Canada

You're not wrong exactly, but I think you're perhaps assuming an unnecessarily absolutist approach. If there are legacy systems that need windows, keep windows for those legacy systems. What you're describing are exceptions, not the norm. The vast, vast majority of public service computers could just as easily be running Linux.

As for who the Federal government sues, that's why you go with an enterprise release like Red Had or Ubuntu. You find a company that you're happy to work with, you pay them maybe 25% of what you're paying MS right now, and in return you get a full support plan with clearly defined SLAs.

This isn't so much "Nothing's impossible" as it is "It's really not that hard." These are solved problems. Plenty of governments have already switched over to open source.

Just curious without knowing anything about the Canadian public IT system but are those ancient databases seriously running on Windows, or why would transitioning away from Windows impact their operations? As for transition, of course any transition is difficult and takes effort and careful preparation.

If Downtime is not an option, I am not sure how well the state is served by operating critical infrastructure on a system that the potential adversary has a prominent kill switch to it.

Regarding liability, well, I don't know how things are in Canada but the state doesn't sue if it is responsible itself and it can protect itself from liability if needed for cases where there is no grave neglect for example (or even for cases with grave neglect, that is a political question not for me to decide). Not saying that is necessarily a popular option but it is certainly an option.

PS: Isolated systems running on Windows are a non-issue for example. Other systems would need to be migrated according to a transition plan that can be more or less ambitious.

#CanadArch

100%. I want this to happen so much.

And make their own distro. No need to build something from scratch! For fucks sake!

Which is exactly what they would do if they were to switch. Starting from scratch would be incredibly stupid, and there's no reasonable way to secure a brand new system when we simply don't employ enough programmers of that kind at the govt level.

Take off, eh!

Or, wait, use another already existing one?!!

Which is exactly what an increasing number of EU countries are doing.

with the Maple Desktop Environment.

Wasn't Arch made by a Canadian?

The author does discuss that actually

Here is the study it is referring to, which the author put out last week ~~(although I don't have the full text right now)~~: https://www.emerald.com/dprg/article-abstract/doi/10.1108/DPRG-06-2026-0347/1400436/Open-source-digital-sovereignty-the-case-for-a?redirectedFrom=fulltext

EDIT: Full paper here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=7585538

Design/methodology/approach

This paper develops a comparative policy analysis of six state-sponsored Linux distributions (China, Russia, India, France, Germany and South Korea) using a dual total cost of ownership (TCO) + strategic autonomy analytical framework, benchmarked against Canada’s procurement landscape, laws and trade obligations.

Originality/value

This paper proposes a Canadian Free and Open Systems Foundation (Crown not-for-profit modeled on Germany’s Zentrum für Digitale Souveränität) alongside a three-phase implementation roadmap and five institutionally targeted policy recommendations. The proposal offers a generalizable middle-power template for reconciling digital sovereignty with open multilateralism, applicable to Australia, Japan, South Korea and Nordic states facing parallel dependencies.

So while the author mentions Debian, that is just an example. The actual recommendation is setting up a foundation to make those decisions after confirming it will meet the requirements + working with other countries on this

Yes and nobody seems to acknowledge that. They think data sovereignty is all that matters. But Microsoft has stated no they have to listen to the US no matter what any other countrys laws say. I thought countries would have been more upset about that but nope.

So they can hire hundreds of IT consultants to fuck the dog around Ottawa cafes for three years, then deliver a system that doesn't work/ ne fonctionne pas.

This is how government IT works. They couldn't even implement a system to pay themselves.

Even better, our own small fuel efficient cars. Most people don't need a massive gas guzzler.