk] Use of Reply-To in the mailing list, Chris Croughton, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] Use of Reply-To in the mailing list, MJ Ray, 2003/08/26
- [Fsfe-uk] Reply-To, List-Id, RFCs, mail clients etc (was: QnetiQ study), MJ Ray, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] Reply-To, List-Id, RFCs, mail clients etc, Tom Coady, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] Reply-To, List-Id, RFCs, mail clients etc, Tom Coady, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] QnetiQ study, ian, 2003/08/25
- Message not available
- Message not available
- [Fsfe-uk] Reply-To on the mailing list, Chris Croughton, 2003/08/26