this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
382 points (98.7% liked)

Linux

48313 readers
796 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Petition Summary: The petitioner calls for the European Union to actively develop and implement a Linux-based operating system, termed ‘EU-Linux’, across public administrations in all EU Member States. This initiative aims to reduce dependency on Microsoft products, ensuring compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and promoting transparency, sustainability, and digital sovereignty within the EU. The petitioner emphasizes the importance of using open-source alternatives to Microsoft 365, such as LibreOffice and Nextcloud, and suggests the adoption of the E/OS mobile operating system for government devices. The petitioner also highlights the potential for job creation in the IT sector through this initiative.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sibachian@lemmy.ml 57 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I've said this a million times, but it's definitely about time we stop spending taxes on a rogue entity across the ocean who definitely does not have our best interests in mind. I'm not convinced it's even legal and I don't understand why the legal prospects have never been brought up about this fucking situation. R&D money should not go to a foreign corporation. In addition, I (and pretty much everyone else on the planet) already paid for microsofts products and services so my government can use it (against my will), so why the fuck do they get away with setting a public price at all? It should legally be free or the governments shouldn't need to pay for it in the first place, and it should legally be open source because it's publicly funded. There are just so many problems with the entire idea of our government using Windows, Office, and their services.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 45 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They could call it Eunux!

Oh...

[–] Samsy@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago

Eubuntu.

Or Keubuntu, the KDEU spin.

[–] privsecfoss@feddit.dk 44 points 2 weeks ago

Someone mentioned that M365 is properly not legal. Guess what, it isn't.

The EDPS (European Data Protection Supervisor) investgated the EU-Commissions' use of M365 and found it to be illegal in march 2024. EPDS gave the Commission until December 2024 to, among other things, stop transfers of Personal Information to third countries in M365 outside the EU. Which of course made the Commission sue the EDPS. And MS to do the same..

So M365 is NOT legal to use for any Public Institution in the EU. Unless the Controller make Microsoft change their DPA, contract etc. Kinda like MS did for the Dutch government after the dutch firm Privacy Company made an in depth analysis of M365 and found numerous illegal processing etc.

Fun how Microsoft was made aware of how they acted illegal, and changed it - only for the Dutch Government...!! The rest of their Customers still have the illegal DPA, terms etc... Also fun how it is Common knowledge and IT-departments still choose to use M365, and move as much as possible there from more privacy and security oriented services.

EDPS investigation into the Commissions use of M365: https://www.edps.europa.eu/press-publications/press-news/press-releases/2024/european-commissions-use-microsoft-365-infringes-data-protection-law-eu-institutions-and-bodies_en

My point? EU-Linux is a fantastic idea! 🙂

[–] 0x0@programming.dev 24 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Focus instead on enforcing standards' compliance so i can open a .docx with any program and be usable anywhere.

Then focus on enforcing FOSS software in public services but don't bother with a "european linux distro", that's just a waste of resources. There are already a great deal of distros around. Considering geopolitics i'd go with SuSe or some other EU-based distro.

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Focus instead on enforcing standards' compliance so i can open a .docx with any program and be usable anywhere.

That's an impossible task. Not even Microsoft manages that. Do not want to count how often i used libreOffice to repair or convert an older MSOffice file so it can be opend with modern Versions of MSOffice.

Once there was a 500MB Excel Sheet with lime 500-1000 used Cells, opened and saved it to.a xlsx file using libreOffice and reduced it to a few MB while still being fully functional.

[–] jnk@masto.es 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

@ShortN0te @0x0 I mean the real problem here is that MS office is a mess but somehow still standardized, so "enforcing standards" would be as easy as showing MS the middle finger and using libre office. They'd save a lot of money and time, it's a clear win-win scenario imho

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 weeks ago

Open standards are the first step of a functional transition to an open government. From there Open Source Software can compete against commercial software, once the ppl see that the FOSS offers the same features then the proprietary paid software they can easily switch to it. With open standards they only need to train the users, no data to migrate etc.

[–] halm@leminal.space 6 points 2 weeks ago

Focus instead on enforcing standards’ compliance

For sure, but ¿por qué no los dos?

Completely agree with your other prioritisations.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

OOXML is Microsoft's proprietary format it itself doesn't implement consistently.

Either you meant OpenDocument or you meant that you want a magic wand.

[–] 0x0@programming.dev 4 points 2 weeks ago

Yes MS intentionally implements it inconsistently and yes that's why i meant whichever format is open.

[–] mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

While I like the idea, it’ll be incredibly tough to overcome Microsofts lobbying, one just needs to look on the history of the LiMux project.

[–] N0x0n@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

As long as the EU doesn't reinvent the wheel, why not? I mean if they are going to fork Linux and rewrite a EU-based linux OS, this would further divide the community and make issues and security a lot more wacky... Not sure this is a good idea.

[–] Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de 37 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Pretty sure they're talking about making a distro, not forking the Linux kernel. I don't see any reason why they would need to fork it anyway.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 0 points 2 weeks ago

One reason could be possible US restrictions and sanctions.

[–] ptman@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 weeks ago
[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Fucking over microsoft is always good

[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 20 points 2 weeks ago

It's not fucking over Microsoft, it's prevent Microsoft from fucking us over. Microsoft is not the victim in this.

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

This is dumb. Hand over development to bureaucrats? create a set of guidelines and requirements, and allow distros to be certified, and fund development of distros that are being used.

[–] halm@leminal.space 44 points 2 weeks ago

It would make so much more sense to fund existing Linux development than making a new distro, tbh.

If the EU changed to Linux systems and donated the same amount back to open source development as they currently pay for Microsoft licenses, that would make a hell of a difference.

[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

I don't know how it works with a frequently updating OS. In my mind beaurocrats can become asses about certifying one exact version they inspected and then making users afraid that open source community can inject the next version with viruses and they can't be sure it's okay too. Ah, and making each certification a paid service and somehow fucking it up.

In Russia there are like two projects of local Linux with custom wine that you can buy just like other software, certified by FSB for sensitive business (I believe them being the first pieces of software to get it except specific cryptographic stuff), but I feel the reason it's getting adopted and certified is because there are some nepotism and illegal connections with money not really changing pockets.

[–] QuazarOmega@lemy.lol 2 points 2 weeks ago

100% I can imagine they don't want to rely on third parties to develop their distribution, but, realistically, all the software that keeps the system going will be developed by "randos on the internet" still, so might as well hand over all the development effort to who has the knowledge already, while providing funds/grants

[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Especially in light of Microsoft CoPilot. You do not want obvious spyware on any computer.

[–] theshatterstone54@feddit.uk 5 points 2 weeks ago

Don't forget Recall, aka literal spyware, taking screenshots of your device regardless of whether you're entering passwords, making private searches, using TOR, opening sensitive documents, looking at private pictures. It's all exposed.

[–] stphrolland@mathstodon.xyz 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

@JRepin

just an idea, it could be based on #NixOS , if I remember well the project was partially funded by European Research or Opensource funds.

Please correct me if I am wrong on the fundings, I say this from distant memory.

EDIT: it was just an idea, as it is not the most user-friendly distro out there...

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 13 points 2 weeks ago

Or they could use a distro that's already been created by a European vendor, maybe even create a competitive tender. There's no point in creating a new distro, add a new repository if you must.

[–] mindlesscrollyparrot@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Well, what better way to embrace FOSS than dismissing the efforts of all the existing distro maintainers? Welcome to the community, guys. Good luck building your cathedral next to the bazaar!

How about they instead work together with the distros and create a way of certifying a distro as gov-ready?

[–] anamethatisnt@lemmy.world 20 points 2 weeks ago

They say nothing about their distro having no upstream. If they make a distro based of Debian/Arch/Fedora I don't see that as dismissing their efforts anymore than Nobara/SteamOS/Ubuntu/Mint does.

I rather they enforce their requirements on their own spin then try to force existing distros to implement said reqs. They should obviously donate to the foss community when using the technology the community maintain though!

[–] Breadhax0r@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

I imagine this would work out to be something similar to redhat enterprise linux, but with the EU funding it's development instead of the US

[–] Frederic@beehaw.org 7 points 2 weeks ago

Just use Debian, it has old root, stable, still being developed, it's the base of various others distro that "enhance" it (sometimes badly).

Debian.

I'm using MX Linus AHS, based on Debian, BTW.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago

PSA: You can sign the petition even if you're not a European national. I registered and signed as a Canadian myself and it accepted it

[–] repungnant_canary@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

To register on that website I need to agree to Privacy Policy:

Please be aware that registered petitions are public documents. This means that your identity, the number given to the petition and the personal data contained therein: (1) may be disclosed to the recipients mentioned in the paragraph above; (2) may be mentioned in public meetings held by the Committee on Petitions, and thus webstreamed (which means that they may be watched by anyone through the European Parliament website); (3) may be mentioned in the plenary session, and thus be recorded in the minutes published in the Official journal; (4) may be made available on the internet website of the European Parliament.

Do I understand it incorrectly or does it allow them to webstream my home address???

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago

No, it means that your name may be read out loud

[–] Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If only the GAFAMS could stop getting money from taxpayers! It would be a big start and then it would just be the individuals who would decide to support by buying their products or not.

[–] theshatterstone54@feddit.uk 1 points 2 weeks ago

You're forgetting corporations. That's where big money is at. Business and Government. If we can take away the Government, that would be nice.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago

Exists already; OpenDesk

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'd really like to see this. However I don't have high hopes when looking at the current state in Slovenia, where Microsoft is deeply rooted in all public and non public sectors, starting from schools. Most know only Windows and Word while they don't distinguish between the two and schools system doesn't give a shit about teaching anything about computers let alone non Microsoft. One of the reasons is, of course, teachers being computer illiterate or ... know only Microsoft. And so on and so forth.

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

This is education everywhere

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Just use OpenSUSE

[–] utopiah@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

" Number of supporters: 141" and 375 upvotes, something doesn't add up.

[–] kaugman@lemmy.today -4 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks but no thanks.

load more comments
view more: next ›