04.21.21

Overt Abuse and Mischaracterisations by Bully de Blanc

Posted in Deception, FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, GPL, IBM, Microsoft, OSI at 1:36 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Blue hair is not a substitute for skills and experience

Blue hair, Bully de Blanc
This screenshot is real and it is a real account, not a prank

Summary: The campaign to ruin the FSF and silence its founder, Richard M. Stallman (RMS), goes months prior to the hate letter set up by Bully de Blanc, her boss, and the Microsoft-sponsored OSI; they just attack the licence (GPL/copyleft) and they try to redefine things for the corporations which fund them

A reader of ours recently wanted to add some more information on Molly de Blanc, whom we dubbed “Bully de Blanc” last month because of the bullying (some people have since then copied the name; MinceR says “Bully the blanc” or “the blank”).

“Earlier this year (in February) Bully de Blanc attacked the very definition of Free software (in apparent collaboration between the GNOME Foundation and OSI) and the desire to attack RMS was already expressed out in the open (in Bully de Blanc’s blog) months before he even came back to the FSF’s Board.”When someone engages in character assassination (based on deliberate distortion, libel, and a gish gallop of falsehoods), he or she should not be shocked to find online criticism of him or her. This is why when it comes to Bully de Blanc we’ve shown no particular remorse; we objectively explained what we had observed. Earlier this year (in February) Bully de Blanc attacked the very definition of Free software (in apparent collaboration between the GNOME Foundation and OSI) and the desire to attack RMS was already expressed out in the open (in Bully de Blanc’s blog) months before he even came back to the FSF's Board. So they must have waited for an excuse or a “trigger” event.

This post contains a polite, calm, and fact-checked interpretation. It will also quote, anonymously, some people who read this site and have researched the matter themselves.

“I have noticed your video here,” one reader noted. “Please put attention here on [the] official Molly de Blanc profile” (in Debian.org).

“As where she tries to be “Debian developer” but it most probably is over,” the reader said, “as status is “Closed”. That is contradictory information and false representation which in the end is also illegal act. She is stating there to be “I also work at the FSF, and serve on the Open Source Initiative board of directions.” — whereby I do not think she is now at FSF — please verify and use your connections to remove that profile, or archive it. This page says she is not on the board. Maybe she was on both boards, but it is very obvious that she has no clear policy neither on “Open Source” [nor] on FSF, she is image maker. As a conclusion, I wish to point out to a pattern of false representations by Molly de Blanc. I think that it would be worth putting it into the timeline, as I have seen pattern of false representations.”

DreyfusWe too have noticed some of that. “All the roles are past roles,” a reader noted. “She doesn’t remove the roles from web sites, she keeps using all these titles as a substitute for skills.”

To us, it doesn’t necessarily matter whether the credentials are false, outdated, or acquired by means like a romantic relationship. What matters to us is the persistent and ongoing agenda, which was outlined even months before the hate letter was put online, backed by corporate media sponsored by the same corporations that control the OSI and GNOME Foundation. Don’t think those people are just going away and won’t be coming back. They try to induce fear and self-shame to keep RMS silent. He’s still reluctant to do new interviews with us (or with anyone else for that matter). The hate letter was updated just over a week ago, just to say that aren’t accepting a public apology from RMS. Nothing he does will ever make them happy. They’re still concern-trolling the FSF, trying to shun it while taking money from Microsoft (which bribes officials, not just the OSI and Linux Foundation).

To better understand what we’re up against, we must understand the agenda and also understand whose agenda that is. IBM, which is now under fire for abuses against workers, has many reasons to dislike what RMS says.

“If thought can corrupt language, then language can also corrupt thought.”

George Orwell

04.11.21

“The Fighters of Freedom”

Posted in Free/Libre Software, FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, OSI at 3:26 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Some anime fans have made this video about recent events

04.09.21

Hate Letter Against Richard Matthew Stallman (RMS) Backfired So Spectacularly That Signers Asked to Revoke Their Own Signatures and the List Was Then Frozen Permanently (Updated)

Posted in Deception, FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, OSI at 3:14 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

They wanted to cancel RMS; instead they canceled their own petition!

RMS petitions latest

Summary: “An open letter in support of Richard Matthew Stallman being reinstated by the Free Software Foundation” tops 6,100 signatures (graph generated just moments ago)

Today we learned that people who had set up the defamatory hate letter “don’t want any more individuals to sign up for some reason” and “oddly, that decision came after several people submitted pull requests asking to get de-listed” (I have heard of a few, spoke to a few, and here’s one more). So it is perfectly possible that the real number of signatures on that RMS hate (defamation) letter may be going down. So they froze the process. Wouldn’t it be embarrassing if the number of signatures started to decrease? “Kind of interesting that they stopped accepting signatures 3 days after the support letter surpassed them,” Artem told us in IRC. So basically, they’re just spreading libel and running away when it backfires instead of retracting and apologising like adults would do. Anyway, the way things are going, it should be clear for everyone to see that the hate letter based on lies was a very bad idea and it’s possible that the blue curve (above) should in fact be going downwards. People realise they were conned and they want nothing to do with this con job anymore. Oh, the irony! Will someone at OSI and GNOME Foundation resign? Maybe the whole Board? Microsoft tenants at the GNOME Board of Directors too…

Update: Graph with numbers added.

RMS petitions at 6100

04.04.21

Who Signed the Hate Letter Against Software Freedom (or Against FSF Bringing Back Its Founder)

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, FSF, FUD, GNOME, Google, IBM, OSI at 1:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link

Summary: The concern trolls who are associated with FSF-hostile groups (sponsored by monopolies) didn’t manage to build enough momentum to sabotage the FSF; the media operatives on their side, however, try to tell us that the FSF is destroyed (monopolies pay them to say this, hoping for self-fulfilling prophecies)

NOW that the hate letter has reached a standstill (barely passed 3,000 signatures, whereas the response to that may soon reach 6,000 signatures) I’ve decided to record a quick video to explain who prepared and signed this letter (and why). Many of the names are very much expected (same as 2 years ago) and institutions are barely recognisable. Many have the strong conviction against the FSF because they’re BSD projects. Some have nothing whatsoever to do with code. In the case of the GNOME Foundation, they’ve attacked software freedom for many years (well over a decade!) and the OSI is a blatant attempt to steal the thunder from FSF. There should be no expectation of them supporting the FSF. They can only pretend.

“Many have the strong conviction against the FSF because they’re BSD projects.”The video above uses mostly polite language, unlike the letter that was signed. At the end they accomplished almost nothing. If anything, as people pointed out to me recently, the FSF became only more closely aligned with the uncompromising ideology of its founder. Some of the others left the FSF. Maybe that’s for the better.

03.31.21

The Open Source Creative Commons: Code of CONduct

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, OSI at 3:20 am by Guest Editorial Team

Creative Commons research and guest author post by Marcia K. Wilbur

code CONduct

Summary: Marcia Wilbur takes a closer look at what happened to Creative Commons in recent times; it’s not what people have come to assume Creative Commons stands for

After some research, I discovered changes at CC, from “open the door” to open source. The people there embrace this and Ehmke. Here are some details.


Imagine my surprise to see the Creative Commons updated website, which honestly seemed somewhat abandoned recently – except for a few students working on a search engine in late 2019.

“Imagine my surprise to see the Creative Commons updated website, which honestly seemed somewhat abandoned recently – except for a few students working on a search engine in late 2019.”Prominently featured on the landing page was an podcast with Coraline Ehmke. After some research, the following was discovered:

- Creative Commons has adopted a Code of Conduct based on Contributor Covenant.

- November 2, 2020: The CC Open Source website was announced. Google and Outreachy as contributors – as usual! To add insult to injury, the CC Open Source website claims: “WE HAVE BEEN BUILDING FREE SOFTWARE AT CREATIVE COMMONS FOR OVER A DECADE.”

Yes. But Open Source software is very different from free software with regards to ethics and philosophy!

CC OS

“Say Hello to Our New CC Open Source Website!
This is part of a series of posts introducing the projects built by open source contributors mentored by Creative Commons during Google Summer of Code (GSoC) 2020 and Outreachy. This post was written by Dhruvi Butti, a 2020 Outreachy intern and a 3rd-year undergrad at IIIT Surat.”

Can we delete the shameless plugs and get to the important stuff? This unwelcoming site includes not only has Codes of Conduct (codes), but an option in the navigation to: Code of Conduct Enforcement

Community huh

CC enforcement

Now, there is a Code of Conduct committee and lots of documentation about policy. Why is there so much work around Code of Conduct? I’m dev. I code. So much policy and at Creative Commons. Why? There was never a need for this before.

While we have a right to say and do what we want, we also consider civility and community. Will you replace community with policy?

November 4, 2020: Two days later a post came in about the open source project and contributing on GitHub (a Microsoft platform).

A post about heading in a new direction appears, as Diane Peters departs.

February 19, 2021: Podcast “open minds” announced.

March 16, 2021: Meet Your New Global Network Council Executive Committee!

March 19, 2021: Podcast – with Coraline Ehmke

In my wildest imagination, I could never have predicted an Open Source movement from within the Creative Commons. However, when you leave the front door ajar, some see this as an invitation to enter.

In 2001, RMS and Lessig rallied together in San Francisco.
In 2002, the Creative Commons received funding to move forward.
By 2014, a new effort and project, the Free Culture Trust, was a collaboration including Creative Commons.

This project was a diverse group of free software (so I believed at the time), open source and proprietary contributors. There were differences in how each group viewed the workflow. There were differences with regard to philosophy, software use, certain mission direction areas. There were as many differences as possible. There were different genders, religions. Did that matter? No. In the end, we contributed and collaborated in a civil and friendly manner. We had no Code of Conduct. We didn’t need one.

There were recommendations by each party as to how to best contribute. A collaboration tool respecting all views did not exist, and we went from requests to using Etherpad to using Google Docs. We never considered a Code of Conduct. We did not need one.

E-mails, voice meetings, and Etherpad were used. During meetings, we discussed the goals and mission of the trust, for a document. During the months long process, suddenly, the Commons dropped off support.

We were informed (2014) the Creative Commons closed their physical doors for lack of funding. Well, we live in a digital age, so closing physical doors is somewhat acceptable – especially if you do not have funding.

The years to follow seemed to be somewhat stable. People didn’t realize or didn’t care about the physical location.

Then, there were some issues with the commons licenses and forks.

One example is recently, in a documentation list for OpenOffice, former AOO documentation people discussed with OpenOffice the use of CC by 3 and CC by 4 and needed to get legal involved. Somehow during the fork of LibreOffice, the content license was changed from CC by 3 to CC by 4 with a mix of GPL (GPL, it’s not just for code snippets!).

The bottom line here is, maybe we need more guidance and less copy and paste of licenses like Code of Conduct or Creative Commons.

Listed below are some free options:

Content
GFDL or Public Domain

Code snippets in Content
GPLv2 or GPLv3

Code
GPLv2 or GPLv3

Code of CONduct
NONE

Unnecessary. Using the current popular “template” for Code of Conduct is not in the best interest for my community efforts or my work in AIoT.

Try and see this from the developer’s standpoint. Of course, let’s be civil in our projects.

Try the FFmpeg Code of Conduct if you absolutely need to use one.

From the FFmpeg CoC: Finally, keep in mind the immortal words of Bill and Ted, “Be excellent to each other.”

The problem with our organization models in our community could be partially attributed to being subject to donations to survive or thrive. Our organizations have succumbed to popular culture, fashionable ethics and being subjects rather than directors.

As organizations de-prioritize the importance of individuals in our community (see OSI article at Techrights) for corporations and funding, how can our community thrive?


Copyleft News: Will you Demand Freedom?

As a recap of the last couple years, we had:

OSI placing Microsoft as a prominent force in their efforts. In 2020, Ehmke lost by approx. 65% of the vote.

SFC held a Microsoft Sponsored Copyleft conference during FOSDEM. Ehmke spoke about the Rising Ethical Storm in Open Source.

Some other presentations listed below:

Karen Sandler spoke about Software Ethics and Copyleft Licensing.

Josh Simmons spoke about Copyleft in a business context.

John Sullivan discussed Copyleft Expansion with SFC.

It’s their party. They can say whatever they want. At the end of the day, we as a community choose whether to accept their proposals or not.

Will you choose enforcement and policing…?

or

Demand Freedom?

03.27.21

The FSF Got a Tonne of Free Media Coverage/Publicity While the OSI Goes Defunct Completely (a Corpse of an Institution, Weaponised Against Free Software)

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

Video download link

Summary: The ‘zombie’ body known as OSI is totally destroyed (it cannot even figure out who speaks for it!); it’s incapable of resuscitating itself, so it’s just strapping on a suicide vest and trying everything it can possibly leverage to destroy the FSF

THIS THING CALLED “OSI” was all along an attack on the FSF, which predates it by 13 years. Yes, 13 years. OSI’s unstated goal was to steal the thunder and grab the limelight, referring to Free software by diluted if not misleading terms, which year after year became increasingly meaningless (with terms like “open core” or even "inner source"). For more than 15 years I gave the OSI the benefit of the doubt and occasionally I would use the term “Open Source” even if I favoured software freedom (some audiences know “Open Source” but get battled when the words “Free software” get uttered/used, as if that means freeware and/or shareware because media conditions people to conflate price or limited choice with freedom).

“What have the OSI and FSFE have to show in terms of code? Almost nothing!”I was disenheartened to discover some frustrating leaks about today’s FSFE, which isn’t what it used to be. As it turned out, Simon Phipps (OSI) and FSFE worked to betray the FSF and last year we showed a number of leaked communications to highlight the astounding degree of skulduggery. The openwashing aside and the proprietary software sponsorship aside (both FSFE and OSI take money from Microsoft and spying firms like Google), they actively worked to undermine the FSF. In the case of the FSFE, they exploited the letters "FSF" to raise money based on false pretences. The FSF looks after GNU, a cornerstone of the GNU/Linux operating system used on billions of devices. What have the OSI and FSFE have to show in terms of code? Almost nothing!

There are several more rogue entities in the mix. They’re not working for freedom and they attempt to crush the community — as that’s where the money is (taking people’s freedom away).

“I started reading more about OIN,” one reader told us a few days ago, and “your post was very informative. They even announced in 2019 their partnership with Linux Foundation and Microsoft – I’m interested in those posts too.”

The OSI is extremely upset at us for exposing 100% accurate information about what the OSI turned into. When we say “OSI”, however, we mostly mean the Board; the OSI has no employees anymore, except one temporary member of staff (interim). The OSI is basically defunct and the number of members it has would be rather miniscule. As we pointed out some years ago, their members make up less than 5% of the budget, so it’s almost 100% corporations. This simple fact infuriated the likes of Simon Phipps, mostly because it’s true and he could not formulate actual/factual rebuttals. Sad to be OSI…

OSI Microsoft photo opIn any event, the scoop we got last week said there was “an update on voting process at OSI… if you haven’t heard. Re-vote at OSI was a no go today… but received an email about the future plan in an update?”

So long story short, they’re still unable to do the election and instead they’ve decided to weaponise their Web site and Twitter accounts to attack the FSF. Nice distraction you got there…

And “if you haven’t seen,” our source added, “their plan to restore trust in OSI elections is mentioned.”

“The OSI doesn’t exist to defend people’s freedom.”Nobody trusts them anymore and they’ve not mentioned their members in a very long time, so we can imagine they lost a big number of them. Why would anyone give money to the OSI if the OSI uses that to boost a proprietary software monopoly of Microsoft (GitHub)? That’s insane! That’s where the majority of the OSI’s budget now goes…

“Still do not see exact details regarding the vulnerability,” our source concluded and there’s another elephant in the room: “Anyway, memberships will expire and others will join in the meantime – So… who is eligible to vote when a re-vote happens?”

OSI and fake ethicsTo make matters worse, the elections are very easy to game. I mentioned this to Simon Phipps and Christine Hall a long time ago. Their response was… not convincing. Not even remotely! “As for the individual memberships,” the source told us, “anyone with a lot of allies or dollars could manipulate the vote.”

It’s already happening. The OSI was up for sale and it got bought. It got hijacked. Now it’s just like a ‘suicide bomber’ organisation, sporting a ‘suicide vest’ (bomb) it’s trying to detonate upon the FSF. Will that succeed? No. The FSF has quite a few members of staff and based on what we’ve heard they’re mostly happy to have the founder back. Seeing the OSI screaming and shouting only proves that the founder was right. The OSI doesn’t exist to defend people’s freedom. They want people to look away from freedom.

03.24.21

OSI Should Elect a Leader Before Trying to Dethrone Others’

Posted in OSI at 7:16 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The OSI's Elected Winner is... Oh, sorry, we have to run the election all over again

Summary: The deeply defunct and intolerant OSI has no members of staff (only one interim member of staff) but it has the audacity to sign hypocritical petitions at Microsoft’s GitHub (proprietary software where most of the OSI’s budget gets funneled to — quite the blunder)

03.21.21

Know Your Non-Profit…

Posted in Free/Libre Software, FSF, OSI at 1:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link

Summary: Incredulous observers, disbelieving in the message of organisations removed from their founder/s (e.g. Linux Foundation and ‘Mother Jones’), need to better understand the underlying facts and who stands to benefit from shift of power

THE situation at the FSF and at the OSI was described here over the past 18 hours or so, albeit only in written form. The video examines the recent events and what they tell us about the direction taken by the forefront authorities in “Free software” and “Open Source”, respectively. We look at some of the relevant Web pages and what they teach us about the strategy and motivation, e.g. awarding the person who worked to remove the FSF’s founder from the FSF and mentioning that an OSI election had been compromised… only to be mentioned days after the election was over.

“The video examines the recent events and what they tell us about the direction taken by the forefront authorities in “Free software” and “Open Source”, respectively.”While we generally support “Free software” and “Open Source” (the latter has become more about openwashing and reputation laundering for monopolies in recent years) we need to understand what the bodies that govern those things are up to. The FSF lost some credibility when it mistreated its founder (Alex Oliva too decided to leave a few months back) and the OSI lost both co-founders; one of them was even banned from the mailing lists (of the organisation he had co-founded). Either it’s just an incredible coincidence that all of this is happening (Linus Torvalds 2018, Richard Stallman 2019, both OSI co-founders 2020) or some forces work to engineer phony ‘scandals’ which in turn leave a leadership vacuum, soon to be exploited by non-engineers that are easy for corporate power (sometimes monopolies) to manipulate, usually disguised as politeness, mannerism, and tolerance (equating companies that bomb people with tolerance is quite an incredibly stretch/slant).

« 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