• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Once again, no one is talking about " fedramp" but the entire article goes into detail about the subject of government requirements for contractors that don’t exist. Maybe give it a look.

    I’m talking about Fedramp as an example of a government compliance regime that “through government procurement laws, governments” DOES "require any company providing a product or service to the government to not interfere with interoperability.”

    I’m confused how you’re spending so much effort in a conversation and you’re not able to connect basic concepts.

    Article premise: “Wouldn’t it be great if X exists?”

    Me: “X does exist for a specific area, its called Fedramp.”

    Where is the difficulty you are encountering in understanding conversational flow?

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        What you’re talking about, and what myself and the author are talking about, are clearly not the same thing.

        Unless you’re Doctorow, I don’t think you can speak for the author, but you can certainly for yourself.

        I looked at your post history and I don’t see anything I’d consider trolling, but your responses her are screaming that in this thread of conversation. I’m just going to chalk this up to us SERIOUSLY not communicating with one another for some unknown reason.

        There’s no point in us conversing further on this. I’m making clear my point in multiple ways. You’re still not getting it so lets just end this here.

        I hope your other conversation with others are more communicative that this one. Have a great day!