04.12.11
Posted in Site News at 4:25 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: Verdades sobre Techrights y cómo envolverse en él o contribuir (preferiblemente IRC).
Un antiguo lector nuestro ha sugerido en varias ocasiones que introducimos Techtrights correctamente, por lo menos a los que no sepan o han oído hablar él por la gente que nos difama o incita animosidad contra nosotros y toman represalias a veces contra los que nos mencionen. Sí, los que criticamos, generalmente nos están difamando aquellos cuyos intereses estén directamente en ángulo recto contra los del Software Free/Libre. Groklaw fue sujetado al mismo tipo de tratamiento por casi 8 años (especialmente al tocar temas polémicos como mono[http://techrights.org/2009/10/01/discrediting-groklaw/]), sólamente aquellos que han pasado tiempo alrededor de nuestro sitio saben que sus detractores mienten simplemente. Así pues, aquí está un manojo de mitos que deseamos tratar:
Mito: Techrights no tiene mucha gente participando.
Realidad: En Techrights, la comunicación usada fué comentarios y email del blog, pero desde mediados del 2008, el IRC Freenode ha sido el medios de comunicación favorecido (tiempo real, pensamiento en grupo en el sentido positivo, etc.), que también privatiza bajo la forma de registros diarios (las conversaciones en el IRC son menos formales, así que son separadas). Además utilizamos un componente de wiki, muchos de los que sean el uso implicado identi.ca para la coordinación, y en 2009 decidíamos restringir comentarios del blog a los lectores registrados solamente. Esto bajó la cantidad de comentarios a casi el 90%.
Mito: Techrights es un cambio de nombre de Boycott Novell.
Realidad: Este sitio se amplió hace mucho tiempo en términos de alcance (como SCO en el caso de Groklaw) y necesitamos organizar el sitio de una manera que divide las causas un poco más con eficacia. El boicoteo de Novell se convirtió en tan apenas parte de un dominio más grande, llamado Techrights. La transición fué largamente atrasada y tardó años debido a razones técnicas que resolvimos solamente a un grado (usando el wiki, URL redirecciones, y así sucesivamente).
Mito: El editor de Techrights es alguna persona loca.
Realidad: Esto es el argumento favorito de nuestros oponentes que atacan al mensajero para distraer al público del mensaje de Techrights. La gente que sabe mis calificaciones y me conoce personalmente podría claramente diferenciar. Nunca oculté mi identidad, al contrario. Estoy trabajando como investigador postdoctoral especializandome en análisis de imagenes y el modelado estadístico y he ganado algunas concesiones por mis logros técnicos, además de muchos trofeos por mis logros en deportes físicos, competitivos. También tengo una afinidad para la administración de servidores de UNIX/Linux, con interés particular en el uso de racimos para mejorar su funcionamiento (necesario para mi trabajo ya mencionado, como trabajo con muchos gigabytes de grupos de datos tridimensionales). La gente que difama el carácter del mensajero basado en comparación personales en vez de discusiones técnicas (insultos baratos) se están inclinando sólamente tan bajo como uno puede hacerlo. Los comentarios difamatorios más groseros dudan mi grado del doctorado o cuestionan que haya ido a alguna universidad obscura cuando de hecho gané mi grado honorario en un departamento 5 estrellas (lo más arriba posible en el Reino Unido), siendo supervisado por su jefe del departamento que recibió un OBE de la Reina de Inglaterra. Mis credenciales en Ingeniería de Programas Informáticos son de primera clase alineada con honores. Todavía escribo código diariamente y mi Software es Free/Libre. No impongo mi personalidad en este sitio Web porque el sitio no es acerca de mí, él sitio es sobre asuntos que a la gente les interesa y afecta másy más. He sacrificado mucho para hacer crecer su comunidad y escalar su contenido (cuerpo de trabajo diverso) a pesar de las muchas amenazas y ataques personales en mí contra, así que ésas personas vengativas deben recordar que soy también una persona con sentimientos y haber sido calumniado es desagradable, no sólo inmoral. Soy muy accesible, no soy enojado o peligroso, y animan los que todavía creen los estereotipos a contactarme que yo respondo siempre.
Mito: Techrights cría o engendra el odio.
Realidad: El sitio podría ser interpretado así cuando viene de un empuje llamado Boycott Novell , pero la persona que eligió el nombre no escribe más aquí, debido a carencia del tiempo y otras razones personales. La realidad es, la historia de la gente que escribe aquí demuestra un historial de defensa de GNU/Linux (sí, sobre todo el campo del GPL Licencia Pública General), no críticas a ciertas compañías. Muchos de nosotros somos desarrolladores que contribuimos activamente a la comunidad. Como los acoplamientos diarios en este sitio debe demostrar, esto sigue siendo un foco de atención nuestro. Las buenas noticias no necesitan generar respuestas, mientras que las malas noticias tienden a requerir una discusión centrada alrededor de refutaciones. Esta es la razón por la cual los temas que cubrimos en post independientes son típicamente de naturaleza negativa. Muchos sitions son como éstos y ha llegado a ser llamados “progresistas”.
Mito: Techrights editorialmente depende de otros sitios.
Realidad: A excepción de los muchos acoplamientos externos que proporcionamos (algunos opositores nuestros diatriban que éstos no son suficiente porque también hacemos una remisión extensivamente), somos editorialmente independientes. Solía escribir para sitios de noticias, pero debido a mi independencia de juicio y depender de la censura de un redactor decidí concentrar mis esfuerzos en Techrights. Gente que contribuye a Techrights no tiene sus opiniones cambiadas/reescritas o sus puntos de vista desalentados al punto de la autocensura.
Mito: Censores de Techrights
Realidad: En casi 5 años de funcionar este sitio, nunca hemos suprimido cualquier comentario del blog, no incluso los vulgares que llevan palabrotas e incluso amenazas clasificadas “x”. Esto nos llevó en un cierto plazo a requerir a que los usuarios por lo menos se registren, lo que lleva a cierta ciertas responsabilidad de lo que se dice. Los “cobardes anónimos” tienden a ser imprudentes e IP address de las cuarteles de Novell fueron usadas para comentar aquí anónimamente también (están haciendolo según se informa afuera de este sitio ahora, a veces anónimamente).
Mito: Techrights fué crackeado (agrietado)
Realidad: Techrights nunca fué crackeado. Éste es parte de la mitología sembrada por trolls pagados y nuestros acosadores, que desde el Internet intentan difamar al sitio por todo medio disponible, incluso la difamación que ellos mismos plantan desdela Web y entonces citan como “prueba”. Cuando estuvimos bajo ataques de DDOS que nos tragaron por días algunos payasos se atrevieron a sugerir que nos DDOSed a nosotros mismos. Rídiculo, porque ésa es su explicación más lógica.
Mito: Techrights es contratado por alguien hacer análisis favorables a productos/servicios de aquellos que los contratan.
Realidad: Otro punto favorito de los trolls pagados y aquellos que ganan su subsistencia de esta manera precisamente. Nadie quién se asocia a este sitio recibió nunca cualquier incentivo – dinero de de otra manera – para hacer funcionar este sitio. Este sition web es una forma de activismo de los pueblos y es un pasatiempo.
Con todo esto en mente, por favor consideren hacernos más fuertes refutando las mentiras que se repiten alrededor del Web y también haciendo primer contacto en los canales del IRC[http://techrights.org/irc-channel/]. Es aquí donde ocurre mucha de nuestra actividad y es muy amistosa.
Noticias de hoy de Groklaw
* El Defensor de Linux Groklaw Cerró – En Victoria[http://wraltechwire.com/business/tech_wire/opinion/blogpost/9418199/]
Groklaw, el sitio web creado y mantenido por el paralegal Pamela Jones para luchar a nombre de Linux ante el tribunal lucha entablada por la empresa de software SCO, está cerrando.
Jones, también conocido como el PJ, emprendió una batalla feroz contra SCO, compañía que amenazó al mundo de Linux con sus juegos contra IBM y Novell [por Unix]. SCO terminó por perder ante el tribunal, y Jones escribió en Groklaw el sábado que ella lo cerraba.
Sé que mucho usted será infeliz oírlo, así que déjeme explican brevemente, porque se toma mi decisión y es firme. En una oración simple, la razón es ésta: la crisis SCO iniciada sobre linux ha terminado, y linux ganado. SCO como lo sabíamos no es no más, ella dijo.
* Groklaw Deja de Publicar Nuevos Artículos[http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Groklaw-to-cease-publishing-new-articles-1225022.html]
* Cambio de Dirección[http://webmink.com/2011/04/10/links-for-2011-04-10/]
Pamela declara la victoria, resiste la tentación de diversificar y anuncia que Groklaw no publicará más artículos originales. Personalmente pienso que esto es una gran pérdida para la comunidad del Software Free/Libre y del mundo en general; un lugar investigador de la comunidad es definitivamente necesario contradecir el acoplamiento de la conspiración que sabemos es el trabajo diario de los cabilderos de la industria y de los “profesionales” de los estándares.
Pamela lo qué has hecho no tiene precio. Usted no sólo se levantó por la libertad del software y contra patentes del software pero por la libertad de los pueblos de todo el mundo, contra el colonialismo digital. Estamos tristes con su decisión pero mantenga por favor todos sus archivos en linea, así que gente de todos los países puede conseguir una ojeada de qué sucedió realmente estos ocho años pasados e impidamos la reescritura de la historia por monopolistas que tienen como objetivo el esclavizar al resto del mundo con su supuestas “invenciones” y “estandares”. P.J. la extrañaremos.
“I added a little paragraph at the end regarding PJ,” added Eduardo Landaveri, who kindly provided the translation above.
“Pamela what have you done have no price. You stood up not only for software freedom and against software patents but for the freedom of peoples all over the world fro digital colonialism. We’re sad with your decision but please maintain all your archives so people from all countries can get a glimpse of what really happened these last eight years and defeat the rewriting of history for monopolist that only look to enslave the rest of the world with their supposed “inventions” and “standards” We’ll miss you P.J” █
Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the esteemed administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
04.11.11
Posted in Site News at 6:14 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Over thirteen thousand posts are in this Web site right now, having just hit another milestone
Techrights is still growing, more people are getting involved (in IRC, Wiki, translations, etc.), and we have just posted another 1,000 blog posts (it was 12,000 at the end of November), which complement many other pages* that we publish more silently to organise all the material, making it more easily accessible.
Techrights will not stop publishing new articles. It has no foreseeable barrier, so now is a good time to get involved by joining us in IRC, sending us information, and/or offering articles to publish. Techrights will also turn 5 later this year. There will be a party. █
___
* Google, for instance, claims to have indexed over 50,000 pages.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in FUD, Microsoft, SCO at 3:52 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Image credited to Groklaw.net
Summary: Not even a day goes by and the mobbyists already engage in revisionism and distortion of the truth about Groklaw; Techrights responds
THIS is sad to watch. As pointed out to us by a reader last night (see IRC logs, which we have finally caught up with), now starts the revisionism about Groklaw and about Pamela Jones, its esteemed and talented editor. She won’t be able to defend herself and rebut the spin for much longer as her online presence is strictly in Groklaw (due to imposters). We have already attempted to set the record straight, but some people insist on echoing the words spread in a PR-esque fashion by all the usual suspects. Examples of the arguments to watch out for are: 1) Pamela encouraged IBM to sue using patents (they forgot to mention that IBM was provoked to do this by an agitator and disrupter which is partly owned by Microsoft) and 2) Pamela celebrated Red Hat’s patents (well, she actually celebrated Red Hat’s ability to settle litigation by patent trolls, even in a GPLv3-compliant way). This recently developed into somewhat of an argument we intended to put an end to, not to restart
In many ways, the FSF et al. adopted a similar attitude towards patents. Eben Moglen, for example, thanked the OIN for shooting down attempts by Microsoft to pass Linux-hostile patents to patent trolls. Richard Stallman will address the general subject very soon and here is the abstract of his talk:
Richard Stallman will explain how software patents obstruct software development. Software patents are patents that cover software ideas. They restrict the development of software, so that every design decision brings a risk of getting sued. Patents in other fields restrict factories, but software patents restrict every computer user. Economic research shows that they even retard progress.
Meanwhile, as Groklaw helped highlight back in February, Microsoft seems to be turning Nokia into a patent agitator and Muktware claims that the Elop-led “Nokia Confirms They Are Stabbing The Free Software Community”:
Nokia has finally confirmed that they are closing the recently opened Symbian platform. Why is Nokia closing Symbian, when it could have had great potential by being taken care by a wider community? Could there be Microsoft influence? I don’t know.
I am upset with Nokia as the company has betrayed the wider free software community which believed, trusted and invested in platforms like Maemo, MeeGo and Symbian backed by the company. The promises that Nokia made to the free software community have been broken. It’s shameful.
It is even worse if one takes into account the new patent strategy, which came along with Microsoft’s president, Elop [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. They might choose to sue Android phone makers or even Google.
The bottom line is, Groklaw was always against software patents. It actively preached against them and recognised them as a threat. In several E-mails before the weekend I discussed this with Pamela, who clarified her position but permitted no direct quoting (I had not asked for permission). So for anyone who is still fooled by defamation of Groklaw, rest assured that her site strives to deliver an accurate assessment, even if that sometimes mean that discomforting views will get across to readers.
Groklaw not only criticises software patents. Patents in general are in doubt over there and in last week’s news we found an article which gives method for swinging on a swing as an example. It’s titled “Patently absurd system encourages litigation, not innovation” and it says:
For those tempted to laugh it off as the antics of Aussies, note that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office saw fit in 2002 to hand a 5-year-old from Minnesota the exclusive rights to use, sell or license a method for swinging on a swing. (It will surprise no one that his father was a patent attorney.)
These are silly examples that point to a serious problem: Patent offices around the globe are apparently only too willing to grant rights to inventors who haven’t done a whole lot of inventing. And businesses are only too ready to rush their claims to court to gain an upper hand in the market or draw revenue from dubious innovations.
How about “methods for enticing users to access a web site” as the Indian press put it some days ago?
The doodles that Google puts out are pretty familiar to regular users. A recent one relates to Harry Houdini’s 137th birthday, showing a cute cartoon of a suited magician in broken handcuffs. What users may not know is that this doodle stands patented. For a minute, when I first read that, I was pretty amused. “No way!” was my first reaction. However, I took a minute to investigate and sure enough, on March 22, Google was granted a patent titled “Systems and methods for enticing users to access a web site”.
I dreaded scrolling down to read the claims-section of the patent; however, this patent only had four claims. Claims are essentially the heart of a patent application, upon which legal rights are granted/disputed.
Hey, Google, what the heck? Et tu, Google? We stand by our initial evaluation of Google's patent policy.
Moving on from the subject of patents, Groklaw is being defamed in other ways, quite notably by Microsoft Florian. He recycles not only false material from Dan Lyons about Groklaw being “funded by IBM” (a lie which IBM rebutted under oath in the courtroom); now he starts with the very old lie that Pamela does not exist or that the site is composed by a group of people. Well, Florian never shied away from lies, so there he goes again. Watch him getting all chummy with Microsoft MVP Miguel de Icaza [1, 2] and with Microsoft spinner Rob Enderle [1, 2, 3] these days over at Twitter. He mostly speaks to Microsoft people over at Twitter and it’s truly telling. This quite rightly upsets friends of the Groklaw site and one reader suggests (by E-mail): “now that PJ is closing up Groklaw, you might explain what Techrights is about and invite people over.” A member of Groklaw, “spaetz”, noted last night that: “I don’t CARE if she is a woman, a man or a whole legal department.”
Recently we’ve been getting people from Groklaw in the IRC channels and they are very insightful, even eager to help. If Groklaw will no longer be active we sure hope to provide them with a service comparable to News Picks and also some analysis, which is not as legalese-oriented and courtroom-based as Pamela’s (we are neither qualified to do so, nor have we the access to court documents).
Groklaw has been invaluable to us; we could not do without it. Regarding the Novell/CPTN situation, for example, Groklaw noticed the following:
Maureen O’Gara quotes Florian too, of course, which tells you all you need to know, I suspect. But if Florian were correct this time, as opposed to all the prior times, and this deal was a foregone conclusion, so to speak, why would FCO write to OSI at all? And yet… they did. OSI sent their response on April 4th, raising some rather serious questions, and in each case saying that OSI lacks the ability to know the answers, but the FCO has the means and the authority to look into the issues raised. But by April 12th? Does Florian ever predict the future in a way that predicts anything but success for proprietary players any more? List the urls, if you have any. And, more significantly, did he predict that the terms of the CPTN deal would have to morph into the form that they have, thanks to OSI raising concerns with the FCO?
In short, I suggest you wait and see what happens. He doesn’t know. The FCO didn’t write to him, you know, or ask for his views.
For those who do not know what Maureen O’Gara (the fake ‘reporter’ [1, 2, 3, 4]) did to Groklaw, read this from the court (strong evidence, no speculations needed):
“A. [Maureen O'Gara:] PJ is the purported author of the Groklaw site.
Q. What is the Groklaw site?
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] It is a website that follows the SCO case — I should say cases, maybe, but –
Q. And then you did, in fact, write a story about PJ or Pamela Jones, didn’t you?
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] Yes.
Q. So, in 196, Stowell says in the subject line, “I need you to send a jab PJ’s way,” and that’s March 30 2005?
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] Yeah.
Q. And 197 is your May 9 to 13, 2005 issue of Client Server News 2000, correct?
MR. JACOBS: Your Honor, Novell moves into evidence D-14.
MR. NORMAND: No objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: It will be admitted.
(Novell Exhibit D-14 received in evidence.)
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] Yeah.
Q. And the lead story is Who is Pamela Jones?
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] Yeah.
1665
Q. Right?
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] Yes.
Q. Is there — is there a causal relationship between Blake Stowell’s e-mail to you and the appearance of the story in Client Server News 2000, May 9 to 13, 2005?
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] No.
Q. You did it independently? You did the story on PJ –
A. [Maureen O'Gara:] I have reason to do a story on Pamela Jones that has nothing to do with SCO.
Q. And, in your — in that article you said, “A few weeks ago, I went looking for the elusive harridan who supposedly writes the Groklaw blog about the SCO v. IBM suit.” “
Later on, Maureen O’Gara and the Microsoft/SCO gang would try to portray Pamela as paranoid. As though she had no reasons to be concerned… and now they try to pretend she never existed, either. SJVN rebuts as follows, and not for the first time, either:
During those years, she was frequently attacked by people who claimed she was an agent for IBM. Her privacy was attacked by so-called journalists. Others claimed, and still claim to this day, that there is no PJ. That’s utter nonsense.
Pamela Jones does exist. I’ve met her several times and she’s a friend. She’s also a very private person in her personal life and frankly she doesn’t trust SCO, or its friends, as far as she could throw them. Since she’s been stalked by them, I can’t say that I blame her.
SJVN wrote about him meeting Pamela about 3 years ago when the same old lies about her existence had bubbled up to the surface again, seeking to discredit and de-legitimise the messenger of course.
There are other inaccurate claims about Groklaw; it is not really “Shutting Down”, as some people put it; it does not need Byfield’s “Eulogy”, either (he has been critical of Groklaw over the years, dismissing the likes of Groklaw as "conspiracy theorists"). He wrote:
When I got up this morning, the news was all over Facebook and the free software news sites: Groklaw, the site that was influential in the SCO legal cases, will stop publication on May 16. It’s news that I hear with decidedly mixed feelings.
Well, mixed feelings, eh? So now he can more easily pretend that freedom fighters as “anti-corporations” and/or irrational. To put the situation more correctly, Brad adds that “The site will remain active, and its archives accessible. But no new commentary will be posted.”
Indeed.
For those who are new to Techrights, our aim is to fight FUD which is aimed at Free software (against Linux, Android, and so on). As we mentioned briefly the other day, Gartner is the latest with the FUD baton [via Pogson] and people in Twitter are currently linking to our Gartner FUD and misconduct wiki page because they too realise that we have FUD in our hands. Those who are new to the site may wish to start familiarising themselves with the wiki. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
The show ends with Tim’s selected tracks, which are titled “Virus” and “The Curse and the Serpent”. We hope you will join us for future shows and 
)
