Courage is Contagious
"Courage is contagious" was a neat slogan - or popular motto - often used by Wikileaks nearly 1.5 decades ago. It was a sort of adaptation. It helped describe what had given Wikileaks so much momentum and sympathy online.
2 days ago Andy Farnell, Helen Plews, and Ed Nevard (CyberShow) published a nice, thoughtful tribute to the late Ross Anderson, noting how he stood in the way of power. To quote: "Ross was not liked by the university to which he devoted his life. The fact is they wanted rid of him by forced retirement. At an institution taking funding from Elon Musk and some morally questionable technology organisations, Ross ruffled feathers with his plain integrity. He was not, however, an "activist" - which made the integrity all the more galling for some."
It is a very good article about an inspiring person; he had inspired the authors who said: "Ross Anderson was literally encouraging - he gave courage. And it is infectious."
They said "infectious", not "contagious". But the meaning is almost the same.
We began covering EPO almost 18 years ago, but 11 years ago we started covering the EPO based on whistleblowers who truly trusted us. We always protected them. We never surrendered to threats from EPO management and never censored a page or even a sentence/object.
I became a witness to acts of great courage from EPO examiners. Some of them told me frankly and upfront that they hated software patents but were pressured to grant them anyway (putting upright fake patents).
Some people sacrifice a lot to make sure many others are properly informed. They do so at great risk to themselves, not just to their career if not peers.
"Here is the write up," one person recently told me after explaining a bunch of really nasty things. "I want to let you know," said this person, "this could adversely impact my position on a FOSS project but as always, making sacrifices in the best interest of our community does of course allow me to love to look myself in the mirror."
Techrights bases a lot of its reporting on leaks. Exclusive coverage comes from leaks. So whistleblowers are very important to us.
I too made a lot of sacrifices, as with international awards and a doctorate I could make a lot of money in "the industry", but instead I chose another path - one that my wife truly and genuinely supports.
To me it is important that science, facts and truth win. I also believe strongly in the labour movement and human rights. People should not let employers overwork them to death; nor should they forsake the right to sick leave, holidays, breaks etc. Work-life balance isn't just a matter of mental health. It's a matter of survival.
Regarding journalism, transparency is imperative and I shall write more about transparency later today. Almost 20 years ago my E-mail signature describes me as "Freelance journalist"; I was even paid back then to write about technology. I no longer get paid, but that also means I am financially independent and my writings aren't tainted by anything but ideology. I feel strongly about (or against) censorship, seeing the Free software movement is being crushed by corporate censorship (and self-censorship). We see this all the time in recent years. It's usually subtle and/or hidden from sight.
It would be morally wrong to compel people to remove correct - albeit 'embarrassing' - informative pages, betraying vulnerable people in the process (the Serial Strangler from Microsoft, Graveley, formally conveyed he'd drop the SLAPP case if I removed some pages, but of course I declined). I'd rather spend a lot of money fighting for what's right and true than compromise my principles.
The Microsofters thought they'd be all clever and victorious, but they quickly find out it's not the case. One of them needs to fly to the UK to face lawsuits against him [1, 2]. His decades of abuse are catching up with him.
If and when it all backfires on them, I envision a lot of positive press for us and nobody would be fooled if they tried to initiate yet another baseless SLAPP from another Microsofter. They've long attempted to censor the site (for decades!) and not even once succeeded. The site has maintained a 100% source protection record and the same for combating censorship. People trust us, based on our track record, devotion, and expertise.
D.A.G. (Green) was so successful handling the European Patent Office SLAPPs that even 10 years later the Office dares not send us a single letter and whistleblowers remember what we've sacrificed to protect them and their message/evidence.
We'll do the same regarding Microsoft. As I said days ago, "Techrights Will Spend the Next Few Years Writing a Lot About Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)". That is a promise. Our coverage about this might outlive Microsoft and Bill Gates. I am young enough to do this for decades if necessary. █