10.11.22

IBM Does Not Like Open Source? OpenSource.com Has Moved From 2-3 Posts Per Day to 1 Per Day

Posted in IBM, Red Hat at 12:42 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

And yesterday was a Microsoft-sponsored placement!

opensource.com patterns

Summary: OpenSource.com is now running Microsoft propaganda, just like OpenSource.org (OSI) does; but it’s also rather revealing that after years of publishing 2 stories per day the site has cut down to one per day

10.10.22

The Exodus Continues: It’s Already Hard Keeping Track of So Many Managers and Executives Who Left Red Hat Under IBM’s ‘Leadership’ (in Attacking the Community)

Posted in IBM, Red Hat at 4:19 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Red Hat, the company with 3 CEOs in 3 years (after just 2 CEOs for two decades)

Getting to know Prem Pavan, general manager for Red Hat Growth and Emerging Markets (GEMs)

IBM exodus

Summary: Red Hat seems to be crumbling; not only has it lost the community, it also lost a lot of important engineers (the layoffs aside) and countless managers, even high-level executives, who quietly left (Red Hat made that more apparent when it appointed replacements… sometimes people from Microsoft, which helps explain tasteless company policies, betraying what the company originally stood for)

10.01.22

IBM’s Lobbying for (and Stockpiling of) Software Patents is Ruining Fedora and GNU/Linux in General

Posted in Free/Libre Software, IBM, Patents, Red Hat at 7:23 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Fedora suffers from software patents, hence it removes features while IBM lobbies for such patents and gives software patents to patent trolls (in patent sales)

In our Daily Links, over the past 3-4 days in particular, we’ve included about half a dozen links about Fedora removing support for some very important functionality. Other distros as well follow suit, all for patent reasons. Meanwhile Microsoft is shoving those patent traps into WSL, having paid for or gotten a patent licence. This is already being brought up in Phoronix Forums (link intentionally omitted, but it’s certainly there and it’s quoted in our IRC channels).

“In other words, IBM is arguably an enemy of Fedora itself and its policies harm GNU/Linux on the desktop.”What does that have to do with patents? The removal of the feature, which many consider to be essential, is said to be due to “patent trolls”, but nobody wishes to name “software patents”. IBM (which controls Fedora) not only lobbying for software patents; it’s also arming such trolls with software patents.

In other words, IBM is arguably an enemy of Fedora itself and its policies harm GNU/Linux on the desktop. We’re one of the very few sites that dare mention this perfectly factual point.

09.29.22

No Protection for Linux Offered by the So-called ‘Linux’ Foundation

Posted in Antitrust, Deception, GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft at 3:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum bdfdd6fa693b45158f0e1cb63bb496ef
Protection Racket
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: From a purely objective perspective, the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation spends far more time/money protecting monopolies than it spends protecting Linux; hence, the organisation arguably does more harm than good to society

EARLIER today we said that the Linux Foundation (LF) was claiming, in vain, that it had protected women and minorities. It’s about rhetoric with almost nothing to show for it. We said that "The Linux Foundation is in No Position to Lecture Us (or Anybody) on Diversity" because it seemed like a typical corporate ploy; they paint communities as zealots and bigots, then demand control of the projects of these communities. The Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) constantly uses such issues as a "wedge". SFC played a big role in the coup against the FSF, even more than once. Someone has told us that “a reminder about the anti-RMS petition tied to the unfounded smear campaign is needed. The campaign was based on baldfaced lies which too many, out of apparent eagerness to lynch RMS or destroy FOSS, did not examine.”

“It’s about rhetoric with almost nothing to show for it.”The video above discusses that for a bit and then proceeds to pointing out how the LF does nothing about ‘secure-core’ or ‘secure’ boot blocking Linux (back doors’ proponents and spy agencies like the NSA misframe security). In other words, when it comes to pressing issues the LF is on the same side as Microsoft and IBM, which even tried to deprecate BIOS support. Restrictions and lockdowns like DRM and TPM are perfectly OK with the LF.

An associate of ours brought up “secure-core”, the “thicker part of the wedge, long after the thin edge.”

“SFC played a big role in the coup against the FSF, even more than once.”The associate said “secure-core has hardly been covered at all; remember 20+ years ago when Microsoft tried to acquire Phoenix or AMI BIOS? I forget which. That was when they laid out their strategy to also begin lock-in from the hardware on up. Not just from the OS on down. I’m missing a few steps but secure-core appears to be a certification programme where restricted boot is not just on by default but on permanently in such a way as to prevent non-Microsoft systems from booting.”

Recently, Microsoft and the OEMs stepped this agenda up a little. Where was the LF? What did it do to protect Linux from this? Absolutely nothing! Spending endless millions on vanity offices.

The Linux Foundation is in No Position to Lecture Us (or Anybody) on Diversity

Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, IBM, Kernel, Red Hat at 10:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Earlier this month the following photo was taken (all male); Original in LWN (months ago LWN also became all male as ris had stepped down)

LF is diverse

Summary: The Linux Foundation cannot define support and cannot understand how to support women so instead it trolls people; it also hires no black people and just like IBM it then accuses the community of being an impediment to diversity (community projects actually have more such diversity)

A couple of years ago we said that “IBM (Red Hat) Lectured FSF That It Needed More Diversity, But Was It Looking at the Mirror? IBM and Red Hat Are Even Less Diverse.”

The new photo (above) shows that the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation fails to demonstrate to us how corporations are taking the lead (these men are employees) or will tackle diversity woes.

We’ve been writing about this subject for years because destructive people in Debian brought the same disruptive ideology to Debian, resulting in almost zero women developers (they’re used as political props, which in turn puts them off). So the ‘Linux’ Foundation’s psyche spreads and it’s not helping. It’s a straw man. Identity politics distract from key issues like Software Freedom and threats such as corporate takeovers. Corporations do not have genders and races, they just have shareholders and they want to dominate everyone.

In a recent press release, the boasting about diversity was prominent. Many of these LF pages keep boasting about diversity, but usually they assign women to do clerical and low-paid work. It’s the same at Red Hat and IBM. They want us to at least feel like they have lots of girls on tje payroll.

What is it that makes this relevant? We need to talk about it because IBM/Red Hat and LF (the front group) keep weaponising this as a smear against communities (for 3 years already), i.e. projects not controlled by corporations. In the case of Linux (the kernel), if all those salaried coders are not female, what does that tell us about corporations as the ‘solution’?

As an associate explains, “many (most) don’t understand the weaponisation, especially of the CoC. It’s “mean” to criticize a corporation for illegal, unethical, and anti-competitive behavior especially if the corporation hurts the kernel and the FOSS world in general.”

Jim Zemlin, who seems to idolise Bill Gates, kept insinuating that criticising Microsoft is like kicking puppies. Criticising a company that attacks you is “hatred” (we did a video about this less than a day ago) and very irrational, apparently… and it’s akin to brutality against animals. He moreover insisted that "Open Source loves Microsoft"… (i.e. Microsoft loves what it is attacking!)

As an associate puts it, “Microsoft has worked hard to earn and stay the object of any hate it receives.”

Not only does the LF hijack the narrative on diversity with so-called 'studies' (marketing) [1, 2] and paid-for puff pieces to promote that narrative [1, 2]; GPL violators and Linux haters join in as well.

It’s more of a siege than a genuine, sincere attempt to introduce more people to Linux. See the photo above; it’s like playing “Where’s Waldo?” but in this case don’t bother looking for a Waldo; there’s a total of zero women.

09.28.22

IBM is Outsourcing Key Parts of GNU to Microsoft Linux Foundation

Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft at 4:03 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Recent: ‘Splinter Group’ SFC (Already Sued by Moglen/SFLC) is Not Really Against Microsoft GitHub, It Helps IBM/Red Hat Outsource GNU to GitHub Using the Same Excuses Microsoft Used When Lobbying for Kernel.org to Move to Proprietary GitHub

Now:

The GNU Toolchain Infrastructure Project

Summary: GNU Toolchain is being given to Microsofters at the Linux Foundation after just over 3 years of coup against the FSF

I censor IBM's critics and work with the Linux Foundation against the FSF

Of note: SFC censors IBM critics (it just swims where the money is)

The comments in LWN today are revealing. People realise exactly what’s going on.

LWN comments

09.18.22

‘Splinter Group’ SFC (Already Sued by Moglen/SFLC) is Not Really Against Microsoft GitHub, It Helps IBM/Red Hat Outsource GNU to GitHub Using the Same Excuses Microsoft Used When Lobbying for Kernel.org to Move to Proprietary GitHub

Posted in Free/Libre Software, FSF, GNU/Linux, IBM, Red Hat at 3:18 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The coup did not end

Mark J. Wielaard hijacking

Mark J. Wielaard and SFC

Summary: After changing copyright assignment (for IBM et al to control GCC at the community’s expense) Mark J. Wielaard, who repeatedly tried to oust the FSF’s founder from the FSF (and GNU), is turning to the SFC, a greedy corporation that censors IBM critics while it also tries to undermine the FSF (Moglen/SFLC already sued the SFC)

2 years ago: Warning: Microsoft Tim and Microsoft’s New Mole Inside ‘Linux’ Foundation Board (a Paid-For Seat) Liaise to Outsource Linux Development to Microsoft’s Proprietary Software Trap

Recent:

  • Wielaard: Sourceware – GNU Toolchain Infrastructure roadmap

    Mark Wielaard writes about improvements at Sourceware, the site that holds the repository for many projects in the GNU toolchain and beyond.

  • Sourceware moving to the Software Freedom Conservancy [LWN.net]

    Sourceware.org has long hosted the repositories for many important free-software projects, including much of the GNU toolchain.

  • proposing Sourceware as Software Freedom Conservancy member project
    The overseers of the hosting server sourceware.org aka cygwin.org aka
    gcc.gnu.org aka (others *) invite the community to assist us...
  • SFC offers project membership to Sourceware; three video-chat discussion times with SFC available
    We're pleased to report that SFC's Evaluations Committee has voted to
    accept Sourceware! The next step is to review the legal agreement:
    
    https://sfconservancy.org/docs/sponsorship-agreement-template.pdf https://sfconservancy.org/docs/sponsorship-agreement-template.odt
    We're in the middle of updating our template to improve it a little bit, but there are no substantive changes. The most important section is building the governance section 6, for which the template has various suggested structures.
    We'd like to have a meeting where anyone can join and ask questions about the agreement or anything else about joining SFC. We'll be hosting 3 calls to let community members join when is best for them: 15:00 UTC Friday, 18:00 UTC Saturday and 17:00 UTC Monday on BigBlueButton. We'll post the links to this mailing list right before the calls.
    Just for clarity since we heard about some confusion in backchannel: SFC is offering membership to the Sourceware hosting project itself, not to the guest projects that receive services *from* Sourceware. We are completely aware that, for example, the various GNU projects that receive services from Sourceware already have a fiscal sponsor — i.e., the FSF. We are not seeking to take those projects from the FSF, rather, to offer SFC's services to the Sourceware hosting platform itself.
    We're glad to answer questions on this and anything else related at these sessions!
    Thanks and see you there! -Pono
  • Mark J. Wielaard - Blog Archive - Sourceware as Conservancy member project

    Last month the Sourceware overseers started a discussion with the projects hosted on Sourceware and the Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) to become a Conservancy member project (which means Conservancy would become the fiscal sponsor of Sourceware). After many positive responses the SFC’s Evaluations Committee has voted to accept Sourceware.

"Shoting match" follows:

  • Mark J. Wielaard - Blog Archive - Sourceware Infrastructure / Conservancy / GNU Toolchain at Cauldron

    But when I said that at the end I also would like to discuss the recent Sourceware as Conservancy member project proposal and that I had asked both Conservancy and FSF members to call in to help with that discussion there was what felt like a shouting match. It was the first time I felt an in-person event was worse than an email discussion. Hopefully people will calm down and restart this discussion on the sourceware overseers list.

This is the latest:

Hi Zoë,

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 04:57:36PM -0400, Zoë Kooyman via Overseers wrote:
> We are aware that several presentations will be given at
> Cauldron this weekend proposing new ways to support the Sourceware
> project and the GNU Toolchain packages hosted there.
>
> The FSF has been a fiscal sponsor to the GNU Toolchain for several
> years (and continues to be), and has been grateful to have
> Sourceware providing development infrastructure using free
> software. Unfortunately, we won't have staff present at Cauldron,
> but we are keeping up with the development of the various proposals
> and talking with people involved, as well as seeing how we might be
> able to offer support to help make good things happen.
>
> We want Sourceware and the GNU packages it hosts to have stable
> homes and strong futures in freedom. We expect the conversations in
> the next few days to be open and transparent and involving the
> community, and look forward to discussing the best way(s) forward in
> the coming weeks.

Thanks. I am really happy you are actively involved. I also want to
thank Bradley and Karen from the SFC for calling into the
discussion. But the discussion at Cauldron seemed really chaotic, I
have trouble trying to summarize it. I posted my original discussion
notes and first impressions here:

https://gnu.wildebeest.org/blog/mjw/2022/09/18/sourceware-infrastructure-conservancy-gnu-toolchain-at-cauldron/

We agreed to continue the discussion on this mailinglist. Hopefully
that will be a little more productive and structured.

Cheers,

Mark

09.15.22

[Meme] The Big News is That Big Blue Has Driven Away Tons of Essential Engineers and Managers of Red Hat

Posted in Free/Libre Software, IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat at 11:05 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Big Blue (IBM) has successfully crushed CentOS and Fedora (still ongoing); but the real news or the untold story is, many top managers have fled the company, as did high-profile engineers (3 CEOs in 3 years, new managers came from Microsoft, brain drain aplenty)

Remote working: Red Hat tells staff they don't have to return to the office
Some cannot and will not return; they quit or got fired (lots of them, even the “chief people officer”)

Summary: The above story from a Microsoft media operative in a Microsoft- and IBM-funded site distracts from the simple fact that there’s a longstanding HR crisis at Red Hat; we wrote about it over the years and salaried IBM staff actively tried to suppress links to our writings

To some extent, the relentless attacks from IBM/Microsoft against Free software have driven away talented technical staff that cared about Software Freedom. Is IBM trying to dissolve what it bought?

IBM and GNU

« Previous Page« Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries »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