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


Microsoft Has Not Changed at All (Only the Shallow Marketing and Control of What’s Left of the Media Has Changed)

Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft at 9:55 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Butterfly Sitting on Human Hand/Finger

Summary: Microsoft wants everybody to come closer so that everybody can be crushed; the tactics are largely the same

THE goals of Microsoft are still the same (world domination by destruction of anything resembling competition). The methods are largely the same, but their public-facing slant is “love” and “service” (as if Microsoft is some charity or a public service). Strategies have barely changed at all, except at some cosmetic level. Even Microsoft itself occasionally admits it (truth slipping out of the horse’s own mouth).

“Android, as people generally know (geeks anyway), has Linux in it. Every single Android device is also a “Linux device” (albeit not GNU and there’s no “freedom” about it, no “libre” to it).”Microsoft is not an underdog; in the area of desktops/laptops it’s still dominating the market, albeit on the client side in general (including phones/tablets) its market share is somewhere between 30% and 40%. It’s decreasing over time and Microsoft panics over GNU/Linux gains, hence the attacks on it (WSL2 is an attack on GNU/Linux, not support for it).

Android, as people generally know (geeks anyway), has Linux in it. Every single Android device is also a “Linux device” (albeit not GNU and there’s no “freedom” about it, no “libre” to it). Android Authority now says that “Microsoft slips Bing search into Android through Outlook” and in its own words: (more here)

If you use Outlook for your Android phone’s email and calendars, you might see an unexpected sales pitch for Microsoft’s search engine.

Android users have discovered that Outlook slips a “Bing search” option into the long-press menu you see when you select text. Tap it and it will open your default browser with a Bing query for whatever words you had selected.

Bundling of this kind may have been done by Google as well, but just because Google does something doesn’t make it OK, either. Bing’s market share is, according to some survey, somewhere around 2%. Yes, measly 2% and constantly declining. Remember that MSIE also started at 0% when it competed against Netscape and illegal tactics brought Netscape down to 0%.

“Microsoft has not actually changed; except for the worse…”These sorts of tactics will become prevalent also in Visual Studio, GitHub and other tools by which Microsoft hopes to regain monopoly over ordinary users and developers. In the latest Daily Links we included this article in which Microsoft Tim reminded us — once again — that WSL and WSL2 are an attack on GNU/Linux (the EEE way). Bundling both horizontally and vertically isn’t a novel tactic; it’s often illegal, but Microsoft bribes officials to cause regulators to only enforce the law against Google. Bill Gates often disguises such bribery as ‘charity’.

Microsoft has not actually changed; except for the worse…


Microsoft Has Put the String “0xBIGBOOBS” Inside Linux (Kernel Driver for Microsoft’s Windows-Only Proprietary Software, Formerly a GPL Violation); Reddit (Condé Nast) Bans You For Mentioning Such Things

Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 4:59 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Recent/Related: Detecting and Undoing/Reversing Censorship of Microsoft Critics at Reddit | Censorship on Reddit Has Gotten (Condé) Nasty and Silent, Even Actively Silenced | [Humour] Things You Can’t Say on Reddit | Beware Mozilla and Rust, They’re Not Friends of Free Software or Even of Free Speech

Reddit ban
This happened 19 hours ago. One might think that it’s a perfectly reasonable thing to say in the “Linux” subreddit. This wasn’t only censored; “They won’t say which moderator did the ban, or why,” the banned person has told us.

Summary: In this increasingly crazy atmosphere of mass sanctioning and permanent banning (removing everything or everyone that’s perceived to be impolite) even “Linux” forums are banning people who point out Microsoft being a rogue corporation that’s attacking GNU/Linux

There’s Apparently a New Boss (or Policy) at Red Hat/IBM

Posted in GNU/Linux, IBM, KDE, Red Hat at 3:46 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Rex Dieter bans Kevin Kofler

Summary: The Fedora project doesn’t seem to care much about free speech, no matter one’s seniority in the project; as the person who relayed it to us has just put it, “they even eat their own.” (Longtime contributors) “He’s not a troll. He’s a contributor who rubbed some people the wrong way and now the banhammer is coming out. Fedora KDE was already collapsing and now it finally will.” (Note: Rex Dieter leads or led this project)

There Cannot be Software Freedom Without Free Speech (Which is Nowadays Being Wrongly and Creatively Conflated With Racism)

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat at 2:26 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Thin-skinned or patently dishonest corporations and people (unable to endure the slightest of criticism) will doom a fundamental cornerstone in order to muzzle dissenting voices that are both honest and sincere

Star Trek City Edith Keeler: Poor boy, his feelings are hurt. He's not a boy, he's a grown-up.

Summary: The time to speak out in favour of free speech is now; because the next phase typically involves removal (to be sold as “voluntary”) of people whose political views are seen as professionally inadequate (recall what they did to Richard Stallman last September)

THE Free Software Movement (FSM) is inherently political. How is that so?

OK, let’s start with the simple observation that its core values conflict with or contradict pretty much all the largest companies, which also control the political system (by means of bribery, euphemised as “campaign contributions” and other non-starters).

“Recently we’ve heard a lot discussions about how Free software is racist, sexist and all sorts of other irrational bigotries.”As a longtime reader of ours from Argentina puts it, the moment you speak of software freedom the discussion becomes political, not just technical. It’s almost inevitable.

Recently we’ve heard a lot discussions about how Free software is racist, sexist and all sorts of other irrational bigotries. Of course the code of proprietary software is equally ‘rude’, but it’s being hidden away from us. Microsoft even put the string “BIG BOOBS” inside the Linux kernel (in a driver for its proprietary software, which contains who-the-hell-knows-what inside its secret code…)

“As for FUD, watch how IBM and Red Hat try to present themselves as a “professional” and “tolerant” GNU/Linux vendor; as if to choose Debian instead of RHEL is to rely on a bunch of reckless misogynists who eat babies… that’s just classic IBM FUD.”There’s a coordinated and profound attack on the image of Free software. It’s not a new attack. It goes a very long way back. As for FUD, watch how IBM and Red Hat try to present themselves as a “professional” and “tolerant” GNU/Linux vendor; as if to choose Debian instead of RHEL is to rely on a bunch of reckless misogynists who eat babies… that’s just classic IBM FUD. It’s IBM that led to the invention of FUD as a concept (a former IBM employee was its victim).

At the moment we’re getting close to the point where particular words aren’t just banned from kernel code; they’ll soon be banned from mailing lists too (depending on context). Code, comments, and documentation watered down first because “slave” is a bad word; then they add all sorts of other seemingly innocuous words (mission creep). The same people who push this into the kernel itself also control the Linux Foundation‘s Linux Kernel Code of Conduct (CoC). Yes, Intel (same employer, which has just been blasted by Torvalds on purely technical grounds).

Moments ago in IRC Ryan told us, “I called Nvidia a bunch of jerks and got CoC blocked.” He was referring to the Fedora (i.e. Red Hat) discussions. He’s a Fedora user and longtime GNU/Linux proponent, not a troll. Maybe ‘doing a Torvalds’ isn’t OK for everybody, even with omission of the “F word” (the word “jerk” isn’t forbidden too, is it?).

We’ve occasionally written here in Techrights about Intel’s serious crimes (including an attack on African children’s education). Can one bring those up in mailing lists without risk of being reprimanded? Nobody wants to receive bollocking for merely stating a fact. It’s unfair. Months ago at work I used the slang “bollocking” and was told off for it at my job; is the world moving into some sort of post-English era?

“At the moment we’re getting close to the point where particular words aren’t just banned from kernel code; they’ll soon be banned from mailing lists too (depending on context).”Cowardice isn’t our ally here; if people lack the courage to speak out about free speech (and no, bringing up the subject does not make one a racist), then little by little we’ll lose ‘permissible’ words and the ability to express ourselves, even if we merely speak about ethical considerations, factually. If you’re a Linux kernel developer and you cannot safely and openly speak about Microsoft’s crimes and Microsoft’s attacks against Linux (still an ongoing problem), then there’s something very wrong. Remember that Linus Torvalds is already bossed by several high-level Microsoft employees; can he too (in spite of his high profile in the project, being its founder) get a sense of fear, self-censorship or subconscious restraint? Hey, it’s not like he was temporarily ‘ousted’ (seemingly ‘voluntarily’) before, right? Oh wait, he was.

The Media Does Not Like Talking About Linux (Which It Doesn’t Understand Anyway). It Makes the News All About Linus.

Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, Kernel at 12:36 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Technical journalism replaced by gossip and drama, including wars over choice of words

Torvalds article in Techradar

Torvalds article in Phoronix

Torvalds article in BetaNews

Torvalds article in Slashdot

Torvalds article in The Register

Summary: Just like back in May (or every other week) the news about Linux itself is being ignored and the subject is getting personified to make Linux seem rude and unruly

THE PAST 24 hours have been rather interesting, especially for a news watcher or neophile (news addict). They served to reinforce what we wrote back in May about media ignoring the actual Linux news and making some gossip about what computer Linus Torvalds had bought, instead. We’re seeing this again today.

“And later they wonder why many people cannot take “professional” news sites seriously anymore.”About 16 hours ago Mr. Torvalds announced the fifth Release Candidate (RC) of the upcoming Linux release [1]. Did the media cover that? No. Only Phoronix did [2]. LWN dropped a quick note and link a few hours ago [3].

As for the corporate media? Nothing!

In [4] and [5] Torvalds is presented as rude and outspoken. This is what people see in Google News and other mainstream channels. In [6] we see echoes of that. Then, in [7-10] it’s about language wars. But nothing at all about the fifth RC of the upcoming Linux release. Nothing.

Is this unusual? No, it’s typical. It’s happening all the time. And later they wonder why many people cannot take “professional” news sites seriously anymore.

ZDNet‘s “LINUX” section says nothing about Linux (the RC); the sole headline is, “Linus Torvalds: I hope Intel’s AVX-512 ‘dies a painful death’” (he actually said a lot more than that, explaining why AVX-512 is technically bad).

References from today’s news:

  1. Linux 5.8-rc5
    Ok, so rc4 was small, and now a week later, rc5 is large.
    It's not _enormous_, but of all the 5.x kernels so far, this is the
    rc5 with the most commits. So it's certainly not optimal. It was
    actually very quiet the beginning of the week, but things picked up on
    Friday. Like they do..
    That said, a lot of it is because of the networking fixes that weren't
    in rc4, and I'm still not hearing any real panicky sounds from people,
    and things on the whole seem to be progressing just fine.
    So a large rc5 to go with a large release doesn't sound all that
    worrisome, when we had an unusually small rc4 that precedes it and
    explains it.
    Maybe I'm in denial, but I still think we might hit the usual release
    schedule. A few more weeks to go before I need to make that decision,
    so it won't be keeping me up at night.
    The diffstat for rc5 doesn't look particularly worrisome either. Yes,
    there's a (relatively) high number of commits, but they tend to be
    small. Nothing makes me go "umm".
    In addition to the outright fixes, there's a few cleanups that are
    just prep for 5.9. They all look good and simple too.
    Anyway, networking (counting both core and drivers) amounts to about a
    third of the patch, with the rest being spread all over: arch updates
    (arm64, s390, arc), drivers (gpu, sound, md, pin control, gpio),
    tooling (perf and selftests). And misc noise all over.
    The appended shortlog gives the details, nothing really looks all that
    exciting. Which is just as it should be at this time.
    Go forth and test.
  2. Linux 5.8-rc5 Released As A Big Kernel For This Late In The Cycle
  3. Kernel prepatch 5.8-rc5

    The 5.8-rc5 kernel prepatch is out for testing; it’s a relatively large set of changes. “Maybe I’m in denial, but I still think we might hit the usual release schedule. A few more weeks to go before I need to make that decision, so it won’t be keeping me up at night.”

  4. Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing ‘magic instructions’ and ‘start fixing real problems’

    Linux Torvalds, the creator of Linux, offered up some interesting thoughts on Intel’s Advanced Vector Extensions 512 (AVX-512) instruction set, calling it a “power virus” that was only created to make the company’s CPU hardware perform well in benchmarks. He also admitted to being “biased” and “grumpy” in his assessment.

    His comments came in a mailing list (via Phoronix) discussing an article suggesting AVX-512 might not be part of Intel’s upcoming Alder Lake architecture. If that comes to pass, it will be just fine by Torvalds.

    “I hope AVX512 dies a painful death, and that Intel starts fixing real problems instead of trying to create magic instructions to then create benchmarks that they can look good on. I hope Intel gets back to basics: gets their process working again, and concentrate more on regular code that isn’t HPC or some other pointless special case,” Torvalds said.

    Intel introduced AVX-512 in 2013, initially as part of its Xeon Phi x200 and Skylake-X processor lines. It has also found its way into more current CPU architectures, including Ice Lake.

  5. Linus Torvalds: I hope Intel’s AVX-512 ‘dies a painful death’

    He notes that “in the heyday of x86″, Intel’s rivals always outperformed it on FP loads.

    “Intel’s FP performance sucked (relatively speaking), and it matter not one iota. Because absolutely nobody cares outside of benchmarks,” Torvalds said.

    “The same is largely true of AVX-512 now – and in the future. Yes, you can find things that care. No, those things don’t sell machines in the big picture.”

    He continued his criticism by saying AVX512 has real downsides.

    “I’d much rather see that transistor budget used on other things that are much more relevant. Even if it’s still FP math (in the GPU, rather than AVX-512). Or just give me more cores (with good single-thread performance, but without the garbage like AVX-512) like AMD did.”

    Web performance firm Cloudflare has written about the performance impact of AVX-512. It advised customers who don’t need AVX-512 for high-performance tasks to disable AVX-512 execution on the server and desktop to avoid its “accidental” throttling.

  6. “Let Intel begin to solve real problems, instead of creating magical instructions.” Linux creator criticized Intel

    Torvalds wrote this statement against the backdrop of rumors that, in Intel’s Alder Lake processors, the AVX-512, apparently, will not be. By the way, Torvalds himself recently for the first time in 15 years replaced the Intel processor with AMD product.

  7. Linus Torvalds Approves Inclusive Terminology for Linux Kernel

    As reported previously, many companies and organizations are reviewing their use of racist and exclusionary language, and the Linux kernel development team has been doing the same.

    Last week, Linux creator Linus Torvalds approved an “inclusive terminology” proposal from Dan Williams for the Linux 5.8 repository, saying he “did not see a reason to wait for the next merge window.”

    This change means that, going forward, Linux developers will “avoid introducing new usage” of the terms “master/slave” and ‘’blacklist/whitelist.”

  8. Linus Torvalds banishes masters, slaves and blacklists from the Linux kernel, starting now

    Linux overlord overseer principal developer Linus Torvalds has signed off on a new policy to adopt inclusive language across the project.

    A Git commit adopted changes recommended by kernel developer Dan Williams, with the result that Linux will no longer refer to masters, slaves or blacklists.

    In their place coders will be expected to use alternatives such as “primary” and “secondary” relationships, or refer to “leaders” and “followers”, or even “directors” and “performers”.

    Blacklists are to become either “denylists” or “blocklists” and whitelists will become “allowlists” or “passlists”.

    Torvalds’ commit was made on July 10th and said he thinks there’s no need for the change to wait for the next merge window for a new cut of the Linux kernel.

    Torvalds later offered his weekly state of the kernel post in which he perhaps tremulously observed that while last week’s Linux 5.8-rc4 was “small”, “now a week later, rc5 is large.”

  9. Linux Kernel Will Stop Using ‘Master/Slave’, and ‘Blacklist/Whitelist’ in Code

    Similarly, the recommended alternatives for ‘blacklist / whitelist’ are ‘denylist / allowlist’ and ‘blocklist / passlist’. As you can see, Torvalds has given developers the choice to adopt any of the suggested ones.

    “The discussion has tapered off as well as the incoming ack, review, and sign-off tags. I did not see a reason to wait for the next merge window,” reads the commit on Linux 5.8 repository.

    According to the commit, old terms will be allowed only when developers are updating code for an existing (as of 2020) hardware or protocol, or when devs are dealing with specifications that mandate those terms.

    The decision comes after Linux maintainer Dan Williams raised a proposal that read, “Recent events have prompted a Linuxposition statement on inclusive terminology. Given that Linux maintains a coding-style and its own idiomatic set of terminology here is a proposal to answer the call to replace non-inclusive terminology.”

  10. Linux kernel will no longer use terms ‘blacklist’ and ‘slave’

    Linus Torvalds, the principal engineer of the Linux kernel, has approved new terminology for its code and documentation to promote the inclusive language. The change abolishes terms such as blacklist, master, and slave.

    There are no formal alternatives in place, but Torvalds suggested plenty of choices. Suggested replacements for master/slave are primary/secondary, controller/device, requester/responder, and main/replica.

    Alternatives for blacklist/whitelist are denylist/allowlist and blocklist/passlist.


    In May, after George Floyd’s death in the US, a string of protests sprung up worldwide to support Black Lives Matter initiatives. In a way to show solidarity, the tech community proposed to get rid of terms such as blacklist and slave.

    Several major product and programming language teams including Twitter, Chrome, Android, Curl, Go, and Microsoft have also adopted alternative terminology.


Red Hat Betrayed the Free Software Community With Its Software Patents’ Stockpiling Drive and Then a Sale to the Biggest Software Patents Lobbyist

Posted in GNU/Linux, IBM, Patents, Red Hat at 8:30 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Even after the sale of Red Hat (Microsoft was entertained too as Red Hat considered a sale to Microsoft) IBM continues to shake down companies using a mountain of patents (to the point of filing lawsuits, just in case the defenseless companies don’t shell out ‘protection money’; Microsoft does the same)

Star Trek Klingon insults: 'Defensive' software patents for IBM blackmail: Red Hat commends its new masters for legitimising software patents

Summary: In 2020 Red Hat is little but a shadow of IBM, whose patent policy continues to threaten software freedom and whose lobbying for software patents (under the guise of “HEY HI”) persists uninterrupted; this growing problem oughtn’t be unspeakable

WE DULY apologise to readers who find our criticism of Red Hat (and by extension IBM) inconvenient, but we are being totally sincere. People who have read this site long enough are aware that for nearly a decade we’ve warned that Red Hat’s patents would likely fall into untrustworthy hands. We even challenged Red Hat employees (like their legal team) on the matter and their responses weren’t too convincing. Logical arguments just weren’t on their side given the hypothetical scenarios presented to them (notably sale of Red Hat to a software patents proponent). This isn’t the same Red Hat that publicly opposed software patents 15 years ago in Europe and even put money where its mouth was.

“People who have read this site long enough are aware that for nearly a decade we’ve warned that Red Hat’s patents would likely fall into untrustworthy hands.”Earlier this year we cited and even made screenshots of evidence (press reports) that IBM is still blackmailing small and large companies using a massive trove/portfolio of dubious patents, including if not primarily software patents. This has hardly changed since April. The new management, if it ever intends to put an end to this policy, will need to sack lawyers, not engineers.

“In-house counsel from IBM” was quoted the other day by Managing IP, which does yet more sponsored puff pieces (this one from Friday) for the litigation ‘industry’. IBM has hardly changed its stance or its way. It’s all rhetoric, marketing, soundbites and buzzwords. IBM is still a company of lawyers and it’s a giant that pushes for secrecy and lousy software patents (by opposing 35 U.S.C. § 101 and lobbying to water it down at the USPTO); remember that IBM also lobbies for software patents in Europe and falsely spoke ‘for’ “Open Source” (claiming that it had benefited from software patents — clearly a deliberate lie).

“Sometimes they also tell us that “HEY HI” (or algorithms in that context) should be entitled to pursue patents — in effect automatically-generated monopolies assigned to companies.”And then there’s all that proprietary nonsense like “Watson” and endless “HEY HI” (AI) nonsense. IBM isn’t changing fast enough (if at all). We might note that a lot of the “HEY HI” media extravaganza was motivated by a patents gold rush. They try telling officials that “HEY HI” is so important and so innovative that “HEY HI” patents should be a priority and should be permitted. Sometimes they also tell us that “HEY HI” (or algorithms in that context) should be entitled to pursue patents — in effect automatically-generated monopolies assigned to companies. It’s as crazy as that sounds…

If the patent system is fast becoming a laughing stock, it’s because of this “HEY HI” lunacy and the COVID-19 situation (patent offices try to spin it as ‘proof’ of patents’ importance, but the public isn’t gullible enough and it understands that the very opposite is true). If one looks at IBM’s site, it’s pretty much reducible to lots of “HEY HI” promises and brands like “Watson” (which they misuse the media to hail as some kind of marvel). They keep talking about COVID as if IBM is some kind of charity fighting for humanity.

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP’s Paul Abbott and Olga Sendetska have just written about this “HEY HI” hype (in relation to patents of course, as it has been a buzzword most exploited by patent maximalists) in Lexology and their site, which said:

For now at least, the “person skilled in the art” (PSA) is deemed to be a human (or team of humans), not a machine, despite having some machine-like characteristics – Jacob LJ’s oft quoted judgment in Rockwater v Technip describes the PSA as “a nerd” but “not a complete android”. However, the PSA may have the assistance of machines. The EPO’s Guidelines for Examination explain that the PSA is presumed to have “at his disposal the means and capacity for routine work and experimentation which are normal for the field of technology in question”. The factual question therefore is whether it was common to use AI in the relevant field at the time of the claimed invention.

In recent times, this may mean there is a gap between what the inventor had at their disposal (which might include, for example, quite advanced AI tools) and what the PSA is deemed to have (for example, only less sophisticated (or no) AI). Does that unfairly skew the system in favour of patent applicants? Or does it amount to a perfectly proper reward for those working at the cutting-edge of research using AI. We suggest the latter – there is no real distinction between this situation and the often-encountered situation of a well-funded laboratory making an invention by utilising equipment that has not yet become routinely available across the field.

This analysis works fine for AI-assisted inventions. But what about AI-generated inventions, in which the AI is fundamental to the core inventive concept? Assuming that patent protection should be permissible for such inventions, how can the traditional obviousness analysis be applied?

We’ve digressed somewhat, but “HEY HI” nonsense like this is not helping the legitimacy of the patent system. Au contraire. Even the patent offices know that. “First off, the USPTO handed down its decision in Re FlashPoint IP Ltd, where it had to consider whether AI can be an inventor under US law,” wrote Jani Ihalainen the other day (post date modified to 5 days ago though it might go a couple of months back) in IP Iustitia, tackling the subject that “Artificial Intelligence Cannot be an Inventor of Patents,” according to the world’s major patent offices, including the EPO. To quote:

Artificial intelligence is a topic that is near and dear to this writer’s heart, and something that has the potential to hugely impact the world of intellectual property law. Whether it is in relation to the possibility of copyright protection being afforded to copyright works by AI, or even inventions devised by the same, both the legislatures and judiciaries of the world will have to tackle these questions more deeply as the technology evolves and becomes more commonplace. However, recently many national governing bodies dealing with IP have handed down decisions relating to artificial intelligence and patents, which will undoubtedly shape the direction we will be heading.

First off, the USPTO handed down its decision in Re FlashPoint IP Ltd, where it had to consider whether AI can be an inventor under US law, and therefore could own patents for those inventions. The case concerned applications for a patent relating to devices and methods for attracting enhanced attention (Application No. 16/524,350), which was created by DABUS – an AI that was created by Stephen Thaler. DABUS was solely listed as the inventor for the invention in question (with Mr Thaler being listed as its representative and assignee for the rights). At first instance, the USPTO rejected the application due to a lack of an inventor, and Mr Thaler subsequently appealed the decision. The Commissioner of Patents then handed down its opinion earlier this Summer.

“HEY HI” has become an excuse for lowering the patent bar and also accepting all sorts of patents on algorithms (provided the code is framed as “HEY HI”). Since technical journalism is generally dying, we expect more of this “HEY HI” nonsense (they call almost everything “HEY HI” these days) to intensify or at least remain frequent. IBM will, as usual, play a big role in that. As for Red Hat? Well, Red Hat sold its soul to IBM. It doesn’t have a say anymore. Red Hat is now Blue.

Linus Torvalds Checks If It’s Still Inclusive Enough to ‘Bash’ Bad Technology (of the Company Whose TPM Pusher Has Just Successfully Pushed to Remove Many Words)

Posted in GNU/Linux, Hardware, Kernel at 3:27 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

One year ago: Bill Gates Said He Was on a “Jihad” Against GNU/Linux, But GNU/Linux Users/Developers Engaged in Self-Defense Are Foul-Mouthed ‘Microsoft Haters’?

Linus Torvalds words

Summary: In the age of endless control of language (e.g. large corporations pushing for "inclusive" language whilst earning billions from bombing of 'inferior' countries) we see that it is still possible to condemn corporations on technical grounds (at least if you’re Linus Torvalds)

Even Before Microsoft Paid (‘Joined’) the Linux Foundation Jim Zemlin Had a Preference for Microsofters

Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 3:14 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Courting Microsoft for nearly a decade now and giving Microsofters top (leadership) jobs

Linux Foundation and Microsofters

Summary: Even years before the Linux Foundation was receiving money from Microsoft it had a tendency to hire Microsoft’s people for key positions (a lot of people no longer remember that, but it’s still in the public record; it was Jim Zemlin who approached if not chased Mr. Ramji to offer him the job and the colleagues saw no problem with that)

« 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




Samba logo

We support

End software patents


GNU project


EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com

Recent Posts