01.12.22
Posted in Deception, OSI at 6:30 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Video download link | md5sum 9430dd2d8ff58307ec5ccf0684ee15f8
Non-fungible OSI
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0
Summary: The OSI tells us that it got over a thousand members, but that boils down to just people clicking a URL or a button
THIS evening (European time) the OSI published this self-congratulatory post, which is a bit misleading. I’ve reached out to the OSI’s chief since then (a couple of hours ago), but it looks very unlikely to tackle the main issue, which is corporations contributing roughly about or well over 96% of the OSI's budget and half of the money going to Microsoft or a shell of Microsoft, promoting proprietary GitHub. The video above contains some first impressions, but I shall wait for a proper response from the OSI before a more detailed analysis. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.04.22
Posted in OSI at 6:18 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Video download link | md5sum dd82add8419c77a6dbe0e85e7bf3070a
Summary: Over the past (almost) week I’ve spoken to the people in charge of the OSI, hoping to constructively engage with them so as to make them understand the concerns and maybe respond accordingly
THE VIDEO above would come across more empathetically than text, so a lot of what I have to say is already covered in it. But a textual/verbal (non-oral) summary would help nonetheless, knowing that videos take a longer time to digest.
I explained to the people who spearhead the OSI (publicly and behind the scenes) that according to the IRS (latest publicly-available form) ~96% of the money the OSI gets is in fact coming from corporations.
“I explained to the people who spearhead the OSI (publicly and behind the scenes) that according to the IRS (latest publicly-available form) ~96% of the money the OSI gets is in fact coming from corporations.”“That’s something we want to change,” I was told, “adding more funding sources, including individuals and grants from different sorts of institutions. It will not happen overnight though, it’ll take time.”
Fair enough. So the ambition is there.
“We’ll start new projects and programs soon,” the message said, and “I hope we’ll get judged over more concrete actions than just a blog post.”
“It does seem like these folks are willing to at least listen.”I was told they would look into “reasons why you consider GitHub the #1 threat instead of others like the efforts to destroy the Open Source Definition by shared source companies or patent-asserting behemoths openly hostile to the OSD.”
There was no denial about the strange arrangement with Microsoft; with a bit of diplomacy hopefully the OSI’s leadership (Phipps et al still play a considerable role) will reconsider this current trajectory.
We’re going to focus on other topics now (more urgent issues and pressing matters like software patents) and I will correspond with the OSI. It does seem like these folks are willing to at least listen. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
12.31.21
Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, Microsoft, OSI at 2:55 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Video download link | md5sum 1491d3d203261f185fc762fac719b488
Summary: The Open Source Initiative (OSI) is a floundering institution whose real budget is decreasing (Microsoft is just ‘laundering’ money through the OSI) and it doesn’t want people — especially paying members — to understand what’s really going on
COMMUNITIES can see that the Open Source Initiative (OSI) does not represent them. The OSI cannot be salvaged. Throwing money at “membership” won’t help either because members' contributions are only 4% of the budget. Most of the OSI’s spending is a redirection of Microsoft to Microsoft and the OSI’s Board of Directors is basically a bunch of “tech giants”, with the odd pair that is not (still a minority/small part of the whole).
“OSI isn’t pressured to rename itself; but we need to recognise that today’s OSI isn’t the same OSI we knew over a decade ago.”Techrights used to be an ally and a friend of OSI; heck, management figures from the OSI used to speak to us, send us material, and read us regularly. But today’s OSI is an entirely different institution, mostly riding the reputation of its past self (as the Southern Poverty Law Center does). We need to move on and focus on more legitimate institutions, not misleadingly named. Incidentally, the FSFE, which also tries to censor Techrights (but fails) is in violation of its agreement with the FSF and it needs to rename. OSI isn’t pressured to rename itself; but we need to recognise that today’s OSI isn’t the same OSI we knew over a decade ago. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
12.30.21
Posted in Finance, Microsoft, OSI at 4:40 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
It has been getting lower each year (down from 5% to just 4%) and Microsoft uses OSI as a ‘money-laundering’ box
Summary: Stefano Maffulli told me (hours ago), citing Josh (who had prepared the above filing), that “clearlydefined has a budget of roughly $250k.” (See page 10 of this latest IRS filing [PDF] near the bottom)
Earlier today (about OSI):
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in OSI at 10:10 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Good luck explaining to the OSI’s Executive Director that Microsoft is a liability, not an ally
Earlier today (about OSI):
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Microsoft, OSI at 9:49 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
A force of occupation against communities instead of their representative/guardian
Summary: OSI has turned into a corporate stooge (helping proprietary software monopolists with their openwashing PR), just like the ‘Linux’ Foundation
Context:
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Microsoft, OSI at 8:23 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Video download link | md5sum fcc05ea90e05571ab709cf70d60cf784
Summary: What would the world be like if companies that harbour criminals [1, 2] and commit crimes got to censor those who point that out?
Social control media sites, which include YouTube and GitHub [1], are censoring a lot these days. As we noted this morning [2], they even suspend Microsoft critics. My 7-day suspension, however, seems to have been initiated by the OSI. I wrote to the OSI’s chief: “Can you not see how your 6-figure salary from the OSI blinds you to real issue? Josh has already said openly that half or more of the OSI’s budget is devoted to ClearlyDefined. I have this on video. He said it himself, twice. And he should know as treasurers and head of the board.”
“I made a copy of the video,” I told him this morning. “That’s Josh Simmons, in his very own words. Unless he was lying, more than once, you have quite a problem in your hands and you need to choose between the community and the corporate patrons.”
The video above discusses some of these issues, looking back at what I published immediately after the suspension [3,4], resembling past attempts by the OSI to censor its critics [5]. █
Posts mentioned in this video:
- Microsoft GitHub and Google YouTube Remove Source Code and Video for DOOM Running on IKEA Smart Lamp Due to DMCA Take Down
- Criticising Microsoft and the OSI is “COVID-19 Misinformation”
- OSI Might be Using COVID-19 to Report Their Critics to Twitter (for Suspension)
- [Video] Open Source Initiative (OSI) Board of Directors Chair and Former Treasurer: Half of Our Money Goes to Microsoft Stuff
- The Libel Initiative: OSI President Falsely Insinuates OSI Critics Are Homophobic and Requests Censorship of Wikipedia (for OSI)
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Microsoft, OSI at 5:35 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Last year's talk from Mr. Joshua R. Simmons will prove rather problematic to Stefano Maffulli, the new leader who is dodging all the relevant topics while OSI/Microsoft falsely report me to Twitter [1, 2]
Latest on this:
Stefano Maffulli wrote on 30/12/2021 06:35:
> I’m sorry Twitter suspended your account. Do you have an account on a mastodon instance?
Someone reported that tweet about the OSI, based on false grounds.
No, I do not use mastodon; how does that make is OK that someone misused COVID-19 to suspend my account, based on a false report?
Can you not see how your 6-figure salary from the OSI blinds you to real issue? Josh has already said openly that half or more of the OSI’s budget is devoted to ClearlyDefined. I have this on video. He said it himself, twice. And he should know as treasurers and head of the board.
I’m open to a serious conversation here; asking me if I have a mastodon account seems like topic shifting.
Also:
Stefano Maffulli wrote on 30/12/2021 06:41:
> I don’t know who reported you to Twitter, it wasn’t me. I’m sorry they suspended your account.
>
> The contributions from Microsoft and GitHub aren’t the majority of OSI budget. I don’t know where you got that number. Our tax report for 2021 will be published asap. Until then you can estimate by looking at their contribution levels reported on opensource.org.
You are using a straw man argument. What Josh said, twice, was that half or more of the OSI’s budget is devoted to ClearlyDefined, not that half of the OSI’s budget comes from them.
I have very good reasons to believe, as I’ve explained publicly, that the report to Twitter came from someone associated with the OSI. I’d take your word that it was not you, personally, but the issue needs to be rectified; there are now 2 issues: 1) OSI censoring critics (this is not the first time) 2) OSI helping proprietary software agenda, in defiance of its original mission.
Put aside the salary and consider the situation from a fresh pair of eyes; I sincerely gave you the benefit of the doubt, but I’m not seeing the OSI improving, only looking to cover up what’s happening.
It is as clear as daylight that ClearlyDefined is designed to fortify Microsoft’s proprietary software. You, as one who used to oppose Microsoft, are smart enough to see this. So is Simon, but the moment he surrendered to them he began being evasive about this whole affair.
COVID-19 misinformation comes from many British politicians including the Prime Minister, shamelessly looking to deflect/divert blame for terrible policy designed to serve oligarchs at the expense of public safety.
Isn’t it funny that Twitter will let the issue be leveraged to censor/suspend critics of corporate abuse and outright ban people who point out patent issues that prevent wider access to vaccination? This is a longstanding problem.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA