12.03.20
Posted in Debian, GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 2:51 am by Guest Editorial Team
By figosdev
Summary: “What we probably don’t want to do is continue to support Debian or systemd, if we can help it.”
Roy needn’t go far for reasons to delete Debian, he only needs to read Techrights. I mean, look at all this.
I’ve also read (from a source Roy should consider reliable) that Stallman is aware of the problems created by Microsoft systemd, which Debian has used to undermine and divide against its community and developers for years.
In better days, Ubuntu was a nice gateway to Debian, but today it is increasingly monopolistic (putting itself in app-store-like control of Snap — not its development, but its deployment) and acting as a shill for WSL — Ubuntu devs have increasing influence in the Debian world as well.
“I’ve also read (from a source Roy should consider reliable) that Stallman is aware of the problems created by Microsoft systemd, which Debian has used to undermine and divide against its community and developers for years.”I had fewer reasons than this when I migrated from Debian nearly six years ago; none of us get to choose what Roy uses at home, though I often wonder why he persists in relying on such an incredibly toxic distribution.
Then again, migration is often far from simple — and if you count activism, Roy has several full-time jobs.
The goal then isn’t to put pressure on Roy which he can just shrug off as simply as he would not having wings or extra limbs, but to try to make it a bit easier for him to imagine his world without the horrors of Debian. “Better the Devil you know,” sure, but Roy knows that’s really not true.
Surely one of the reasons Roy wouldn’t change his distro is that he would have to change his workflow; this is like gambling with both spare time and extra trouble. A migration that’s smooth as possible would minimise the gamble and instability likely to result from changing distros.
Another thing to consider would be how much control the change is either giving or taking away from Microsoft.
While I could write an article about the long-term advantages of moving to a more modular distro like Tiny Core, as I did before moving to BSD, this article will instead focus on seeking short-term benefits and minimising workflow disruption; if we want to tempt Roy away from Debian, I doubt Tiny Core is the best place to start. I simply went to more trouble to make it suit my own needs than I want to subject Roy to if he even seriously considered doing this soon.
“In better days, Ubuntu was a nice gateway to Debian, but today it is increasingly monopolistic…”I do however, note that Techrights itself has migrated to something more minimalist; perhaps Roy would benefit from using Alpine at home, perhaps not. It should be considered, even though it’s not a choice I would likely make as I believe Alpine has a GitHub-based init system. Although it is a step up from systemd, in terms of being GitHub-based this would make Alpine a lateral move from what he uses now. Though as I said, there are lots of reasons to leave Debian.
I think it is best to let Roy worry about which distro he would move to IF he decided to move, and I would also recommend the following criteria towards that decision:
* A distro that is not itself developed on GitHub, obviously. This counts Void out.
* A distro that does not use systemd.
* A distro that is as close to Debian as possible, but is not Ubuntu or Devuan.
Obviously my first choice for Roy would be OpenBSD, but even for me I decided to switch distros before switching operating systems — for Roy this step would help even more.
Devuan was considered before the Alpine migration I think, and for whatever reason it was dismissed, Roy knows I have others. Besides, I think Devuan has most of the problems that Debian has except for a couple well-known exceptions.
Roy has a setup consisting of several machines and even more screens. He most likely manages those screens with either xrandr or a tool that uses xrandr. Even if Roy were to switch to BSD, this would not likely change. Probably the most trouble I’ve had with more than one screen is from Tiny Core — you need to install the “graphics” package to get a window system and xrandr that can handle more than one screen.
Roy likes Falkon and I confess, I do not keep track of which distros support KDE. I’ve had nothing but complaints about KDE since 4.x (props to Trinity) and their recent cancel-fest was not inspiring. I don’t blame Roy at all for liking Falkon relative to other choices though; web browsers suck.
“I had fewer reasons than this when I migrated from Debian nearly six years ago…”I think Roy makes heavy use of tmux and it is incredibly standard; even OpenBSD comes with tmux included (though I’ve deleted it because it’s developed on GitHub).
You can migrate piecemeal without a plan, but for Roy I recommend a plan (which he can tweak as it suits him) since it will increase both the ease and likelihood of an actual move. The plan is also piecemeal.
As far as I can tell, there are two sane ways to begin this process: one is with a quick and simple assessment of his workflow, and the other is with a plodding, methodical and tedious assessment. If Roy wasn’t always spread among lots of other projects, I would suggest the plodding and tedious assessment; for that, you boot Debian from live and list the installed packages using apt list, then compare this to a list from Roy’s installation(s).
“Obviously my first choice for Roy would be OpenBSD, but even for me I decided to switch distros before switching operating systems — for Roy this step would help even more.”But possibly even before that, I would suggest Roy start by figuring out which of his machines has the “simplest” job in terms of his regular workflow, as I believe he uses each machine a bit differently. The whole process is actually easier if he uses all of the machines for the same things, but I doubt he does. If he uses them all the same way, then he can simply remove one machine from the “RAIL” (redundant array of inexpensive laptops) and redistribute the workflow manually over the other machines.
We are going to assume Roy has a slightly different workflow on each machine, though either way it should be reasonable to assume that one machine has the smallest or simplest workflow. I recommend he target that one for migration.
The priority is to make a reasonably complete list (even if only pen and paper are used) of purposes that machine serves. For the purpose of choosing a distro to switch to, a similar list for each machine would probably be beneficial as well — but we at least need a list for the target machine.
Depending how important that machine is, a full backup with tar or rsync to one of the other machines is obviously recommended; if it is very important, a second backup to standalone media may also be worthwhile.
The machine can then have the new distro installed to it — I’m not certain dual booting is worth the trouble, but Roy knows best. I would lean away from it for this purpose because it simply makes getting used to the new system take more time (and in some ways, more trouble).
“Depending how important that machine is, a full backup with tar or rsync to one of the other machines is obviously recommended; if it is very important, a second backup to standalone media may also be worthwhile.”A reasonable goal is to retain as many of the tools already used on that machine as possible. Some minor workflow goals may change or even improve. The backup of the system should be moved (or copied) back to the target machine, so that it is trivial to access old files. Only the most valuable, high-priority cruft from the old installation should make its way into the new installation as needed, but a repository of all old files can sit under a folder in /root, /home or /opt.
Soon the new machine will be up to capacity in terms of its purpose on the RAIL, and Roy can consider repeating the process with the second-least used machine.
As the migration moves forward, Roy will likely learn some new tools or at least new tricks with existing tools. Even when his migration from Debian is complete, it could be years before his wife wants to migrate; but then this is just about Roy. What distro his S/O uses is really no concern of mine.
“What we probably don’t want to do is continue to support Debian or systemd, if we can help it.”We can’t force Roy to do anything, but perhaps this will offer him a friendly nudge for future consideration. In this short run, this is workflow-disruptive; in the long run, it would inspire new innovations or shortcuts — not entirely unlike the ones that have happened at Techrights lately. What we probably don’t want to do is continue to support Debian or systemd, if we can help it.
Long live rms, and Happy Hacking. █
Licence: Creative Commons CC0 1.0 (public domain)
Permalink
Send this to a friend
12.02.20
Posted in Europe, Free/Libre Software, Microsoft, Patents at 2:27 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
We just try hard to prioritise the most urgent issues (or ‘patients’ so to speak), picking causes or institutions that can still be salvaged somehow
Summary: Not only Europe’s second-largest institution (the EPO) is morbidly if not critically ill; the OSI is now a zombie controlled by Microsoft and friends, much like the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation
YESTERDAY the COVID-19 death tally was at almost 12,000 (including 2,611 deaths in the US alone, another ’9/11′) — almost an all-time high. It’s really bad and people may need to wait until those Thanksgiving travel-related figures are factored in (the number of cases will definitely increase due to that).
“The OSI is beyond redemption at this point…”Here in the UK we reopen today, after a 4-week lock-down period across England. They say that in our area there were “191 cases per 100,000 people in the latest week 21 Nov-27 Nov. The average area in England had 129.” With almost a quarter million hospital admissions (connected to COVID-19) and nearly 60,000 deaths by now (even more when indirect factors are accounted for; the total excess deaths w.r.t. projections is the more complete figure) it’s clear that it’s a really bad time to get ill, even with just an ordinary flu. The health services are already overwhelmed with patients as we enter the coldest days of the year (December-January).
It’s expected that in less than 50 days from now the US will have a new president; we don’t expect him to be a lot better in most aspects, only in some. When it comes to tackling COVID-19 there’s not much he can still do; by the time of his inauguration (never mind the transition) it’s possible that over 100 million Americans will have had COVID-19 (and tens of million tested positive, having also shown symptoms).
Lately, or during lock-downs in particular, we’ve been focusing a great deal on the EPO. The Benoît Battistelli era is fully back, as António Campinos ‘popularity’ level is just as appalling. We hear from insiders. They’ve had enough!
It’s not exactly expected to improve during the pandemic and it certainly isn’t going to get any quieter in “EPOnia”; the fact that the mainstream media says nothing about the subject is rather revealing (e.g. of its role). Regardless of what happens, we remain dedicated to covering the most pressing issues of the time. At the moment the situation at the EPO is increasingly urgent, for human rights reasons, setting aside the aspect of software patents.
There’s much we could instead say about Free software, infiltration at the Linux Foundation (it seems to be working closely with CBS on marketing, even though CBS keeps badmouthing “Linux” — with examples as recent as this week), the Slack acquisition by an ICE facilitator, and the OSI Member Survey being carried out by Elana Hashman, who is now OSI Board Director based in Seattle, WA (Microsoft). She says she is “Principal Site Reliability Engineer for Azure Red Hat OpenShift” (so she helps Microsoft).
The OSI is beyond redemption at this point; when I mentioned this to Richard Stallman a couple of months ago he generally agreed but wanted more information. Well, we used to think that the OSI was just a little ill; it changed when its General Manager abruptly resigned and it then turned out that most of the OSI’s funds were diverted to Microsoft projects. Regarding the funds of the Linux Foundation, now that there are no physical events their main revenue stream is gone; they were already operating at a loss, having massively overpaid people who don’t even use GNU/Linux. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
11.29.20
Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, OSI at 9:00 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“What really worries me is that the courts might choose a muddled half-measure—by approving an interpretation of “indecent” that permits the doctor program or a statement of the decency rules, but prohibits some of the books that any child can browse through in the public library. Over the years, as the Internet replaces the public library, some of our freedom of speech will be lost.”
–Richard Stallman, 1996
What if we let the intolerant determine what is and isn’t tolerant, then govern everybody’s speech? Reference: Code of conduct as per Wikipedia.
Summary: The free speech crisis in Free software communities has enabled expulsion of opinionated people whose opinions truly matter; in their place we now have companies that bomb people, sometimes even kidnapping children and sterilising women because nothing says “Ethics” like naked fascism and corporate domination everywhere
ALMOST everybody knows that earlier this year the OSI banned its co-founder only weeks after its other co-founder had resigned in protest. Nowadays the OSI is run by proprietary folks and most of its budget feeds proprietary GitHub (Microsoft monopoly). OSI is a disgrace and its uses speech policing as a pretext for ousting people who stand in this agenda’s way. Not entirely surprising or unprecedented. People who routinely break the law and work closely with ICE (kidnapping children and sterilising women) claim to be ‘protecting’ us from immoral voices. Yeah, right…
“Even RMS (when I last spoke to him about it) generally agreed, he just wanted a comprehensive resource explaining what had happened to OSI.”Many out there will agree that the OSI in 2020 is defunct. Even RMS (when I last spoke to him about it) generally agreed, he just wanted a comprehensive resource explaining what had happened to OSI.
“I started evaluating licenses,” one reader told us this weekend, “when I was curious what had happened around the time Perens left. More after Fair license info.”
She decided to start by asking around about the “Fair License”, having remembered it as a weird one (and still getting approved by OSI). She has been involved in Free software since the days I was just a pupil in school. “First,” she said, “I contacted James William Pye, the author of the Fair License.”
The findings were somewhat revealing. “Both links on the OSI site to the license itself were broken.”
From the page:
<Copyright Information>
Usage of the works is permitted provided that this instrument is retained with the works, so that any entity that uses the works is notified of this instrument.
DISCLAIMER: THE WORKS ARE WITHOUT WARRANTY.
Versions
2015, Fair License: http://fairlicense.org/ [dodgy Web site, definitely not what's intended to be there]
2004, Fair License: http://rhid.com/fair (this URL no longer works)
“License was approved around 2004,” she recalled, sharing the following E-mail response from James William Pye:
Do you know of any projects currently using the license?
I don’t think there are, and it probably shouldn’t be used unmodified. It should likely provide an explicit list of permissions to enhance clarity.
Did you have many projects in the past using the license?
No.
The website link does not seem to associate with the license (lots of domino images). Is the license hosted anywhere?
I thought someone took stewardship of it a number of years ago, but I don’t know what happened to it.
Any assistance is greatly appreciated. If you have time to discuss more, I am interested in anything more you may want to share.
No problem.
“This thread is only the first I opened,” she continued. “Very interesting!”
From her notes:
# License – [License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)
## information
- review list
- authors: bruce perens, josh simmons, bradley kuhn
- date: jan 2 2020
## Noteworthy:
### 1. Perens states
“Well, it seems to me that the organization is rather enthusiastically
headed toward accepting a license that isn’t freedom respecting. Fine, do
it without me, please.”
### 2. Perens states
>> Don’t waste your time, Bradley. They were told not to listen to you,
>> either.
>>
### 3. Kuhn makes a shameless plug for SFC (the MS backed/sponsor for SFC Copyleft conf)
>>> Pls. support the charity where I work, Software Freedom Conservancy:
>>> https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/
Here’s the main E-mail of interest:
Josh,
Well, it seems to me that the organization is rather enthusiastically
headed toward accepting a license that isn’t freedom respecting. Fine, do
it without me, please. I asked Patrick to cancel my membership, and I would
have unsubscribed from OSI lists, including this one, if your server was
working. I own an interest in 10 Open Source companies and manage a 50
Million dollar portfolio investing in them. That will keep me involved
enough.
Thanks
Bruce
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:18 PM Joshua R. Simmons <
josh.simmons at opensource.org> wrote:
> That’s out of line, Bruce. I’m not sure where this FUD is coming from, but
> it’s inappropriate.
>
> Regardless of my own views, I quite value Bradley’s contribution, as well
> as Van’s engaging the process and responding to criticism in good faith.
>
> I’ve been following the discussions closely and, frankly, it seems a
> decent model of critical civil discourse. Let’s keep it that way.
>
> (Apologies for the re-send, had to square away some issues with my mailing
> list membership.)
>
> Josh Simmons, VP at Open Source Initiative (Tax ID 91-2037395)
> @joshsimmons <http://twitter.com/joshsimmons> | josh at opensource.org | 1-707-600-6098
> | bluesomewhere on Freenode
> ad astra per aspera
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:53 PM Bruce Perens via License-review <
> license-review at lists.opensource.org> wrote:
>
>> Don’t waste your time, Bradley. They were told not to listen to you,
>> either.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 6:29 PM Bradley M. Kuhn <bkuhn at ebb.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I can’t find an example when OSI approved a novel copyleft license that
>>> hadn’t yet been used in practice and therefore had no track record of use
>>> for any FOSS project. It was once somewhat common for OSI to approve
>>> licenses that were used by only one entity, and most of those licenses
>>> were
>>> never used beyond the one project, and even most of those entities have
>>> deprecated those by now. (OSI also made a decision to cease considering
>>> such single-use licenses.) Rapid acceptance of a novel licenses, so far
>>> unused in practice, causes confusion in the FOSS community.
>>>
>>> Folks have shouted down Bruce as he wonders how Van’s license will be
>>> used
>>> in practice. I think Bruce has made a useful point on this thread: as a
>>> general matter, it’s relevant that we consider how the license impacts
>>> users’ *and* software publishers’ software freedoms in *practice*, not
>>> merely *in theory*.
>>>
>>> In that regard, I’d like to know if the project that plans to use this
>>> license will be inbound=outbound (i.e., is the entity that’s promulgating
>>> this new license willing to bound themselves by the license terms)? Van,
>>> could you tell us, on behalf of your client (who appears to be the only
>>> potential licensor interested in this license), what their contribution
>>> plans are regarding this license? Are they planning to accept
>>> contributions
>>> under this license, and thus be bound by it for their FOSS projects?
>>> If not, why not?
>>> –
>>>
>>> Bradley M. Kuhn – he/him
>>>
>>> Pls. support the charity where I work, Software Freedom Conservancy:
>>> https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/
Asked whether we could share her findings, “Definitely!” was the reply. As we’ll show in our next post, there’s a more extensive gameplay here (as the saying goes, “follow the money”) and money flows in a number of interesting directions. Consider who’s heading the OSI right now (there’s also a leadership vacuum, so a top-level OSI position was advertised earlier this month).
These people don’t care about Free software and they don’t care about free speech, either. They equate speech they dislike with all sorts of horrible things which merit expulsion. They are, by their own definition, “ethical”; thus, anyone who does not agree with them is “unethical”… █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Free/Libre Software, Microsoft at 4:29 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Recent: [Meme] DRM Loves Wintel/Microsoft/Centralisation/Monopoly
Summary: GitHub is proving to be more of a censorship site than a code-sharing site; with the GitHub takeover Microsoft became a ‘censorship police’ or force of occupation against its ideological competition; just weeks after the YouTube-DL debacle and further take-downs seeking to ‘protect’ broken DRM schemes (by banning code) we can see that Microsoft isn’t defending developers at all; it’s just protecting the interests of MPA, RIAA and other Biden circles from the interests of the general population, which sometimes circumvents perfectly circumventable ‘DRM’ schemes
“DRM is the future.”
–Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO
“DRM is nearly always the result of a conspiracy of companies to restrict the technology available to the public. Such conspiracy should be a crime, and the executives responsible for it should be sentenced to prison.”
–Richard Stallman
Permalink
Send this to a friend
11.28.20
Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 4:44 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft loves Linux, they say; but as Microsoft’s former VP James Allchin put it: “If you’re going to kill someone there isn’t much reason to get all worked up about it and angry — you just pull the trigger [...] We need to smile at Novell while we pull the trigger.”
WE ALL know that Microsoft does not “love Linux”; Microsoft is just trying to turn GNU/Linux into its own thing, intended to serve Microsoft’s bottom line and lock-in. It’s a very old (decades-long) modus operandi and we’ve been seeing it stretching across to things like WSL and maybe even WINE. First, Microsoft needs to get some leverage or control over its competition, sometimes through groups that represent that competition, e.g. the Linux Foundation, OSI, SFC and so on.
“First, Microsoft needs to get some leverage or control over its competition…”As Dave Lane told me or put it (not for the first time) not too long ago, “as I like to point out #MicrosoftLovesLinux like a tapeworm loves a healthy digestive system.” █
Image of tapeworm by Russ Hobbs, Klaus Rohde. CC BY-SA 3.0.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
11.26.20
Posted in Free/Libre Software, Microsoft at 6:48 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Sometimes being freer is more costly (in financial terms) in the short term
Summary: It’s important to remind people that so-called ‘free’ services (Clown Computing, centralised spaces that ‘farm’ their so-called ‘users’) aren’t really free; we need to advocate freedom or free-as-in-freedom alternatives
THE fake Open Source ‘movement’ wanted us to think that the term Free software was bad because it implied “cheap” and “shoddy”; this straw man argument helped them sweep a lot of media attention over to their side and, in turn, promote monopolies and surveillance companies as “good citizens” that are “open” (because they upload some code portion to proprietary prisons/PRISM like GitHub). “They already whitewash Windows 10,” Ryan told us moments ago. “Wikipedia lists it as “partially open source”.”
“GitHub is proprietary and “free of charge”; does that make it “Free”? Ask developers/projects such as YouTube-DL, which got terminated (along with all their mirrors) without even a warning; then, Microsoft reportedly threatened everyone else who ‘dared’ make a mirror.”Thankfully, more and more disillusioned people can now see that for what it really is. As we set aside some EPO affairs (we’re not abandoning that, we’ll carry on covering those matters at least once a day) we intend to focus again on advocacy for Free software. There seems to be a resurgence of it. Recently I’ve been seeing some truly encouraging signs for the #DeleteGitHub ‘movement’ or ‘campaign’, more so after the YouTube-DL debacle. Some high-profile projects have initiated their departure process (leaving Microsoft and GitHub behind). YouTube-DL and other projects (with almost no media attention paid to the latter take-downs, as Microsoft bombarded the media with face-saving PR about ‘defending’ developers) were the last straw to many. As Ryan points out, we should “also mention that after “byuu” left Higan, his successors moved it to GitHub, where it is at risk from Nintendo, who likes to abuse the DMCA as it pertains to emulators.”
“Whether they’re in the right or not,” Ryan adds, “they have a history, and Microsoft won’t fight them, so the current Higan project is at risk of being black bagged and progress lost one day because of lawyers and Microsoft.”
Free software (or libre, some say livre) is about freedom of users; that extends to things such as privacy and free speech, of course. We need to stress this point more and more. GitHub is proprietary and “free of charge”; does that make it “Free”? Ask developers/projects such as YouTube-DL, which got terminated (along with all their mirrors) without even a warning; then, Microsoft reportedly threatened everyone else who ‘dared’ make a mirror. So much “free”, eh? Like "free" food in a slaughterhouse/abattoir. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
11.25.20
Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, OIN, OSI, Patents at 6:52 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Well, maybe ironically he posted this in a Microsoft site. Microsoft now gets the majority of the OSI's work/budget, basically to help cement its monopoly. OSI has just advertised a job opening for its leadership because at the moment it lacks any.
Summary: Richard Stallman was right about the OSI and the fake ‘movement’ that claims to have ‘coined’ the term “Open Source” (it wasn’t a new term at all; it had been used in another context and the Free software community spoke of things like “Open Hardware” years earlier)
THE “OPEN SOURCE” so-called ‘movement’ (see Perens using that term, “movement”) turned out to be a sham. It banned its own co-founder and Perens, the second co-founder, resigned in protest earlier this year. Ever since then he occasionally explains what went wrong. Richard Stallman speaks to him about it (he told me so).
“I frequently urge people to stop saying “Open Source”. We need to speak about Software Freedom (or Free/libre software) instead.”In 2020, for the first time in more than 15 years, I abandoned news about “Open Source” completely, seeing that the majority of them were just openwashing and promotion of proprietary prisons such as GitHub (Microsoft surveillance and censorship). To me, personally, “Open Source” is dead. It’ll never come back. The label or the term “Open Source” is also increasingly meaningless. Many software licences that are called “Open Source” are not Free software-compliant. They’re an openwashing slant to help sell proprietary software and/or mass surveillance in Clown Computing.
I frequently urge people to stop saying “Open Source”. We need to speak about Software Freedom (or Free/libre software) instead. Any time we (still) say “Open Source” we help those who hijacked the term to push a toxic agenda, in effect helping a new-age monopoly by mass deception.
It’s kind of sad in a way. It’s difficult. For many years I did in fact use the term “Open Source”; so seeing what happened to it is frustrating. But it’s too late to change that now. That’s why Perens quit the OSI. That’s why ESR went on the mailing list and fought back, only to be banned by the very organisation that he had helped found.
“Open Source” has always been a sham, but many assumed it to be well-meaning; Stallman was right about it. “I had an idea though about OSI and their push on their OSI-approved licenses,” one reader told us earlier this week. She has been around this scene since the 1990s and she knows what really happened. And “still,” she says, “when clearly they are long done… since Perens did say there were licenses that never should have been approved (and I never saw any effort to improve that situation after he said it…) and since he said there were loopholes – I will evaluate a few and write up an analysis.”
In the meantime she left us with a bunch of relevant screenshots we cannot see (without a Microsoft account or spying by Microsoft). Notice these openwashers and people who speak of “virus” (in relation to a software licence, see image on the right). Those people are active in a Microsoft site (proprietary and surveillance) while claiming to do “Open Source”.
Our reader thinks the whole thing is mostly a scam. Charlatans make money from the scam.
“Meeting people in real life was an eye opener! 
At SCaLE 15x in 2017,” she recalls, “I attended the law track, where I met a Lawyer claiming to be a Free and Open Source Lawyer… who didn’t know the difference. We did explain the difference to him during happy hour.
“Although IANAL, I knew more than the lawyers present who did not have the basic understanding of copyright – Example, they were arguing a moot point because they did not have basic knowledge of functional v speech.”
Here are some more comments regarding OSI on Linkedin:
Richard Stallman once said:
“When I do this, some people think that it’s because I want my ego to be fed, right? Of course, I’m not asking you to call it “Stallmanix”!”
We’d like to see Torvalds’ reaction to people saying that he’s releasing “GNU” each time he releases a new version of Linux (kernel). He’d be more pissed off than RMS ever was…
We’re still looking for additional loopholes regarding the OSI scam and the creation of parallel ‘movements’ (like calling GNU “Linux” and Free software “Open Source” — only to be taken over by the likes of Microsoft at the Linux Foundation and OSI). To be continued… █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
11.24.20
Posted in Deals, Deception, DRM, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Vista 10, Windows, Wine at 7:56 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Published hours ago as a press release paid for by WSL (Windows) boosters
Summary: The press release above (link omitted, it was pinned in several sites) is a cause for concern; after Microsoft infiltrated OSI and the Linux Foundation (both are now GitHub boosters, in effect diverting projects to Microsoft’s proprietary monopoly) it’ll be important to watch this space
THE word “mole” may seem rather strong, but it’s in the press release. The same people who have already infiltrated Canonical to a certain degree (to promote Microsoft Windows in the official Ubuntu blog) are now picking another sort of ‘outpost’, not even elaborating on the nature of the said collaboration.
“If Microsoft genuinely loved Linux, it would improve WINE.”Those who are familiar with the antics and tactics of Whitewater Foundry would rightly be concerned. This is a move that’s anything but exciting, except perhaps for Microsoft (if it hopes to more tightly control the WINE project through these people).
If Microsoft genuinely loved Linux, it would improve WINE. WSL is the very opposite of that — it’s about keeping people away from GNU/Linux and getting them stuck inside Vista 10 with all the back doors, the extensive surveillance, the DRM and so on. CodeWeavers basically sells proprietary software based on the Free software, which is WINE. Why would it wish to get closer to Whitewater Foundry? Time will tell, but it doesn’t look good. This would not benefit GNU/Linux but Microsoft’s war on GNU/Linux (it's about control, akin to what the deal with Novell sought to achieve) █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA