07.29.21

The OSI’s Defunct Elections (Privacy Breach), Conflict of Interest (Nicholson), and Other Lingering Problems

Posted in Free/Libre Software, Microsoft, OSI at 7:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

OSI privacy issue

OSI privacy issues. I don’t think we’re supposed to see the voters’ data (publicly accessible here as the front end or the corresponding .json file).

Summary: The above, together with an email from the OSI below, serves to show they’re re-running a bad election and — yet worse! — there appears to be a conflict of interest implicating the OSI’s sole member of staff!

THE OSI is in a state of disarray following the abrupt departure of its sole member of staff one year ago. Coordination is poor, the agenda has shifted in a negative way/direction (like attacks on the FSF), and this is what its interim manager said in a message:

As an Individual Member of the Open Source Initiative who joined by March 4th, you are eligible to vote in the re-run Open Source Initiative’s 2021 Board of Directors election. This email includes important information about the election and voting process.

CANDIDATES:

This year TWO (2) Individual Member seats are open. You may view the candidate profiles/bios here:

https://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Main/OSI%20Board%20of%20Directors/Board%20Member%20Elections/2021%20Individual%20and%20Affiliate%20Elections/

VOTING:

Elections for OSI Directors are held according to Approval Voting
- see Wikipedia for more information on Approval Voting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting

Each voter may “approve of” (i.e., “vote for”) any number of candidates, from none (0) to all eleven (11). The winners of the election will be the two candidates who receive the most votes from the voting Individual Members

IMPORTANT!!!

To cast a vote, you will be led through the following steps.

1. Log into Helios (your credentials are included below).

2. Select (“approve”) your preferred candidate(s).

3. Review/Confirm your ballot (i.e. who you voted for), then “Submit” your ballot.

4. CAST YOUR BALLOT: PLEASE NOTE, YOU MUST ALSO “CAST YOUR BALLOT” on the screen appearing after you submit your ballot.

IF YOU FAIL TO CLICK THE “CAST YOUR BALLOT” BUTTON YOUR VOTE WILL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE FINAL TALLY.

IMPORTANT DATES:
* July 26, 2021 (11:00 am PDT): Elections open
* August 6, 2021 (4:59 pm PDT): Elections close
* August 9, 2021 (11:00 am PDT): : Run-off elections open (if needed)
* August 13, 2021 (5:00 pm PDT): Run-off elections close
* August 23, 2021: New Board Directors seated
* First meeting August 24 and 25, 2021

QUESTIONS:

If you have any questions feel free to contact Deb Nicholson at d.nicholson@opensource.org

Election URL: https://vote.heliosvoting.org/helios/e/JulyIndividual2021/vote

Have lessons been learned from the last time around?

We’re not too sure.

The OSI elections… again seem to have a security/privacy issue, compromising the integrity of the whole process. As one source told us (see screenshot, links etc. at the top), issues linger on “and then there’s this privacy concern.”

“The OSI elections… again seem to have a security/privacy issue, compromising the integrity of the whole process.”“sjvn hasn’t voted yet,” the source noted. Are we supposed to even know that? “Shows all members and whether they voted or not to the general public…”

This is bad enough in its own right, especially given prior events and context (compromised election).

“However,” our source added, “I saw the OSI elections are currently being… reheld. So, not sure because I did not document who was going for elections but… I noticed Salt there. He has a long standing relationship with Nicholson, the Interim General Manager. So, Salt running for a position where he has history with the “manager” is odd, but we are well aware of the cronyism in the past. What really struck me was his bio, where he discusses paid positions for Executive Director and staff.”

To quote:

Why I am running

The OSI is a leading voice when it comes to the conversation surrounding free/libre/open culture and values. It is currently at a point of inflection, transitioning from an (almost) entirely volunteer-driven organization, to one with an Executive Director and paid staff.

Yes, “paid staff.” Like a company. That would more or less confirm what the OSI has become. It diverts more than half of its funds into Microsoft GitHub promotion, i.e. proprietary software. Is this the future of OSI?

“That would more or less confirm what the OSI has become. It diverts more than half of its funds into Microsoft GitHub promotion, i.e. proprietary software.”As our source noted: “This could get interesting!”

The cronyism at the EPO comes to mind (Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos stuffing or staffing up the management with friends of theirs, not qualified people).

We shall patiently watch the next steps.

07.21.21

Open Source Initiative (OSI) a Sinking Ship in Service of Microsoft Monopoly, Proprietary Software, and Even GPL Violations

Posted in Deception, GPL, Microsoft, OSI at 7:26 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 0c445e665844ad7a63d0d23c44317a9d

Summary: The Open Source Initiative (OSI), which nowadays approves licences it ought not approve, not only takes funding from enemies of Open Source/Free software (for openwashing and silence/complicity); it actively promotes them and makes excuses for their attacks on software freedom

Some years ago the Linux Foundation became a proponent of GPL violations despite the GPL being the licence of the project it is called after.

The defunct OSI is commenting on Microsoft’s proprietary software that helps violate the GPL/copyleft. It’s authored by the same people who tried to eliminate the father of Free software, Richard Stallman, as recently as a few months ago. What does that tell us about the OSI?

We’ve decided to belatedly do a video about these issues, seeing that we’re unable to produce as much lately, partly because of the heatwave.

06.01.21

The Libel Initiative: OSI President Falsely Insinuates OSI Critics Are Homophobic and Requests Censorship of Wikipedia (for OSI)

Posted in Deception, OSI, Wikipedia at 4:53 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

OSI censorship

Summary: Name-calling and insults (where none are needed) are used to compensate for unfavourable coverage about the OSI; typical corporatism in Wikipedia

To be clear, I don’t know what was changed in Wikipedia, I can only guess based on the context, and I didn’t even know he was gay. This is truly ridiculous.

‘Open Source’ as a Proprietary Software Coup and an Attack on Software Freedom

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, IBM, Microsoft, OSI at 4:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link

Summary: The well-financed interests behind the coup against software freedom are at it again; seeing that Free software is everywhere and has already won many markets, they still try to rebrand and reown the entire market, but whether they succeed or not depends on our collective action

SIMMONS and co. are at it again. Working on the payroll of proprietary software giants (Google, Salesforce etc.), these people basically wage a war against software freedom and moan about ICE while in fact working for ICE and outsourcing everything to a proprietary software monopoly that also works for ICE. So we know they don’t care about actual ethics; it’s just a shallow case of ego tripping or typical, chronic cognitive dissonance. Those are the same people who not only try to cancel the FSF and its founder but also worked from within OSI to cancel the OSI’s own co-founder (for trying to protect the OSI from such subversive entryism).

“Some say OSI isn’t just fronting for Microsoft and GitHub but also for Tidelift. Some people tell us that. Then again, consider the fact that Tidelift is managed by people who signed the anti-Stallman letter, looking to destroy the FSF and by extension copyleft/GPL.”The initial pointer (for this article) was sent to me by someone who had worked for Microsoft and got sick of what he saw there. He left. Tidelift is propping up Microsoft, according to him. It’s also connected to the Red Hat founders (company sold to IBM, which made them a lot of money, possibly making them billionaires). Some say OSI isn’t just fronting for Microsoft and GitHub but also for Tidelift. Some people tell us that. Then again, consider the fact that Tidelift is managed by people who signed the anti-Stallman letter, looking to destroy the FSF and by extension copyleft/GPL. The latest person to manage the hate letter is an IBM employee. Speaking of IBM, Simmons once again promoted this nonsense yesterday, this time in an IBM/Red Hat site called opensource.com. As it turns out, those nostalgic monopolists and OSI figureheads are boosting Microsoft moles and lobbyists (of proprietary software!). They speak of “our pals at” Microsoft (GitHub) and it’s worth noticing how many Microsoft employees lead this thing. They’ve killed the term “Open Source”. Nowadays those who claim to speak for Open Source are just proprietary software giants, along with their front groups (including the Linux Foundation, which insists that "Open Source loves Microsoft").

“Unless we speak about those issues more openly (which puts people at risk of running afoul of some so-called ‘CoC’), the situation will worsen.”This video begins with the more positive news about Free software winning the Web servers wars (according to statistics revealed yesterday afternoon, Microsoft’s collapse in Web servers continues; down from 5.54% to 4.95% in one single mouth! Yes, that’s like more than 10% in losses in just one month; they lost 7 million domains!). We covered this collapse many times over the past year or so, sometimes in long (about an hour long) videos. So the game plan or the strategy at Microsoft seems to revolve around hijacking the competition, e.g. by hiring NGINX people to become marketing drones of Microsoft (as seen in the above case).

Unless we speak about those issues more openly (which puts people at risk of running afoul of some so-called ‘CoC’), the situation will worsen. They try to ‘own’ our revolution and then lock us out with doors and gates.

05.11.21

The FSF Needs to Reject OSI (and Open Source) Along With Much-Needed Rejection of the GNOME Foundation (Not the Same as the GNOME Project)

Posted in FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, OSI at 5:15 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link

Summary: Response to a good little speech (unscripted apparently) by Geoffrey Knauth, who explained his position on Open Source about a year ago

THE current FSF president is a good guy. Geoffrey Knauth is a good and welcoming speaker (reminiscent of Peter T. Brown). But since his talk that I saw this morning a lot has happened in the OSI and it merits a discussion.

“Their petition backfired so badly that all they do with it right now is remove signatures.”The above started as a spontaneous response to this video of Geoffrey Knauth (from last year). Here it is for context:

Video download link

“A lot of those conferences are run by women… and we really have no conflicts,” he notes. A lot of what he says makes perfect sense and I agree entirely. What Knauth says about “Open Source” (around 9:00 onwards) I may have agreed on a year ago, but a lot has changed since then. The video explains what and why… I show this blog post from the OSI and explain the situation with the GNOME Foundation, where most chiefs proceed to sellout, becoming Microsoft employees. The GNOME Foundation is extremely problematic (it has tried to cancel RMS for over a decade), but so is the OSI. And by extension the “Open Source” brand…

Berlin scenesThe problematic blog post from the OSI was the start of something; a month and a half later the OSI (with zero full-time and permanent staff; it's defunct and cannot even organise an election) took/chose a key role in attacking the person who had most stubbornly protected the mission statement, initiating this attack based on complete nonsense including distortion of some very old stances. They just waited for an opportunity to pounce and then attack the FSF, collectively. Yes, they sought collective punishment, too.

It gets worse.

Well, they (Bully de Blanc and the Interim GM of OSI, a former IBM et al stooge) have been concurrently attacking software freedom even before the 'cancel mob' was assembled with support from biased and subjective media, based on almost nothing at all (just a little announcement about a return to some board, not even leadership, which Geoffrey Knauth maintains). Their petition backfired so badly that all they do with it right now is remove signatures. Karma still works, doesn’t it?

04.27.21

The Anti-FSF Petition of GNOME Foundation and OSI Continues Losing Signatures

Posted in FSF, GNOME, OSI at 8:30 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: There are further removals (diff below, based on the changes made in the past day or so), whereas the support letter keeps growing (albeit slowly)

Individuals

[...]

59d124
< akurushimi
2627d2691
< Seraphim R.P. (Kerygma Digital)

GNOME Foundation and OSI versus FSF
Notice the curve below going down (visibly). Won’t be long before the hate letter has 2,000+ signatures, compared to 6,000+ (or 6,500+) for the response to it.

Creating Parallel ‘Movements’ (Backed by Monopolies) to Marginalise the FSF, GNU, and GPL

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, FSF, GNOME, OSI at 11:38 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Concern-trolling or sheer opportunism?

Summary: The GNU General Public License (GPL) is a thorn in the side of monopolies and monopolists; can groups funded by monopolisers and run by professional vilifiers do enough damage at the behest of their corporate masters? The video above offers some additional background

THE GPL has long been attacked by proxies and concern trolls like Black Duck (Microsoft-connected) and it has not exactly worked. The GPL is still hugely popular, no matter what firms say based on GitHub data (i.e. based only on what’s controlled by Microsoft’s proprietary software trap). Even recently we saw high-profile examples of defections to the GPL and even AGPL.

Google, IBM, Microsoft and other such firms aren’t happy about this. They work with the GPL where they have no other choice, e.g. the kernel (Linux is GPLv2). It is predicable and we should very much expect attacks on messengers or public faces of the GPL, notably the FSF and its founder, Richard Stallman. It’s the concepts — the ideas to put it another way — that are under attack. They conveniently personify the issues. Never forget that…

It’s not Dr. Stallman himself that the monopolies fear; it’s the things he created, the ideas and his licences in particular…

“They’ll surely be coming back with another sneaky attempt, be it a bigger “cancel mob” or some attempt to override software freedom with buzzwords and catchphrases (like “hey hi” and “ethical”).”The same people slandering the FSF’s founder and blackmailing FSF board members into mothballing the whole thing (yes, canning the FSF by means of abandoning the Board of Directors altogether) also receive money from those very same monopolies. Take SFC for instance. Not only did it lobby the FSF to oust Stallman (both from within and outside the FSF), it’s continuing with a trend of disturbing statements while racking up money from Microsoft and Google. Bradley Kuhn from the SFC was pushed out of the FSF’s Board for a conflict of interest (looking to promote the agenda of the SFC, which he chose over the FSF when he left the Board). The SFC has become in some sense richer (as a funnel of funds) than the FSF, as they hire more people and they’re bringing in millions of dollars to the SFC (only two salaries are being paid as of 2 years ago).

Working for OSI, a force of corporate occupation and a coup, some people went out of their way to attack the very existence of the FSF. Some of these people work partly for Microsoft.

A reader recently pointed out to us various problematic things that she had observed. She wished to share her findings, as she suspects people who cannot code (and never coded anything) basically take over the movement, not for the betterment of freedom but for their selfish agenda funded at least partly by monopolies.

“We will first discuss the principles of digital autonomy,” one recent presentation says, with Google and Amazon logos next to it (see slides/cover). As if listening devices and CCTV inside our homes gives us “digital autonomy”…

This whole “digital autonomy” thing is mostly being promoted by Bully de Blanc. “Digital Autonomy push by bad actors,” according to our reader, should be a cause for concern. “I wanted to mention something of a slight concern,” she said, “last year and must mention to someone. Molly and Karen are pushing digital autonomy.”

Those slides are self-discrediting because of the sponsors.

“Then,” she added, “they spoke at Hope.”

Well, all this “autonomy” thing seems like another attempt to redefine Free Software, as the "ethical source" people do. They try to build and shield some new identity for themselves, just like a group of developers now hijack the acronym/name “GNU”…

Bully de Blanc open coreThe OSI is in this too by the way. The OSI together with the GNOME Foundation try to redefine Free Software and Open Source. They collaborate on this, just like they did on the hate letter.

“Open Source” was having a go at creating a “parallel movement”, seeking to replace the original (Free software) by co-opting the followers, distracting from the real thing, and in turn diluting the message, celebrating openwashing instead of things that completely comply with the seminal definitions.

“Then,” our reader noted, “for this Gnome conference – during the presentation, they [had it] mentioned… previously presented at Hope and Debconf. Using the previous presentations for credibility. [...] Presentation does not equal endorsement…”

They’re basically chaining past ‘credentials’ to make up for lack of skills and experience. This is a very Bully de Blanc ‘thing’. Then, consider which corporations fund this pair of presenters.

I was then made aware by our reader that “recently Karen [Sandler] and [Bradley] Kuhn [of SFC] gave a keynote for an ethics and AI session.”

“Hey hi” (AI) is basically a stupid buzzword, whereas ethics are a broader concept (even Microsoft claims to stand for ethics!), so we’ll see their next step. “Karen,” our reader sighed, “giving a talk about ethics.”

But I don’t have anything like real piece of evidence to suggest she is not ethical. So let’s leave her out of this and focus on Mr. Kuhn instead. As far as we know, Karen Sandler did make some rather problematic statements about Stallman, but that’s nowhere as bad as what Kuhn did.

Bully de Blanc on RMSI managed to convince our reader that Sandler isn’t the problem, though she may be led by sponsors and colleagues with another agenda. “I agree,” she said, that “there is no valid, verified evidence – and, she is a lawyer. However, she seemed to be Free software. Maybe she was at that time. She is the SFC director, and they did have a Microsoft-sponsored event.”

“Anyway,” our reader said, “I have serious concerns… although I can never really figure out the endgame. Do not even know where the digital autonomy push is going… or if it even will continue after all this. One thing I noticed is there are people who jump on fashionable topics, and perpetrate their expertise on the matter. Some are convincing. I don’t really believe Molly is the mastermind or puppetbully… Of course, I have no evidence. Maybe someday!”

In any event, we need to watch out for those things because the above-mentioned people played a role in the anti-FSF coup attempt, both two years ago and last month. They’ll surely be coming back with another sneaky attempt, be it a bigger “cancel mob” or some attempt to override software freedom with buzzwords and catchphrases (like “hey hi” and “ethical”). It would be unwise to overlook the possibility.

04.24.21

OIN’s Deb Nicholson: We Don’t Solve Any Real Issues, Just Like OSI (Where Nicholson is Now Interim General Manager)

Posted in GNU/Linux, ISO, OIN, OSI, Patents, Videos at 8:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

OSI board

Microsoft Tim's interview with Neil McGovern

Summary: Before working at OSI, whose sole accomplishment so far is an attack on the FSF, she worked for IBM (et al) front group OIN and SFC, which is another attack group that raises money from Microsoft and then attacks the FSF

“WHY on Earth are you picking on Nicholson???”

One might actually say a foolish thing like this, conveniently ignoring the fact that — putting aside irrelevant gender aspects — Nicholson worked for SFC while SFC was attacking Richard Stallman, lobbying and pressing for his removal. At the same time she brought Microsoft money to the SFC for two years in a row, then moved to the flailing OSI, where only months later she and her colleagues started a campaign of defamation against Stallman and an extended campaign to undermine the FSF (using ‘guilt’ by association tactics).

“At the same time she brought Microsoft money to the SFC for two years in a row, then moved to the flailing OSI, where only months later she and her colleagues started a campaign of defamation against Stallman and an extended campaign to undermine the FSF (using ‘guilt’ by association tactics).”The hate letter’s perpetrators actually plotted to redefine Free software and make proprietary software seem "OK" only 1.5 months before they found an excuse to start a vicious attack, helped by media that’s funded by proprietary software giants.

Looking back, there’s a track record of bad deeds. Nicholson’s bosses at SFC — like herself — were given an award a month ago. Can’t they recognise the self-harm they’re doing? De Raadt, Miguel de Icaza, Garrett, Nicholson, Kuhn…

What on Earth is going on and who stands to benefit?

Prior to the stints at the SFC and OSI there was a stint at the Open Invention Network (OIN).

“They clearly do nothing to tackle software patents or patent trolls and they mostly protect monopolies, just like OSI ‘minionry’ does these days.”The totally useless OIN, which we’ve criticised for quite some time (the short story is, they seek to undermine true patent reform and distract from opponents of software patents, instead working to legitimise such patents), is no good. GNU developers we’ve spoken to are saying the same. Some GNU/Linux developers who are threatened by patent trolls also receive no help from OIN. We did a series about this last month.

In the following video, which is rather old by now, we have an almost open (or frank) admission that OIN is of no real use to software developers. It’s for monopolies that cross-licence.

To quote from the video: “You wouldn’t be able to sue IBM for it…”

They clearly do nothing to tackle software patents or patent trolls and they mostly protect monopolies, just like OSI ‘minionry’ does these days. The portion below (Fair Use) is 4:00-5:20 from the full video.

Video download link

Notice how the questions aren’t even being answered (or not properly anyway) until pressed further and further. Roblimo died years ago and I still feel deep sadness over it (I shed tears, too), as he was always nice to me and wanted to hear my side of the story, especially on things which truly mattered (he also put me in the radio 14 years ago when he worked for Slashdot and we debated OOXML).

« 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