Maricopa County mtg report

[der.hans]

Am 09. Jul, 2002 schwätzte Trent Shipley so:

> > This is a possible opening for us. It only works well together as long as
> > Microsoft decides it's in Microsoft's favor to work well together. Free
> > Software can fixed to continue working well together. Free Software doesn't
> > use the 'embrace and extend' attack to not work well with others.
>
> No.  Microsoft will always want MS products to play nice together.

Yes, they usually want their products to play nice with each other, although
they're not afraid to try to force you to buy new products.

I mean that Microsoft will intentially choose to not work well with non-m$
products.

> THAT is very debatable.  Maricopa IT's position is implicitly that the MS
> monopoly is a *good* thing.  The resulting obligitory standard coupled with
> ease of use (deskilling) more than offsets the marginal cost of any monopoly
> rents extracted by MS.

In other industries the standard comes from a standards body. We've all seen
the email about the shuttle booster rockets being the width of two horse
butts due to standards.

Luckily, with software we can more easily change standards, so we don't get
stuck with something for 200o years.

> This is where AZOTO (?) can help.  Providing free (or low cost) consulting is
> *not* lobying.  It is within the ambit of the NPO's mission.  More
> importantly it gives the County a partner that is less organizationally
> amorphous than PLUG.

I agree. It could be very good for AZOTO to fill this support role.

> Why would it matter?  Even with *NIX, you still need virus protection.

I do? Y4?

The anti-virus industry is one that shouldn't even exist. Poor engineering
led to its creation.

> I did an internship at an archive.  There is no way around the fact that
> critical documents must be stored in readilly accessible, human readable,
> analog formats.

I'm not sure about that, but it will probably be many years before it's
changed.

> What is possible is to get a re-audit of what documents are classified as
> "critical".  A lot of documents will be purged after seven years (or other
> small number) the risk of storing these ephemeral records only in machine
> readable digital formats is low.  Arguably, ephemeral documents (say less
> than 10 years of retention time) *should* be stored electronically.

This is actually the group I want to target. We have to prove electronic
archiving works for items like this before they'll start considering it for
permanent records.

We can also push for using electronic copies for redundant backup.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  https://www.LuftHans.com/
#  Motorraeder toeten nicht. Motorraeder werden getoetet.