What's wrong with OOXML

And more, what's wrong with the OOXML approval process.  Which can largely be summarized as, "Microsoft couldn't convince ISO to make OOXML a standard, so Microsoft subverted er, sorry, embraced and extended ISO."  The subversion included filling up ISO with single-issue sockpuppet members paid off to vote for OOXML, who don't care about voting anything else because they're not being paid to vote and so are allowing standards to fall into the unapproved bucket by default.  It included fixing the vote mechanisms in one German hearing such as to make it imposible to actually vote "No".  And it included a vote in Norway that "approved" OOXML despite a vote of 21-2 against.

It seems to me ISO's very next move should be to kick out all the sockpuppets, followed by declaring the OOXML approval invalid.  Then after that, ISO should penalize Microsoft by ruling that OOXML may never become a standard.  It's the only way ISO can retain its credibility.

Glyn Moody ends his article with the following:

It is striking that some parts of Microsoft have been making soothing noises to the open source world, speaking of their desire to work alongside free software projects and to ensure "interoperability" - a favourite concept at the moment - between the open and closed worlds.  Those voices have become increasingly seductive to some, especially in the open source business world, who would rather work with than against the Seattle behemoth, and who seem to believe that Microsoft is genuine in its offers.  But if the whole sorry OOXML saga shows anything, it is Microsoft's deep and utter contempt for the whole idea of an open, collaborative process based on mutual respect and consensus.  Henceforth, members of the open source community must view with deep cynicism all - not just some - offers by Microsoft to work more closely with the free software world.  If they don't, they could find themselves used and abused just like the once famous, and now former, International Standards Organisation.

The stupid ... it BURNS!

The United States has outsourced the manufacturing of its electronic passports to overseas companies — including one in Thailand that was victimized by Chinese espionage — raising concerns that cost savings are being put ahead of national security, an investigation by The Washington Times has found.

The Government Printing Office's decision to export the work has proved lucrative, allowing the agency to book more than $100 million in recent profits by charging the State Department more money for blank passports than it actually costs to make them, according to interviews with federal officials and documents obtained by The Times.

The profits have raised questions both inside the agency and in Congress because the law that created GPO as the federal government's official printer explicitly requires the agency to break even by charging only enough to recover its costs.

[ FACEPALM ]

"We have n00 s00p3r s3kur3 biometric RFID passports to FOIL TERRORISTS!  We're going to outsource the manufacturing to a Thai company that's already been compromised, so that we can make a bunch of money in violation of our charter!"

This isn't security theater.  It's security farce.

Evolution?

Aspergia, a site about Asperger's syndrome, raises an interesting question:  What if Asperger's syndrome is an adaptive mutation?