He may be a clever guy with a good idea but he totaly misunderstands how democracy 2.0 works in hte U.S.

Voters are largly irrelevant in Dem 2.0, The suckers vote for whoever has the best TV adds.

Therefore what really matters are the campaign contributors so you can by better and more TV adds than your rivals.

The best contibutors are big businesses and the people who own big businesses. So if you get elected you need to keep these people happy and ensure the funds keep coming your way. MS, Oracle etc. are all big campaign contributors -- it would be electoral suicide for a government to fund a open source initiative which ate into there revenues.

Isreal is neither first world or democratic.

Its a European colony where the ethnic europeans have priviledges and rights and the natives have none.

Isreals tiny christian minority is treated just as badly as the muslim citizens and routinly vote with the muslims for what its worth. The 23% of Israeli citizens who are christian or moslem are represented by only 12 members in the 120 seat Knesset and only one ethnic Arab has ever held a (very minor) cabinet post.

It does not have a first world economy, its prosperity is due to US taxpayers, about $2.5 billion in hard cash each year and about three times that amount in soft loans, cheap or subsidised military equipment and other hidden subsidies.

Sorry founded in 1908 by Susan Hoover the inventors cousin.

Computing, Data Processing, IT whatever you call it has been deployed extensivly by corporate America since 1965.

After 42 years of continuous development and employment all the easy stuff has been done! There are no "deploy this system and become 50% more efficient" opertunities any more.

Worse niave IT people have consitantly overstated the benefits of IT and underestimated the costs so if you propose a 5% saveing through a new software any sensible business manager would think "I'll get 1% if Im lucky and it will probably be cancelled anyway so why take a risk!".

The major (rational) reason for upgrading systems has been increases in volume and throughput which cannot be handled by the old system in a shrinking economy this isnt such an issue.
   

Sandwiches -- circa 1750 lord Sandwich popularised the concept of a slice of meat between two slices of bread so he could eat while playing cards without getting the cards greasy.

General Motors -- was an amalgamation of existing companies, significantly it still trades through the original brand names Chevrolet, Chrysler Cadillac etc.

In hard times companies dont axe thier IT departments they just kill new projects and purchasing. Given the abysmally slow software development cycle for most business projects this actually makes sense -- "I save $100,000 dollars now on something that might work in 2011.".

Its pretty much the same in the consumer market - if you might lose your job next month that cluncky old Dell suddenly looks "good enough" and no new hardware - no new software.

Your probably right about the games industry though!

And it not just a case of unemployment shooting up to 10%, many of those in jobs will be earning less money -- low bonuses, low sales commisions, people lost a job but found another at a lower salary etc.

Those people who did manage to earn as much or more than last year are reluctant to spend it and are preparing for the time when thier luck runs out.

Another poster commented on how "business could save millions if they revisited thier old systems". Sorry but the running costs of an existing system will rarely be more than the software devlopment costs of "improvements". This is call "Business Process Re-engineering" in Bullshit and thier have been too many high profile failures in this area for this to be taken seriously by Business management.

If developers had delivered more on time/on budget/fullfills requirments software during the good years these arguments might have some credibility -- but for the most part corporate america would rahter stick with the abd smell thay have gotten used to rather spend money on solething that could be worse.

Only Sweden of all the other EU countries has attempted this and the various privicy groups have protested effectivly and loudly so it will probably be blown out of the water.

This is a classic UK civil service tactic -- introduce unpopular legislation that suits thier purposes and say the EU made them do it.

To any suckers who are still living in the Old Country -- if you dont like it stop moaning and vote the b****s out.

It is currently illegal to sell any knife to a minor in the UK. So all the hardware shops have there knives in a locked cabinet which means you need to find a sales dork to open the cabinet so you can get hold of a potato peeler. Since most of the sales staff at the weekends are about fifteen years old it means you are asking a minor to open a cabinet whose purpose is to prevent minors accessing the contents.

The "no pointy knives" was a serious (and seriously reported) suggestion by some semi-official and officious group of medics.

Sorry but I cant think of a single company/brand/product that had its origins in the Great Depression.

Up till 2002 the software industry was counter-cyclic with the rest of the economy. When times got tough companies spent more on computers and associated software to save costs or gain competetive edge.

But the low hanging fruit is gone and IT departments are just another big budget item that needs cutting. Particularly in the current cluster f***ed economy -- can you think of any software that would get you easier, indeed any, credit from the bank, or, software that would help you sell your latest high tech gizmo to someone who just lost thier job and is having thier mortgage foreclosed?

Spending on sex, gambling and drugs goes up in hard times, but, the first two are a done deal as far a software is concerned and the third is in a market so free that the competition will kill you.