C’mon man, you need to at least wait for it to be public before jumping the gun.
Also, we need to stop these vote of thanks we extend to these people when they do their jobs.
They are public servants not our benefactors
“If a startup is offering cybersecurity services and critical database solutions to the Government of Ghana, is that really a startup?” Hon. Samuel Nartey George
Respectfully @samgeorgegh yes.
A startup can absolutely still be a startup while solving real government problems.
That is how innovation grows globally: prototype → pilot → testing → iteration → compliance → scale.
Companies like Palantir, Anduril, and even SpaceX worked with government early while still proving and refining what they were building.
That did not stop them from being startups.
And respectfully, even when a startup receives money from government, it should not be treated like “easy money.”
A lot goes into building sustainable tech: engineers, servers, cloud infrastructure, cybersecurity, testing, iterations, maintenance, upgrades, support, documentation, and scaling.
The software people see is usually only the visible part.
A lot happens behind the scenes to keep systems secure and reliable.
That is why many people are asking a practical question:
If a student, startup, or local company pilots an innovative solution with a public institution and the product is still being tested and improved…
Do they immediately enter the same registration, certification, and fee structure as a mature enterprise vendor?
If yes, that could choke local innovation too early.
If no, then that distinction needs to be clearly stated.
Because Ghana needs room for local builders to experiment, pilot, improve, and grow before enterprise-level burdens kick in.
That is how stronger local technology ecosystems are built.
@kwekutech@gemini_dna@pazunre@TheDumbTechGuy@MacJordaN@koboateng
My dear brother Hon. Sam Dzata George,
The report of your engagement with a section of our respected technology experts is why l asked you the question below a day before your engagement. You ignored me. Clearly from the report, attendees were responding to zero drafts when you have 5th versions of the bills.
My brother Sam George, this report by our sister Keni Ribeiro can form the basis of your stewardship going forward. Too many of such strongarm tactics lately.
Anyways please l repeat the questions below.
Last year, you requested comments (RFC) on a number of crucial bills around the following themes:
1. Regulating speech on digital platforms – the Misinformation, Disinformation and Hate Speech Bill and the Cybersecurity Amendment Bill.
2. Regulating broadcasting on digital platforms – the NCA Amendment Bill, Electronic Communication Bill, NITA Bill, and others are implicated.
3. Regulating the digital economy and IT professionals – NITA, Kofi Annan, emerging technologies, etc.
Can we—and the public—have a version of the draft bills with a matrix showing which comments and suggestions were adopted and which were not, along with the reasons?
It is good to create spaces for engagement, but it is most useful to be speaking to the right or updated documents.
Thanks and have a productive day
https://t.co/IItLhQ3O48
Developed a tool that monitors the uptime of various government websites, allowing users to view performance trends over the past 30 days and check which services are currently online.
Check it out on https://t.co/2TqBqp551U
I read 2 papers a day.
I read 15 pages of a textbook in a course I have taken in the past a day
I study a course for 3 hours a day
1 read 15 pages of fiction a day
I spend 2 hours on a personal project a day
I spend 30 mins writing a day.
These are non negotiable.