Difference between revisions of "Talk:Military Open Source Software Working Group"

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with 'reacting to a comment which I can't see, perhaps from alex, which said, 'how is this security related'? response, probably obvious: if the military are not security related, the...')
 
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
--[[User:Mbauwens|Mbauwens]] 18:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 
--[[User:Mbauwens|Mbauwens]] 18:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
:I looked at the link before.  It's not about software security, security clearance, or anything security except that its military.  It's about open source being done by the military.  Its not about security.  It could be in several other categories, and perhaps "Military" might be a good one, but the category system is about direct relations a lot of times, where this is not even tangential.  It would be derivative if the Military were more secure because they used open source.  do you want to make that claim?  Maybe.  Might help to say that though. --[[User:GoodRollin|Alex Rollin]] 19:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
:By the way [[User:Mbauwens|Mbauwens]], your talk page formatting makes it really hard to have a conversation on the talk page.  Anything you want to do about that?  Maybe think about it at least? --[[User:GoodRollin|Alex Rollin]] 19:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
**
 +
 +
Hi Alex, I find your formatting harder to follow than mine, but if you have suggestions, feel free.
 +
 +
Please have a look at the security category in our wiki, it is NOT about computer security, it's about p2p warfare, so again, if open sourcing the military is unrelated to the influence of p2p on warfare, I'll resign with immediate effect
 +
--[[User:Mbauwens|Mbauwens]] 19:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:58, 11 August 2010

reacting to a comment which I can't see, perhaps from alex, which said, 'how is this security related'?

response, probably obvious: if the military are not security related, then who is?

--Mbauwens 18:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I looked at the link before. It's not about software security, security clearance, or anything security except that its military. It's about open source being done by the military. Its not about security. It could be in several other categories, and perhaps "Military" might be a good one, but the category system is about direct relations a lot of times, where this is not even tangential. It would be derivative if the Military were more secure because they used open source. do you want to make that claim? Maybe. Might help to say that though. --Alex Rollin 19:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
By the way Mbauwens, your talk page formatting makes it really hard to have a conversation on the talk page. Anything you want to do about that? Maybe think about it at least? --Alex Rollin 19:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Alex, I find your formatting harder to follow than mine, but if you have suggestions, feel free.

Please have a look at the security category in our wiki, it is NOT about computer security, it's about p2p warfare, so again, if open sourcing the military is unrelated to the influence of p2p on warfare, I'll resign with immediate effect --Mbauwens 19:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)