EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

10.19.20

Standards and Choices

Posted in Antitrust, FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Standard at 11:37 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Letters and numbers

Summary: GNU/Linux is a very standards-based platform; having lots of choices (e.g. distros to choose from) isn’t the principal problem — or nowhere near the extent sabotage and illegal tactics by Microsoft have been

Choice versus standards. False dichotomy? Many choices can be implemented to comply with a given standard, preventing monoculture while maintaining cooperation at some level. Having multiple measures and units (e.g. decimal/metric versus Imperial) means conversion becomes necessary. Yet the world keeps revolving and we keep trading, even with anomalies in the way we measure things.

“It’s not “hatred” to assert that secret deals (typically composed by Microsoft lawyers, often in violation of competition laws) are the primary obstacle. The antitrust case revealed the gory nature of some of these secret deals.”Proponents of a so-called ‘UNIVERSAL LINUX’ (we made a satirical post about it earlier today, using a good ol' car analogy) want us to think that having both GNOME and KDE, or Wayland and X, or many other such things (not the ‘same’ but one being profoundly outdated and broken, e.g. LibreOffice vs. OpenOffice) is a suicidal path. They blame the wrong thing for limited adoption of GNU/Linux in laptops/desktops. As if the channel ‘prefers’ Windows because GNU/Linux has inherent problems and not because of Microsoft crimes, including bribery. People who (mis)place the blame on themselves instead of those working to undermine/sabotage their efforts may be suffering a ‘self-loathing’ complex. They then reinforce the very same FUD patterns originally conceived and disseminated by their adversaries.

In the coming weeks we intend to dig deeper into the Bill Gates deposition transcripts, which include passages about “Jihad” and deliberately breaking standards (to make things like Java work only in Windows). To quote some things that Ryan said in IRC yesterday:

I’d like to see more laptops coming with a KDE distribution. It’s a shame KDE doesn’t get more attention these days. Means I’m still going to have to do something with it after I buy it. But the defaults never work out for everyone I guess. It could be worse. All kinds of shitty firmware and bugs and an OEM going “Well, we sold it with Windows 10, so….”.

The ‘problem’ with GNU/Linux isn’t that it’s doing ‘too much’ for ‘too many’ people (or only for geeks). There are desktop environments for beginners, not just for advanced (or ‘power’) users. The open standards are generally there (that’s why GTK-based applications are easy to run in KDE and GNOME-based distros deal just fine with Qt) and focus must be placed on the real barriers to widespread adoption. It’s not “hatred” to assert that secret deals (typically composed by Microsoft lawyers, often in violation of competition laws) are the primary obstacle. The antitrust case revealed the gory nature of some of these secret deals. Go tell Jim Zemlin from the Linux Foundation that the US government wasn’t "kicking a puppy" when it took on Microsoft.

10.07.20

The Messages That Likely Got Eric S. Raymond or ‘ESR’ Banned by the OSI (Which He Co-founded) and Why That Still Matters

Posted in Free/Libre Software, FUD, OSI at 11:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Familiar tactics with familiar outcomes? Does one have an obligation to be empathetic towards suspected provocateurs?

DARVO explained
DARVO explained

Summary: Trouble-making in the Free (and Open Source) software world leaves leaders bruised; they seem to be falling into traps when they speak out, responding to provocative moves which then cast them as aggressors who are rude

“With whatever moral authority I still have here,” ESR wrote earlier this year, “I say to all advocates of soi-disant “ethical” licensing not just “No” but “To hell with you *and* the horse you rode in on.””

We now know more about why the OSI banned ESR. It’s not the message people often quote, in which some insults were added. Well, he publicly spoke about it. An anonymous Techrights source quoted the above. “Here is one thing ESR said,” the source noted, adding the part where he said: “I am not fooled. You are mounting an ideological attack on our core principles of liberty and nondiscrimination. You will not succeed while I retain any ability to oppose this.”

“We now know more about why the OSI banned ESR.”“Other quotes from the chain by ESR about Eric Schultz,” noted observers, are: “Because that way he couldn’t use our prestige to advance his goals. He couldn’t use OSI to pretend to be pro-freedom while actually being against freedom.”

“Both of these messages are hostile, assume bad faith and (as noted by some supporters of ESR’s position) unhelpful for resolving the issue,” said one commenter.

But not everybody agreed. “They do not assume bad faith,” said the next comment. “They define ‘liberty and nondiscrimination’ in a particular way that the other person, Eric Schulz, objectively opposes. Schulz would probably disagree about the definitions of those terms that ESR is using, but it is not an assumption of bad faith.”

“Our source wished to bring this to our attention discreetly.”The last comment said this: “They don’t assume bad faith, they are accurate depictions of what Schultz wanted to do. I mean, would he even disagree with that? The original proposal was for a license that’d allow anyone except US ICE to use the software, for example. That’s ideological. It’s pretty clearly different from the non-discrimination policies open source licenses normally have, that’s why he had to propose the license to start with. And he wanted to use the OSI to endorse his new license as being open source, whilst it didn’t meet the original criteria. In some issues there’s no way to helpfully resolve them. What sort of meet-in-the-middle do you propose here, exactly? Either open source licenses as determined by the OSI don’t discriminate against particular users, or they can, and that’s a values based decision. There’s no real way to be ‘helpful’ about it: no is no.”

Our source wished to bring this to our attention discreetly. We need to at least have a better grasp/understanding of what happened. It is a pretty big deal because for the OSI to oust a founder and former leader, then become a Microsoft 'proxy' of sorts, is a sign of collapse or at least defection. Monopolies and Open Source aren’t contradictory anymore; when the whole ‘open source’ and OSI ‘thing’ is just an openwashing veil for proprietary software (which is where we’re at in 2020) we know it’s a lost cause. It’s sellout complete with software patents, as per yesterday’s Facebook post from OIN. All Things Open (ATO) is now stacked or controlled by (and sponsored by enemies_ of Free software. It props up patent boosters/cartels and the types who don’t even use Free software themselves (they use Windows and “Macs”). Whatever our thoughts may be about the political views of ESR, it’s clear he wasn’t as bad as those people. The ousting of a founder and former leader (like at the FSF) helps weaken/eliminate the ability to morally resist corporate takeover/entryism. Moral authorities were also driven out at Python two years ago; look who's stacking the deck these days

Look what happened to Apache when ASF got stacked by Microsoft; the whole thing was outsourced to Microsoft's proprietary software prison (GitHub), just like the OSI.

“It’s almost as though some people at the OSI was pre-conditioned to get rid of ESR one way or another.”Microsoft apologist Jim Jagielski (ex-ASF) responded to the above with: “FTR, I find the final part of that sentence uncalled for. I also disagree with the idea of “ethical open source”, but it adds NOTHING to the debate and discussion to disparage those who are speaking their PoV for it. I, for one, can certainly understand and appreciate what their goals and intents are, and in some way, I even agree with them. But on one hand to damn them for speaking their mind, while at the same time defending (for lack of a better word) those using our software to oppress fellow human beings by “allowing” them to continue using our software to do so seems hypocritical. Please show better restraint.”

Many people agreed; temper issues aren’t being denied, but many disagree with the harshness of the punishment. It’s almost as though some people at the OSI was pre-conditioned to get rid of ESR one way or another. Unlike Perens, who resigned weeks earlier without throwing a slur.

At least we now know which messages were considered in violation of the CoC and acted upon quickly.

09.10.20

Techrights at DistroTube

Posted in Europe, Finance, Free/Libre Software, FSF, FUD at 8:33 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: This morning’s segment from DistroTube regarding the Linux Foundation, the FSFE, and the FSF (including RMS being deserving of an FSF award)

09.05.20

Confusion and Diffusion Tactics: Microsoft Propaganda in Twitter Calls Windows (Vista 10) ‘Linux’ and Misleads Millions

Posted in Deception, FUD, GNU/Linux, Vista 10, Windows at 9:33 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Swift on FUD (a high-profile Microsoft propaganda account disguised as ‘security expert’)

WSL FUD

“I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

“Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.

“Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.” –Richard Stallman

09.01.20

Net Applications Was Always Hostile Towards GNU/Linux (and Close to Microsoft), So Stop Measuring or Assessing ‘Market Share’ Based on What It Says

Posted in Deception, FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 1:49 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Funny spin, old spin

Big laughter

Summary: We’re supposed to think that versions of Windows still have about 90% of the market; nothing could be further from the truth

SO, some so-called ‘Linux’ sites now tell us about Net Applications, alleging that GNU/Linux is ‘losing’ and it’s all based on some firm with secret data and ties to Microsoft. As we recently noted, another firm claims that GNU/Linux share increased by 15% during lock-downs; so different firms tell different and mutually-contradicting stories. We’ve chosen to not link to any of those so-called ‘Linux’ sites as it would merely feed the FUD/misinformation/click-bait. Either way, Windows does not have about 90% of the market. It’s crafty or artistic misuse of statistics. Android has a higher share (on the Web at least) than Windows and outside laptops/desktops the share of Microsoft is minuscule anyway. Don’t let the liars claim otherwise.

“Working behind the scenes to orchestrate “independent” praise of our technology, and damnation of the enemy’s, is a key evangelism function during the Slog. “Independent” analyst’s report should be issued, praising your technology and damning the competitors (or ignoring them). “Independent” consultants should write columns and articles, give conference presentations and moderate stacked panels, all on our behalf (and setting them up as experts in the new technology, available for just $200/hour). “Independent” academic sources should be cultivated and quoted (and research money granted). “Independent” courseware providers should start profiting from their early involvement in our technology. Every possible source of leverage should be sought and turned to our advantage.”

Microsoft, internal document [PDF]

08.21.20

[Meme] GNU/Linux Has Too Much Choice, They Say…

Posted in FUD, GNU/Linux at 1:45 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Obey: Same task (operating systems), different styles

Summary: The old FUD about GNU/Linux offering ‘too many’ choices would have us assume the same about fashion and about protective gear, would it not? (As if everyone is the same and the needs never vary)

08.18.20

Daniel Wallace Explains Why He Challenged the GPL (Copyleft) in Court

Posted in Antitrust, Courtroom, Free/Libre Software, FSF, FUD, GNU/Linux, Interview, Law at 10:30 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Richard Stallman
Richard Stallman’s last interview as FSF president

Summary: Almost 15 years ago Daniel Wallace alleged that copyleft (or GPL specifically) was problematic and contravened federal antitrust laws; he lost the case and now he explains to us why he pursued that misguided litigation campaign

OVER the past few days we’ve been studying the GPL challenge that was widely discussed a decade and a half ago after Daniel Wallace, about 60 at the time, had alleged that it was an antitrust violation. He even took it to court. As Wikipedia put it:

Wallace v. International Business Machines Corp., 467 F.3d 1104 (7th Cir. 2006), was a significant case in the development of free software. The case decided, at the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, that in United States law the GNU General Public License (GPL) did not contravene federal antitrust laws.

Daniel Wallace, a United States citizen, sued the Free Software Foundation (FSF) for price fixing. In a later lawsuit, he unsuccessfully sued IBM, Novell, and Red Hat. Wallace claimed that free Linux prevented him from making a profit from selling his own operating system.

We found the current contact details of Mr. Wallace and Ryan, who comes from the same state where Wallace resides, did eventually call him. That was yesterday. “He said it was long in the past and that he was planning to develop a product based on BSD,” Ryan reported. “He wouldn’t go further than that. He just said he’s 74 now and it’s long in the past. He chose not to proceed because he was representing himself pro se and that it would have bankrupted him had he continued to appeal.”

When we started exploring this we wondered aloud who might have funded or ‘bankrolled’ the lawsuit.

“When we started exploring this we wondered aloud who might have funded or ‘bankrolled’ the lawsuit.”“He said it was just his opinion that the GPL doesn’t “hold water” legally,” Ryan continued, “and that giving software away and charging for services prevents others from making competitive products.”

Did Microsoft have anything to do with this (like the SCO lawsuit)? “Doesn’t pass the “sniff test” for Microsoft,” Ryan said, “I think it’s just someone who wanted to knock over copyleft because they had some idea for a product that couldn’t compete. He seemed to not like Red Hat very much. He said that it was dishonest to give the software out for free and charge for services. The court kept saying that he failed to articulate an antitrust argument. They let him amend his complaint 4 times before they threw it out.”

Groklaw wrote a lot about it at the time. Sadly, some Groklaw pages are no longer accessible.

“Groklaw wrote a lot about it at the time. Sadly, some Groklaw pages are no longer accessible.”“He seemed to be under the impression that the GPL requires software to be free of charge,” Ryan said. “It doesn’t. It just makes it hard to sell because someone could take the same source code and come up with a different version. He said he got hit with huge costs for the legal costs incurred by FSF and the three companies (IBM, RH, Novell).”

“Although,” Ryan continued, “he accidentally contributed something to the GPL. Instead of knocking it down, he gave us case law that it provides direct benefits to the market, as decided by the trial judge, and a three judge panel voting unanimously at the Seventh Circuit appeals court. Which can be cited if someone else is ever hit with antitrust complaints regarding a Free Software License. I’d say that Daniel Wallace’s demeanor was more shocked that someone wanted to talk to him and evasive, but definitely kind of blindsided that someone would poke around at that after 15 years.”

It’s never too late to start pursuing answers and clarify.

“He said he was looking into some product based on BSD but wouldn’t elaborate,” Ryan summarised. “I mean, there are small tech companies in the Indianapolis area, so it’s certainly possible that he wanted to make a server offering or a network product, where FreeBSD was competitive with Linux at the time, mostly.”

“In reality, what Microsoft is doing — licence-wise — is far closer to a violation of antitrust law.”“He has very strong opinions that the GPL is illegal under copyright law. He kept saying things like “I couldn’t attack it using copyright law, so I went after it with antitrust law.”.”

As Wikipedia put it: “On May 16, 2006, Judge Richard L. Young dismissed the case with prejudice: “Wallace has had two chances to amend his complaint [...]. His continuing failure to state an antitrust claim indicates that the complaint has “inherent internal flaws.” [...] Wallace will not be granted further leave to file an amended complaint because the court finds that such amendment would be futile.”

In reality, what Microsoft is doing — licence-wise — is far closer to a violation of antitrust law. IBM, Novell, and Red Hat collaborating in the open, or sharing code, isn’t anywhere as problematic as what Microsoft does.

“No less than Bill Gates himself said in a recent Fortune article that Microsoft competes better against Linux in China when there’s piracy than when there isn’t.

“So, Microsoft actively looks the other way as people pirate its software. It builds its market share that way, and lets people get used to the idea of having Windows at a certain price.”

ECT

08.14.20

Ars Technica, ZDNet and Bleeping Nonsense Still Misreporting to Blame ‘Linux’ for Malware One Can Merely Add to Linux (Distracting From Systems With Back Doors, Such as Windows)

Posted in Deception, FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Security, Windows at 6:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“Doctor, it hurts me when I do this.” Doctor: “so don’t do this.” Corporate media: “If you install malicious software or never patch, bad things can happen.” Geek: “I patch my systems and don’t install random stuff from dodgy Web sites.”

FBI/NSA report

Summary: A revised (spun) ‘report’ that we alluded to last night is spreading to more sites today or overnight; but it’s totally distorting the situation to make “Linux” seem a lot more dangerous than it really is

THE ‘news’ about “Linux” is always full of noise and FUD. Some of that comes from Microsoft front groups and Microsoft-connected publishers. That’s nothing new; it has been going on for well over a decade.

So we took a quick look at the original report [PDF] some chronic (serial) liars now allude to, assuming it’s that usual FUD where something one can add to Linux is portrayed as a problem with “Linux” itself (that’s like calling a hole in Photoshop a “Windows” bug).

“We’re omitting the links, but it definitely started with ZDNet, which also previously sought to associate Linux with terrorism, based on a distorted and cherry-picked government report that named “Gentoo” somewhere along the lines.”So while FBI, NSA etc. are themselves putting back doors in all things Microsoft here they are warning about “Russia” because it is possible, on an already-compromised system, to sort of rootkit everything (as one can expect; that’s a universal weakness and prevention framework exists, not only mitigation).

They suggest using a kernel not older than 3.7 (which is already very old).

The noise has already come from Microsoft Peter’s (pedophile) Ars Technica, Bleeping Computer and Bleeping Computer’s troll whom ZDNet hired. We’re omitting the links, but it definitely started with ZDNet, which also previously sought to associate Linux with terrorism, based on a distorted and cherry-picked government report that named “Gentoo” somewhere along the lines.

“As for ZDNet, its hire from Bleeping Computer (choice of a notorious drama queen, even prior to the hire) said a lot about ZDNet’s own agenda. The motivations are surface-deep.”Trashy media isn’t a new problem; the fact that Ars Technica had its “Open Source” section run solely by a Microsoft pedophile (until his arrest) speaks volumes, as does the fact that Mr. Goodin (Ars Technica) got sued for defamation for his inaccurate click-bait. As for ZDNet, its hire from Bleeping Computer (choice of a notorious drama queen, even prior to the hire) said a lot about ZDNet’s own agenda. The motivations are surface-deep.

Bleeping Computer? Bleeping nonsense! To hell with so-called ‘journalists’ who instead of showing people the actual report (screenshot above) come up with headlines such as “NSA and FBI warn that new Linux malware threatens national security” (by Mr. Goodin).

Ars Technica is owned by the same company that runs Reddit (where Microsoft critics are heavily censored), controls the site that caused Linus Torvalds to be temporarily ‘ousted’ from his own project, and repeatedly defamed Dr. Richard Stallman, egging on the online lynch mob.”We’d rather focus on patent threats and European Patent Office corruption, but lately there has been a rise in FUD against GNU/Linux, which means that some wealthy and well-connected people are growingly afraid of it (IIS is dying). They weaponise the media. They pay that same media. The editor of Ars Technica UK admitted to me that Microsoft wasn’t just the key advertiser but somewhat of a co-founder in the sponsorship sense. Ars Technica is owned by the same company that runs Reddit (where Microsoft critics are heavily censored), controls the site that caused Linus Torvalds to be temporarily ‘ousted’ from his own project, and repeatedly defamed Dr. Richard Stallman, egging on the online lynch mob.

Never forget what Microsoft did to Softpedia just months ago. It is another common vector of FUD, run single-handedly by a self-professed fan of Steve Ballmer. Microsoft, a very close ally of Donald Trump, plays dirty. We cannot just ignore all the FUD.

Update: Now it’s all over the place with needlessly alarming headlines:

Russia/Linux

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts