Intercontinental Brigading - Part XV - Annualised Consequences for Opposing Microsoft Back Doors in Linux Since 2012
By 2026 they've escalated things to state violence and death threats. What next (for 2027)?
Previous Parts:
We're back on UTC/GMT. It's soon be Halloween, then November, so Companies House filing penalties may be looming for the hired guns of GGG ("Restricted Boot" Garrett, "Microsoft Plagiarism" Graveley & "Gas The Jews" Lozza). Maybe they reckon it's better to pay fines or risk fines than to allow a critic (or even their clients; they're already sued by their own clients [1, 2, 3]) to see how worse off they really are.
Here's a roundup of what we got from GGG, as a quick recap readers sometimes ask us to produce for concision's sake:
2021: SLAPPs, threatening letters from solicitors
2022: doxing to employer
2023: phoning employer of wife, hate crimes
2024: two American lawsuits (Microsoft-connected) subsidised
by third parties and coordinated in tandem a priori, not
just throughout
2025: doxing family members
2026: death threats, attempt to put wife in prison
2027: [yet to be known, soon]
In a nutshell, life does change (a lot) when Americans connected to Microsoft and to one another go after you with over a million pounds in legal budget (funded by third parties, by their own public admission) with the sole aim of "funny" censorship and 'punishment' after doing truly horrible things to women. One day we'll expand on that (when the time is right; truth is catching up with them).
Let's discuss again what led to this, as this was brought up again in IRC about an hour ago. As MinceR put it, "who knows, maybe if they made the CPU entirely out of TPMs, they could make Restricted Boot work..."
Last week there was a lot of press coverage about a matter that vindicates us. Many of applications got impacted. It was so severe that emergency fixes us to be issued, e.g. Istio. Why did this happen?
When computer security is left for people who neither understand nor pursue security [1, 2] we are forced to conflate being controlled (by Microsoft in Garrett's case) with security. A company publicly accused of blackmail as recently as 2 days ago isn't interested in your security, it just wants to control you. In Garrett's eyes, this is OK. He gets paid to pretend this is fine.
If you challenge Garrett, he will start saying mean things in social control media and even start writing stupid quips about your penis. He thinks it's "funny". It's all just a giant distraction from what started it all, restricted boot, or the utterly inane (intentionally misleading) idea that asking Microsoft for permission to run Linux is somehow "security".
This is not a personal dispute, it concerns the battle waged by people who aren't qualified... against Computer Scientists. It's also a battle between serial infringers against people who try to uphold the law. American slop companies don't want a discussion about that sort of thing.
These are matters of national security (sovereignty at stake), which is why political intervention happened and representatives have become accessible. They're hardly surprised those Americans struggle to keep a job; with very bad language and allusions to violence it's a miracle anyone would even hire them, but their attempts to silence critics of corporate corruption make them like "assets" (set aside the liabilities). █
