A decade ago, the largest concern with corporate monocultures in software was quarterly-cycle thinking that would degrade the quality of software on which governments rely.
Now, we also see the active weaponization of trade and threats to supply chains, and it is no longer just about dark corporate patterns but about dependence on private entities tied to the U.S. in its slide away from democracy.
I firmly believe that promoting software that exposes governments to diplomatic coercion should be treated as treason and scrutinized by intelligence.
I don't see how that link supports your assertion, nor really even the supports the general idea that docx isn't open. Their main complaint seems to be that it's a big standard which makes it hard to implement. Honestly it gets to be a bit hard to take these free software groups seriously when they move the goalposts and try to redefine what common words mean. It's an open format by any reasonable definition and no amount of whining by free software advocates and scare quotes changes that.
31 comments
Now, we also see the active weaponization of trade and threats to supply chains, and it is no longer just about dark corporate patterns but about dependence on private entities tied to the U.S. in its slide away from democracy.
I firmly believe that promoting software that exposes governments to diplomatic coercion should be treated as treason and scrutinized by intelligence.
>Exchanging files in ODF seems much more frictionless to me than in DOCX.
How so? Any program that can open ODF should be able to handle DOCX, both are open formats.