Recently I recieved an email from Jay Lyman of NewsForge.net who wanted my input on an article he is working on:
I heard you talk a little about your work developing software at NASA when I got a tour of the OSU Open Source Lab earlier this year. As I recall, you mentioned that some of your work had the potential to end up in weapons systems, and a discussion of the matter then followed. I’m working on an article now on the appropriateness of open source for weapons, military and national defense and would like to include your input.
This is a very creative and timely topic given our current political climate and I was happy to help by answering the questions that followed.
Do you believe that military, weapons or defense applications are contrary to the ideals of the open source software community? Please explain.
Freedom is the number one ideal of open source and I believe it would be contrary to these ideals to restrict what the software is being used for. The FOSS community is providing a general purpose foundation for a computing system that requires a great amount of customization for a military application and because of the dedication to the ideals of freedom I think it is a valid however possibly unfortunate use of the software.
As a developer, are you concerned about the use of your creations and development for military/defense purposes?
The project I worked on this summer while in the NASA Goddard Robotics Internship Program was general purpose hand recognition software that had as much application on a Mars rover and physical rehabilitation as it does on a military platform.
This is the only software that I have ever developed that has any military applications.
Although I am concerned that the software could be used in a weapon I am hopeful that more productive application may be found. And by using a FOSS license a developer may be inspired by this software and create an entirely new application.
Do you believe open source is appropriate for these types of applications and national defense?
Ensuring that FOSS is protected by licenses that offer liberal and wide freedom to everyone is key. It would be dangerous to start trying to put any restrictions on how FOSS is used as many good things can come out partnership with governments such as the NSAs SELinux.
Furthermore creating additional barriers of use may confuse consumers and scare off vendors from distributing FOSS.
For example would using Linux on desktops in the Senate be considered defense use? Senate does handle defense funding and decide on military actions.
From your perspective, how significant is open source software in this area?
The group that I worked used Linux for prototypes. However this is primarily R&D and proof of concept work. Deployed military applications more than likely are then converted to a specialized CPU like an FPGA.
I think FOSS is used for rapidly prototyping and feeling out a concept but deployed hardware is futher ruggedized and made more compact and manufacturable by special hardware.
Anything else you would like to add?
Freedom is a central value of the community and I think restricting that freedom to protect from unwanted users, such as the military, would be subverting this value.
The next day after emailing my response I started reading The Debian System and read the following passage:
The additional ability to use Debian for whatever purpose a user thinks fit is equally important. Debian does not allow any discrimination of persons, groups, or fields of endeavour. Debian may be put to use by anyone for anything, even in morally debateable domains, such as genetic research and warfare. Debian does not attempt to define what is acceptable and what is not because it would put a limit on the freedom of its users
So it seems that the community has already given some thought to this topic; however I am still anxious to see what Jay has found from the research of his article.
Note: Tux logo borrowed from Phlak linux, a modular live security Linux distribution, see http://phlak.org
