THE majority of GNU/Linux users are either unaware or have become irritably nonchalant about what Microsoft is doing. Figures and organisations of authority reaffirm this bogus, phony idea that Microsoft has changed. Those figures and organisations are often paid by Microsoft to say that (or to seem apathetic about Microsoft). We're not talking about obvious sellouts and defectors or even blatant Microsoft boosters who occupy the media. Not even 'Miguel and Lennart', who undermine software freedom from the inside. The everyday, casual sabotage comes in other forms.
"We're not talking about obvious sellouts and defectors or even blatant Microsoft boosters who occupy the media."Linux is under attack from Microsofters, and moreover it's not hard to see all that. It's a matter of observation, so don't believe those who call it "hate". Many people know and can see what's really going on. The company's ongoing attacks on Linux are too many to exhaustively name. In the case of SCALE, it's not exactly a new problem; Microsoft was there last year, they allowed Microsoft sponsorship 2 years ago, Microsoft sponsorship 3 years ago (also Microsoft speakers). The year beforehand they had quite a few Microsofters as speakers [1, 2, 3] in addition to money from Microsoft (Microsoft sponsorship goes back to 14x).
It's not just smaller event organisers; the largest organiser is implicated too.
One very concerning example is the Linux Foundation. Since 2016 it has been anti-community and pro-Microsoft, right about the same time it took money from the "Microsoft loves Linux" liars.
Since then the Linux Foundation has killed linux.com. This is what happens when we let anti-Linux companies run things; and sure, they'll pay the Foundation for it. For them, burying Linux and harming the brand is an actual objective.
"Since then the Linux Foundation has killed linux.com."Judging by this month's posts, linux.com is effectively dead. It's basically run by a bot now. The linux.com bot says something like "LF Platinum Member Content"; this basically means it's running syndication in exchange for money, notably for IBM.
The Foundation itself was eerily quiet this month and most of last month. If the site linux.com cannot be brought back to life, they should free up the DNS space and let someone else run such an important domain. If they're unwilling or incapable of doing so themselves, they should pass this authoritative domain to someone who actually uses Linux. "Linux.com should hand it over to non-Microsoft community," an associate said this morning.
But linux.com is part of a broader trend here; this is what happened to "the news" in general, impacting news cycles news on the web, news sites' ownership and so on. It seems to be an unexplored or barely-explored problem -- a problem that has little to do with the "advertising industry" or ad blocking etc.
"In the case of Linux conferences and sites, what we see is enemies of Linux taking control."Recently, the subject has come up again in the US, partly because of Senator Sanders. This will worsen over time because if they fail to fund the media (no federal assistance) the nation's oligarchs will control the narrative all across the board. Sometimes foreign oligarchs will do the same.
In the case of Linux conferences and sites, what we see is enemies of Linux taking control. There's a lot more money (salaries) in attacking GNU/Linux than in advocating/promoting it. ⬆