147

The UK Post Office should have insisted on an open source system (www.bbc.co.uk)

submitted 1 day ago by yak@lemmy.sdf.org to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The UK Post Office should at least have considered open source software for Horizon to enhance transparency, empower users, and avoid vendor lock-in, which could have prevented or mitigated the scandal’s impact. People like Richard Moorhead, Christopher Hodges, Alan Bates, and the long running Computer Weekly coverage all underscore the need for transparency and accountability, indirectly supporting open source principles, although direct advocacy is rare. For future systems, the Post Office and similar organizations should prioritize open source to prevent such injustices.

The establishment narrative often focuses on individual accountability rather than systemic issues like software design. But this overlooks how proprietary systems enabled the Post Office to deflect responsibility.

Open source software aligns with ethical principles of justice, autonomy, and resource stewardship, making it a compelling alternative for future public sector IT projects.

Thoughts?!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] dwazou@lemm.ee 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

I'm not British. There are many things that I admire about the United Kingdom.

This is the nation that produced Agatha Christie, Jane Austen, George Orwell, JK Rowling, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Elton John, David Attenborough. Led Zeppelin, Aldous Huxley, JRR Tolkien.

But the one thing that disturbs me is the unbelievable level of corruption.

In Britain, political parties can raise millions of pounds from one single individual. Private corporations, including foreign corporations, are allowed to give large amounts of money to political parties. Several members of the UK parliament currently work as consultants and lawyers for large corporations such as Thames Water or HSBC. This is all legal.

Compare this to France.

In France, no individual is allowed to give more than 7000 pounds to a political party. Corporations are banned from giving money to political parties. Members of parliament are all banned from having second-jobs. And if you break these rules, an independent agency (HATVP) has the power to criminally prosecute you.

Why did France pass these tough rules ? Huge corruption scandals

France had one President (Nicolas Sarkozy) sell access to his donors

We also had one powerful MP (Francois Fillon) taking a second-job as a lavishly paid consultant for huge corporations

When the French media revealed these scandals, the French political class was so embarrassed that it actually forced them to take action.

The British had similar corruption scandals.

David Cameron was caught selling access to Downing Street in exchange of money:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/mar/26/david-cameron-private-dinners-tory-donors

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9168388/Cash-for-access-David-Camerons-private-dinners-for-donors-revealed.html

Boris Johnson was also caught selling access to Downing Street in exchange of money:

https://www.ft.com/content/8c6041ff-a223-43e9-9e45-53c3f7cf47f7

Yet the British political class did... absolutely nothing !!! No reform...

Similar scandals have led to completely different legislative outcomes.