10.15.19
Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Kernel at 12:08 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
By Pedro Fco. (maslinux.es)
This is a Spanish translation of: Software Freedom Eroding in Linux and Nobody Seems to Care or Oppose This and mirrored over at El Kernel de Linux está introduciendo Open Source Privative Software (Artículo de opinión de Roy Schestowitz)
Summary: Linux, el kernel, continúa su trayectoria o el camino hacia convertirse en software propietario de código abierto (OSPS).
La importancia de la Libertad del Software será entendida más y más (o mejor) con el tiempo. He aquí un nuevo ejemplo de las noticias. Cuando la gente no controla el software, es el software el que los controla a ellos – un punto que Richard Stallman ha estado enfatizando durante décadas.
El jefe de la Fundación Linux y el único editor de Linux.com son usuarios de Mac (este último alardeó ayer de sus múltiples “Macs”), así que no esperes que se preocupen por la Libertad de Software. No lo hacen. No hemos estado hablando mucho (o con frecuencia) sobre ellos últimamente porque son una causa perdida. Nos rendimos. Se apoyan en historias antiestallmánicas. Linux.com se siente como un sitio de Openwashing y Microsoft (nuevos ejemplos a tal efecto).
Mientras tanto, se ha puesto de manifiesto, una vez más, que AMD sigue adelante con la DRM. Como dijo Michael Larabel:
“Soporte inicial de HDCP. Sí, protección de contenido digital de alto ancho de banda. Este soporte para HDCP Linux en el lado de Radeon viene para Raven Ridge y más nuevo. Como se explica en el artículo anterior, es probable que se deba a que los APUs de AMD están llegando a más Chromebooks y, por lo tanto, todo puede ser visto como algo bueno. Para aquellos que no desean soporte para HDCP, la implementación de AMDGPU DC permite desactivarlo como una opción de Kconfig“.
“Más cambios en la AMDGPU para Linux 5.5 seguirán en las próximas semanas“, añadió Larabel. “El ciclo Linux 5.5 comenzará formalmente a finales de noviembre y se estabilizará a principios de 2020. La lista de cambios para esta AMDGPU DRM-Next-5.5 pull inicial a través de esta lista de correo.”
Ese segundo DRM no es el mismo DRM (sólo el mismo acrónimo) y no es algo a lo que se opondría ni siquiera Stallman. Lo preocupante, sin embargo, es que se ha vuelto ‘normal’ lanzar DRM de restricción de usuarios a GNU/Linux (usando palabras/términos técnicos como “HDCP”), la pieza más famosa y conocida del software libre. A los responsables de la Fundación Linux no les importa (ni siquiera usan GNU/Linux) o no se atreven a decir nada – viendo lo que les pasa a los que sí lo hacen.
La gente habla mucho sobre la situación de Stallman en este momento (una segunda ola de llamadas para eliminarlo de GNU) aunque pocos conectan lo que se le está haciendo a Stallman con lo que le pasó a Torvalds hace un año. Se está incitando a la gente contra los que hacen lo correcto. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
10.11.19
Posted in GNU/Linux, Humour, Kernel at 3:01 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The non-Linux-using Linux Foundation and how it views the Linux project
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in DRM, GNU/Linux, Kernel at 2:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Linux, the kernel, continues its trajectory or the route towards becoming Open Source Proprietary Software (OSPS)
THE importance of Software Freedom will be understood more and more (or better) over time. Here’s a new example from the news. When people do not control the software it’s the software controlling them — a point that Richard Stallman has been stressing for decades.
“The people in charge of Linux don’t care (they don’t even use Linux) or won’t dare say a thing — seeing what happens to those who do.”The Linux Foundation‘s chief and the sole editor of Linux.com are Mac users (the latter bragged about his multiple “Macs” yesterday), so don’t expect them to care about Software Freedom. They don’t. We haven’t been speaking much (or frequently) about them lately because they’re a lost cause. We gave up. They prop up anti-Stallman stories. Linux.com feels like an openwashing and Microsoft site (new examples to that effect).
It has meanwhile emerged — yet again — that AMD pushes ahead with DRM. As Michael Larabel put it:
Initial HDCP support. Yes, High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection. This HDCP Linux support on the Radeon side is coming for Raven Ridge and newer. As explained in that aforelinked article, it’s likely due to AMD APUs coming to more Chromebooks and so all-in can be viewed as a good thing. For those not wanting HDCP support, the AMDGPU DC implementation does allow disabling it as a Kconfig option.
“More AMDGPU changes for Linux 5.5 are still coming over the next few weeks,” Larabel added. “The Linux 5.5 cycle will formally kick off around the end of November while it will reach stable in early 2020. The list of changes for this initial AMDGPU DRM-Next-5.5 pull via this mailing list post.”
That second DRM isn’t the same DRM (just the same acronym) and it’s not something even Stallman would oppose. The worrying thing, however, is that it has become ‘normal’ to toss user-restricting DRM into Linux (using words/technical terms like “HDCP”), the most famous/well-known piece of Free software. The people in charge of Linux don’t care (they don’t even use Linux) or won’t dare say a thing — seeing what happens to those who do.
People speak a lot about Stallman’s situation at the moment (a second wave of calls to remove him from GNU) though few connect what’s being done to Stallman to what happened to Torvalds a year ago. People are being incited against those who do what’s right. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
10.08.19
Posted in GNU/Linux, Kernel at 11:01 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Losing control over one’s project after nearly 30 years apparently takes its toll on a person
Permalink
Send this to a friend
09.28.19
Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, IBM, Kernel, Marketing, Microsoft, OSDL, Red Hat at 3:33 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
The Linux Foundation (LF) business model, which revolves around marketing and openwashing, is draining the life out of Linux
Summary: Lack of devotion to Linux, the very thing that the LF is named after, is putting the project at peril; Linux is meanwhile, under the auspices of the LF and Microsoft GitHub, becoming IBM™ systemd®
HESITATION to publish this article can be attributed solely to largely speculative remarks about how Linus Torvalds thinks and feels. He has not spoken to me for a long time, though I don’t choose to interpret that as snobbery. I just don’t think he’s free to say as much as he did in the past (we corresponded even before the Linux Foundation existed).
Some time earlier this month (depending on one’s subscription/paywall status) I saw a photograph of Torvalds at LWN. I don’t see many photographs of him anymore even though I read Linux news all day long; he keeps a relatively low profile and he doesn’t make many public appearances any longer. The ‘face of Linux’ has changed. So anyway, earlier this month LWN published an article with the following photograph of Torvalds, who is only in his forties. I don’t want to ‘creep up’ and talk about his personal life, but this made me wonder if Torvalds even leaves the house much (he says he works in a bathrobe; he apparently exercises at home only, or so I’m led to assume because there’s a treadmill there); he looks older than he is in this photo. He looks/seems to have aged faster in recent years. Readers can judge for themselves. This is 2019:
5 years ago (famous picture, mirrored for comparative purposes):
Read the comments in LWN. “Is that really a photo of Torvalds on the left? Jesus, he looks like he has aged like, 20 years since 2012,” says the first comment.
“He’s not wearing glasses, looks like a very different person without them” was the unconvincing first reply. I saw him without eyeglasses many times before.
The next comment said, “bad photograph, perhaps, i saw him in 2018, he looked much younger” and immediately after that: “Was that before he took the politeness training break?”
This refers to the famous incident we’ll come to in a moment.
Out of 8 comments in total only a single comment (the one by Paul McKenney) isn’t about that photograph of Torvalds (and what it says about aging). So people were certainly taken aback.
I personally have a lot of respect for Torvalds. He’s a geek and he’s a hard-working person. Very hard-working. He typically releases Linux and its release candidates on a Sunday, sometimes even late at night or whilst on holiday. That’s dedication. It’s a 30-year (nearly 30) devotion.
Torvalds is in it for Linux.
Zemlin is in it for the money.
Microsoft is in it for sabotage.
“Zemlin is in it for the money.”The Linux Foundation is a facilitator of corporations’ power (including Microsoft’s). It may have outlived its usefulness (long ago). There’s also the IBM factor, which can give room for concern. In the 1980s we had RMS, FSF and his GNU project/manifesto. The 1990s saw media shifting all attention to Torvalds, the ‘new wunderkind’ (child prodigy) on the scene. IBM was happy to boost him as a poster child after he had made a kernel that went well with GNU (he said Linux was nothing professional like GNU). In the 2000s GNU was already ignored; “What’s that,” people might respond. “Oh….. You mean Linux!”
In the 2010s Red Hat was propping up systemd after the ‘Pulseaudio experiment’. It was introduced initially as just an init system (process number one or zero); from “nothing professional like Linux” it’s quickly turning into a replacement to most of Linux. The 2020s, in IBM’s vision (now that it owns Red Hat), might be an IBM-controlled system with very frequent releases of systemd to keep the competition always behind, always chasing IBM.
The LF has had virtually nothing to say about technical aspects and competitive aspects of the above. Nothing. It’s too busy doing what it does best: outsourcing projects to Microsoft (GitHub, where systemd too is hosted).
“Torvalds might not be in real control of the project he started almost 3 decades ago. Maybe he should consider picking his trademark and relocating elsewhere, as he did back in 2007.”Maybe it’s time to begrudgingly reach the conclusion that LF became another OSDL. A lot of people don’t know or don’t remember it, but OSDL was disbanded after it had been mostly abandoned by key Linux people. This is a matter of suppressed public record. They hated the OSDL and thought it went all wrong. It used terms like “IP” to sell services (article by John Oates), it wanted its own ‘GitHub’ (article by Ingrid Marson), it wanted Microsoft Office, and it was generally getting close to Microsoft. Sounds familiar? To quote Slashdot: “Martin Taylor, Microsoft’s general manager of platform strategy, declined to comment on the specifics of what was discussed when he met with OSDL’s CEO Stuart Cohen, only to say that they met.”
Readers have long told us that Torvalds went sort of silent or at least quiet after serving some time in the ‘penalty box’ one year ago (due to a media lynch akin to that which ousted Richard Stallman; he’s being pressured to be more 'corporate' (a 'socially-engineered' Torvalds), never use strong words, or else risk ousting). Judging by the photo above (it’s public), he might not be all that happy either. Torvalds might not be in real control of the project he started almost 3 decades ago. Maybe he should consider picking his trademark and relocating elsewhere, as he did back in 2007. Jim Zemlin and his corporate friends can carry on running their PR agency under a different name. Maybe they’ll even be asked, belatedly, to pay their taxes (if the IRS reassesses their status). “Not under my name…” █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
09.26.19
Posted in DRM, FSF, GNU/Linux, Hardware, Kernel at 3:14 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
AMD (now the owner of ATI) puts DRM in Linux through graphics drivers
Source: Protest against ATI nearly led to the arrest of RMS (2006)
Summary: The battle for digital freedom has long been lost in kernel space; earlier this year Techrights analysed the complete source code of Linux to find DRM already well entrenched inside the kernel and it keeps spreading further (Linux is becoming the very thing the FSF objected to in Windows Vista; it is “Open Source Proprietary Software”)
THE technical limits of removal of blobs from Linux had been reached long before DRM landed inside Linux. For instance, linux-libre issues were already mentioned the other day; blobs are "bugs". What does that mean? In simple terms it means that ‘fixing’ Linux by removing bad stuff from it (not the same as a fork) would produce an unsatisfactory outcome. Moreover, it gets worse over time. It’s not only “subpar” or “not ideal”; it can be very messy. Ask people who use linux-libre in their distro.
“In simple terms it means that ‘fixing’ Linux by removing bad stuff from it (not the same as a fork) would produce an unsatisfactory outcome.”Some months ago Phoronix mentioned in passing that AMD was putting DRM in Linux (the evil DRM, not Direct Rendering). So did Intel along with Google. Yesterday Phoronix posted this update to say: “The recent work over the past few months on HDCP support for Raven Ridge and newer. Granted, many open-source fans won’t be happy to hear about High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) support coming to the AMD Linux driver but it’s already been supported by the open-source Intel driver and NVIDIA’s proprietary driver. The HDCP support is actually good news in one respect as it’s likely at the behest of Google with AMD APUs now appearing in Chromebooks, similar to Google having pushed along Intel’s Linux HDCP support. This HDCP support could lead to enabling AMD to compete with other design wins for other Linux-powered devices. If you don’t want AMD HDCP support, at least for now they have it exposed as a Kconfig option so you can disable building the support via DRM_AMD_DC_HDCP.”
“What happened to “Bad Vista” and “Defective by Design”? We don’t suppose that a Stallman-less FSF would do any better against such threats to our freedom.”What’s most curious here isn’t that AMD follows Intel’s footsteps (that’s typical) but the lack of statement or complete silence from the EFF, the FSF, the FSFE…
All those who claim to have opposed DRM didn’t keep their eyes on this ball. Had they done so, maybe AMD would at least have second thoughts about it. But no… and so Linux gradually gets ruined in the same way the WWW was ruined, owing to inaction on EME (DRM inside the ‘standards’). The FSF did speak about it and organised against it. Why not HDCP? What happened to “Bad Vista” and “Defective by Design”? We don’t suppose that a Stallman-less FSF would do any better against such threats to our freedom.
As a side note, Phoronix tries to remain neutral; the above oughtn’t be interpreted as Michael Larabel’s endorsement of DRM. Larabel has thankfully highlight many of these things over the years and for that he deserves our gratitude and support. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
09.25.19
Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, Kernel, Marketing, Microsoft at 4:19 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Publicity rights (or personality)
Summary: The “Linux Foundation” has nothing to do with Linux anymore; it’s just an opportunistic and tax-exempt marketing agency looking to squeeze bucks out of the Linux trademark of Linus Torvalds
THE Linux Foundation is killing the Linux brand. It’s misusing it or “lending” it to things that have nothing to do with Linux. Similarly, as an associate of ours put it this morning, Forbes has, as recently as yesterday, resorted to “brand dilution, “open-source” vs “open source”, OSI is too quiet…”
I’ve pointed this out to OSI; but they rarely respond when I raise such concerns or register complaints with them. From the article’s summary: “Open-source relies on collaboration between contributors and companies – but profits make things more difficult. Part one of two.”
“The Linux Foundation is killing the Linux brand. It’s misusing it or “lending” it to things that have nothing to do with Linux.”Notice they’re not even speaking about code! This is pure openwashing.
Yesterday we wrote about how Zemlin’s PAC had been selling (or licensing) the “Linux” brand to dying/unpopular projects (“The Corporate Linux Foundation [LF as Agent of Microsoft and Other Serial GPL Violators]”) while outsourcing almost everything to Microsoft. Thomas B. Rücker wrote in response that “LF is an industry association and pay-for-play is their raison-d’etre. At some point it was supposedly ‘just’ about paying Linus, but those days are *long* gone. A lot of the projects that get labeled “LF project”, there’s a vendor paying for this fronting. They’ve been doing this for years. I’ve seen this first hand and was privy to meetings.”
Someone has just pointed out this article to us. It’s about “LF Edge” and it says: “Two open-source foundations – IOTA Foundation working in the sphere of blockchain and the open-source Linux Foundation have come together for Edge computing, specifically the LF Edge.”
“What other ‘snake oil’ is the Linux Foundation willing to be associated with?”What does that have to do with Linux? The Corporate Linux Foundation doubles down on marketing as a business model, misusing the “Linux” brand for quick profit (never mind the dilution of the brand). A few hours ago this site published news entitled “IOTA {MIOTA} Foundation teams up with Linux; may facilitate mainstream interest” (got that? It’s about brand recognition, right?)
Nonsensical sites such as these aren’t even about Linux. To quote the summary: “IOTA is ranked at #16 above Dash but underneath Huobi Token in the market. The price declined at a rate of 11.73% in the course…”
“As for the site known as Linux.com? Forget about it. It’s ‘sold’…”What other ‘snake oil’ is the Linux Foundation willing to be associated with?
As we noted over the weekend, corporations are taking over both “Open Source” and “Linux” (their identity); Microsoft now pays people to relay the lie that Microsoft is authority or commands its competition. As for the site known as Linux.com? Forget about it. It’s ‘sold’… its soul is sold because all editors and writers got fired back in April; all that’s left is a Microsoft-friendly stenographer.
“And now we have a so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation which does more or less the same (you must create an account with Microsoft to participate in “LF” projects) while its news site, Linux.com, promotes .NET.”Welcome to Linux.com? No. Should we call it Linux.NET? Seems reasonable in light of this latest story from Swapnil (“AWS Joins the .NET Foundation”). Whose agenda is being served here? What does that even have to do with Linux?
Need we mention again how the ‘Linux’ Foundation outsources pretty much everything to Microsoft? The code is hosted by a proprietary software platform called GitHub and check out what Pete Zaitcev (Linux developer) published only hours ago:
A job at LinkedIn [owned by Microsoft] in my area includes the following instruction statement:
Don’t apply if you can’t really write code and don’t have a github profile. This is a job for an expert level coder.
I remember the simpler times when LWN authors fretted about the SourceForge monopoly capturing all FLOSS projects.
P.S. For the record, I do have a profile at Github. It is required in order to contribute to RDO, because it is the only way to login in their Gerrit and submit patches for review. Ironically, Fedora offers a single sign-on with FAS and RDO is a Red Hat sponsored project, but nope — it’s easier to force contributors into Github.
We previously covered examples where sponsorship or invitation to events was limited only to those with a GitHub account, i.e. those imprisoned by proprietary software of Microsoft. It’s totally absurd. And now we have a so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation which does more or less the same (you must create an account with Microsoft to participate in “LF” projects) while its news site, Linux.com, promotes .NET. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
09.16.19
Posted in FSF, GNU/Linux, Kernel, Microsoft at 10:05 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Media mob. A year after they made Torvalds ‘take a break’ Stallman steps down (coinciding with lots of negative media coverage).
Summary: Stallman has been ejected after a lot of intentionally misleading press coverage; this is a dark day for Software Freedom
SO it’s official. The FSF has broken the news that “Richard M. Stallman resigns” and it seems like it was done in a hurry judging by the brevity of the statement:
On September 16, 2019, Richard M. Stallman, founder and president of the Free Software Foundation, resigned as president and from its board of directors.
I’ve decided to wake up early and do a rebuttal to all that “remove Stallman” movement. He can be tactless, sure, and I often disagree with what he says in some areas like sexuality, but removing him would make the world a much worse place. As explained yesterday, Microsoft people should call to “remove Gates”; Gates has done vastly worse things. As for Stallman? Some media exaggerated or distorted what he said; see later comments in this thread. The damage has been done.
“He can be tactless, sure, and I often disagree with what he says in some areas like sexuality, but removing him would make the world a much worse place.”As Stallman himself has just put it in his site, “I am resigning effective immediately from my position in CSAIL at MIT. I am doing this due to pressure on MIT and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations.”
Stallman previously responded in his blog with “Statements about Epstein”. To quote:
I want to respond to the misleading media coverage of messages I posted about Marvin Minsky’s association with Jeffrey Epstein. The coverage totally mischaracterised my statements.
Headlines say that I defended Epstein. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve called him a “serial rapist”, and said he deserved to be imprisoned. But many people now believe I defended him — and other inaccurate claims — and feel a real hurt because of what they believe I said.
I’m sorry for that hurt. I wish I could have prevented the misunderstanding.
Slashdot mentioned this and there’s this article entitled “Stallman defends himself over Epstein comments”, lost in the noise of misleading headlines claiming that Stallman was defending Epstein (he wasn’t).
To make matters worse, yesterday the Software Freedom Conservancy issued a statement to say: “We call for Stallman to step down from positions of leadership in our movement.”
Wait, your movement?
“…Microsoft people should call to “remove Gates”; Gates has done vastly worse things.”Stallman started it. You just piggybacked it. Some of you were kids when he started it.
“Move along, Stallman, let us steal your movement…”
This is part of the “remove Stallman” and “post-RMS” nonsense (among others; the FSF mistakenly gave an award to that person).
Sorry to say this, but the Software Freedom Conservancy would not even exist if it weren’t for Stallman’s software and licence, which they enforce for a living (they’re quasi-lawyers suing and threatening to sue). We’d rather see Kuhn stepping down (than Stallman stepping down). The Software Freedom Conservancy is not essential and it has competition anyway (it’s not like GPL enforcers are missing in action).
In the above statement the Software Freedom Conservancy cites (without actually citing) old remarks from Stallman, but why did it wait until now to make a big fuss over it? Is it opportunism? Maybe the impact of Outreachy inside the Software Freedom Conservancy? Agenda for 'professionalism'?
We can’t help recalling what happened a year ago to Torvalds. He temporarily stepped down. Had Torvalds still had ‘teeth’ in the project (he was lashed last year as a a warning), he would likely reject exFAT like he did all sorts of case-insensitive file systems in the past. He doesn’t want Linux – strategically – to chase Microsoft with specifications and patents (for an inferior implementation).
“We can’t help recalling what happened a year ago to Torvalds. He temporarily stepped down.”Why was he pushed out? You would struggle to find evidence of Torvalds being racist or sexist.
Even remotely.
If he sees bad code, he calls it out.
He’s a technical person, a geek.
We need geeks, not suits and marketing liars like Linux Foundation managers.
Calling bad code “bad” is not intolerance and it is very much essential. Look how many strides Microsoft has made inside Linux since Torvalds got ‘spooked’ by the media.
Is there an effort to ‘decapitate’ (as in decapitation strategies) GNU/Linux? The media wants us to think Torvalds is a disgusting person and Stallman now speaks of pressure on MIT.
“When Bill Gates was done with the Lolita Express they figured out how to steal kids from their parents for a profit (child separation). But it’s Stallman who ends up being the evil one?”Torvalds isn’t a bad person (I spoke to him in the past and he was polite), but yesterday I saw some people repeating this smear about Torvalds. Some videos in YouTube want him and Stallman to step down (no more identity to Linux and GNU). Who would benefit?
Those who wanted Stallman to step down or be removed got their way. Now, who the heck do they think can replace him? Nobody can. We wrote about this in our recent series about "FSF Titanic". Stallman made GNU when I was a baby (literally), then he came up with the GPL etc.
He’s tactless, but he remains instrumental. If the Conservancy wished to distance itself from Stallman, fine. But they actually called for his resignation and sacking.
We need someone in the top of Free software who speaks about politics (like Stallman does) because companies like Microsoft are inherently political, politically-connected and extremely subversive, you can’t face them on technical terms alone.
Why doesn’t Smith resign over crimes against humanity? Here are some new tweets:
When Bill Gates was done with the Lolita Express they figured out how to steal kids from their parents for a profit (child separation). But it’s Stallman who ends up being the evil one?
Free speech and political speech come at a cost; you’re guaranteed to piss off just about everyone, based on selective subsets of things you say over the years. Having no opinions is ‘safe’; if you want to be attacked while smiling politely.
At the moment Micosoft is trying to take control of both GNU and Linux using EEE tools such as Azure and WSL. Failing to guard GNU and Linux at a higher level may hand fast defeat to us and triumph to Microsoft.
“With the removal of Stallman we already see some “Extinguish”.”Some Linux bloggers have sadly decided to also cover Microsoft Vista 10 news because there’s “Linux” in the name. Now, with Stallman out, such an agenda would face less resistance. From yesterday: “Microsoft announced something Linux users would have never dreamed of, the first Microsoft Linux Conference for their WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) implementation. [...] WSL 2, the latest version of Windows Subsystem for Linux, was announced by Microsoft earlier this summer and it introduces major new features like an entirely new architecture that uses a real, in-house built Linux kernel, as well as full system call compatibility to run more Linux apps.”
With the removal of Stallman we already see some “Extinguish”. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA