[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Linux-aus] Interview with Mark Lloyd from ACS on compulsory accreditation
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Janet Hawtin wrote:
I went to a meeting in SA yesterday about a proposed national Natioal
Not for Profit ICT Coalition. Where ACS and CISA were proposing to
have a system whereby
ACS or a central group provided Accreditation to IT folk who want to
access the not for profit sector to provide IT services.
The model was proposed to be a way to provide trusted IT services.
It was proposed that this could be expanded to cover financial services etc.
The model is proposed to have a group which provides accreditation
and a second group to broker access to the ngo sector.
ACS looked to be a player for the first group and the interview and this
http://www.acs.org.au/news/110806.htm
lead me to think that this is an overall goal of ACS for IT.
CISA look to be aiming for the broker role at least for SA and NGO sector.
The models of similar structures included:
http://www.icthub.org.uk
http://www.nten.org
http://compumentor.org
http://techsoup.org
http://sangonet.org.za
http://www.npower.org/about/index.htm
Which uniformly are systems whereby there is a central control over
who is trusted
and there is only very little, and commonly innacurate information
available through these portals on FOSS technologies and solutions
which offer very real synergies with the not for profit sector.
Given that my husband who has a degree was refused membership to ACS
because they didnt like the stripe of his degree I have concerns that
the choices made by ACS as a broker of IT trusted providers will
besimilary partisan.
Janet
I think that the ACS has some good points, and could be useful, as the
ACS supposedly, regulates its membership, in terms of standards,
including ethics, and, provides certification, and, ongoing training,
to its members.
However, Anne was contacted at work, by someone from the ACS, to solicit
membership of the ACS, so I looked into it for her (MACS can be a useful
status, in obtaining work, both employment as an individual, and, where
a contractor has workers who are MACS, or SMACS, that could be useful).
I found that membership of the ACS costs $320 per year, with an extra
$110 joining fee. Those fees are the pesent fees.
I also found that Anne's PostGraduate Diploma in Computer Science, from
Curtin University, is not recognised by the ACS. The PostGrad Dip
CompSc is the equivalent of an honours degree. For the ACS to accredit
pass degrees, but not the PostGrad Dip, shows a lack of professional
maturity on the part of the ACS, in my opinion.
The information in the last two paragraphs, was obtained from the ACS
web site, in the last couple of days.
I also looked at the IEEE Computer Society (www.computer.org), for
comparison, as both Anne and I have in the past been members. Membership
costs 110USD per year, and, subscription to the Digital Library, costs
119USD per year, for professional membership; a total of 229USD per
year, or 305AUD, using an exchange rate of 0.75USD per AUD.
I think that the IEEE Computer Society membership would be more
beneficial, and, better value for money, than ACS membership.
Perhaps, your husband could investigate joing the IEEE Computer Society,
Janet.
I note that I have previously mentioned the SLPWA, in relation to
another thread on this list. Perhaps, Linux Australia could investigate
the possible creation of a similar organisation at the federal/national
level.
One thing that concerns me about the ACS proposal, as described, is the
monopoly nature of it. Ther are a number of problems with monopolies
(quite apart from the spirit of monopolies, being contrary to free trade
and competition). I remember what was said about the formation of the
National Union of Students in Astralia, which later became the AUS (or
the other way around), which was basically, that it was hatched out of
the office of the then federal minister of Education, John Dawkins, and
was thus controlled by the federal government, especially by the ALP,
was was solely a partisan institution, pro-ALP. This may have been why
there was no apparent opposition to the imposition of the
"Administration Fee" for tertiary education in Australia, that started
at $100 per year, and, evolved (by the ALP) into what became HECS, and
is now known as HELP (?), which leaves graduates with massive debts
(although, not as bad as the NZ post-tertiary debts). It is possible
(and, O believe, highly likely), that the objective of the creation of
that organisation, was to prevent opposition to the imposition of HECS.
From what I understand, if it had happened in the 1960's, or 1970's, the
universities would have had massive disruption, involving protests,
sit-ins, and, possible rioting, due to the end of free tertiay
education, but, instead, the formation of the NUS/AUS, ensured thast
there was no significant opposition.
The point with this, is that a supposedly representative body at the
national level, was apparently in bed with the federal government, and,
especially with the ALP, and, subsequently represented those interests,
instead of the interests of its members. If the ACS is allowed to
similarly obtain compulsory membership (this sounds alot like
compulsory union membership, both for trades and tertiary students,
which the federal government is supposed to be firmly against, and has
taken action to abolish), in collusion with the goverment, then the
motives, and, the subsequent interests, and direction, of the ACS,
would need to be investigated (perhaps, by the ACCC?). It could be (but
not limited to) a covert way of imposing USA intellectual property
domination of the Australian IT industry ("You claim that you wrote that
module/program/database? Well, it looks remarkably like the equivalent,
in this Microsft program, so, we are going to sue you for 100 million
USD, for copyright infringement, and, we estimate that it will take
about 10 years, and cost about 300 million USD, for you to defend the
suit, unless you give us the rights to all of the products that you have
developed, and, all of your assets, including your home and your
superannuation entitlements, as they are clearly obtained from the work
that you have done, that is like the Microsft software, and we will
spend the next ten years and 300 million USD, proving it, unless you
surrender, now.") Similarly in a recent case; SCO UNIX and Linux. And,
it must be remembered, that, in the courts, nothing is certain, and, no
matter how right or legal something is, a decision can always go in an
unespected direction.
So, with what is in that paragraph, and, the text above, I have great
concerns, about the ACS proposal.
Now, there is also another, significant aspect.
I am a member of various incorporated non-profit organisations, and, I
operate web sites for some of those, and, other non-profit
organisations. I do that for no personal gain. Why hould I have to join
some pompous commercial organisation governed by self-interest, so that
I can be allowed to help non-profit organisations? And, in one of the
organisations, both Anne and I had created databases to manage various
functions of the organisation, and, in another organisation of which we
are members, one of the governing council has created a daatabase, like
(but not exactly) a membership database, and it is possible that Anne
and I could, in the future, do similar computing work for that
organisation, free of charge. The man who created the database, as far
as I am aware, has no formal training in computing; he just knocked up
a simple database, to assist him in his role as an office bearer of
that organisation.
Why should people, who are willing to do something for a non-profiit
organisation, for free, or, perhaps, for reduced rates, be required to
join some commercial organisation that is governed by self-interest?
I personally believe that the imposition of manadatory membership, of
people who do work for non-profit organisations, with the proposal
involving the ACS, is no more than an opportunistic profiteering attempt
by the ACS, with highly suspicious motives otherwise, being proposed to
be done, "in bed with the government".
And, as those of you who participate in the running of incorporated,
non-profit organisations, are no doubt aware, it is already,
sufficiently difficult to get people to fill office-bearer positions,
and, to get people to do tasks for no (or reduced) reward ("We need
someone to operate and enhance our website, and we need someone to
create and maintain a membership database and other databases for us,
and we will not be paying you anything, but you will have to pay the ACS
$430 up front, and, $320 a year, to be allowed to do it. Now, who is
going to volunteer?").
So, from the information that has already been given, and, considering
the above material, I think that the answer to the ACS proposal,is very
much like the "Be scared, be very scared" scenario, and should be
boycotted.
By the way, what is the CISA?
--
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..............
"So once you do know what the question actually is,
you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
A Trilogy In Four Parts",
written by Douglas Adams,
published by Pan Books, 1992
....................................................