04.16.11
Posted in Deception, Microsoft, Patents at 4:24 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: How mobbyists game the press and patterns for journalists to watch out for if they wish to avoid being deceived and exploited
In my “Inbox” I have over 100 messages from Microsoft Florian. Not all of them are personal. Florian is shy to admit this, but his operation is based on reuse of text for blog comments (he shut down comments in his own blogs after he had found them irritating) and also for E-mails, which he uses to embed his name and his often incorrect claims inside news articles. Maybe he pondered sending it to one zillion reporters, hoping that one in a zillion will give it room in a post/article. Maybe that’s how the lobbying industry works, who knows? I sure don’t. But what I do know what I was sent and I received admissions too. Here is an example of a message:
From: Florian Mueller
To: “Roy Schestowitz”
Subject: Bilski decision doesn’t invalidate even one software patent
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:53:58 +0200
(sad story… and this here is an example of my emails to journalists when news break)
Please feel free to use in your reporting on the Bilski decision any of these comments. I’m the author of the FOSS Patents blog (and founder and former director of the NoSoftwarePatents campaign) on the Bilski decision and what it means for the patentability of software.
Here are a few select quotes, and further below the URL of my posting and the complete text.
“Unfortunately, the Supreme Court delivered an opinion that doesn’t help the cause of partial or complete abolition of software patents at all.”
“[T]he court’s majority position is about the most liberal reasoning that it could have been. Only a decision to uphold the Bilski patent could have been any less restrictive.
“Simply put, the Supreme Court’s decision does not do away with even one software patent that already exists, nor does it raise the bar for the future.”
“The decision announced today makes it clear that a majority of the Supreme Court wanted to give the abolition of even only a small percentage of all software patents the widest berth possible.”
“This US decision is even more disappointing when taking into account the global trend.” [then mentions political process in New Zealand and court decision in Germany]
“The position that software patents should be abolished isn’t nearly as popular among judges and politicians as it is in the free and open source software community.”
The upcoming Defensive Patent License (DPL) is recommended at the end of the blog posting.
Here’s the URL and the full text:
Then comes ego-surfing. He can show other people how the prior mentions (which he mass-mailed for) supposedly give him credibility. It’s a chain of FUD, just like Microsoft with the FAT patent (using prior settlements to discourage re-examination).
It’s a typical recipe of “please use my quotes”; “here are samples you can use” (not exact words). I received loads of those, even after pointing out to him that he is mass-mailing while hiding it, which I did not appreciate. In fact, judging by the headers it seems like a personal message, but after a while I could see what he was up to and then he sent me this explanation:
From: Florian Mueller
To: “Roy Schestowitz”
Subject: EU launches investigation against IBM over mainframe practices
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:33:54 +0200
(this goes to multiple recipients but I didn’t want to use an undisclosed
list because of potential problems with spam filters; nor do I use a mailer
tool 
[...]
Those “spam filters”, eh? They are a hindrance to lobbyists. Florian and his bully friends from Microsoft can try all they want to gag those who explain their ‘algorithm’ (Florian has not patented this lobbying algorithm/business method yet, has he?), but people deserve to know the truth. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Site News at 3:52 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: How my comments were removed from ZDNet UK and my attempt to have them reinstated
We have always been somewhat cynical about ZDNet. Its business model had a lot to do with it, but it was not just that. We are still not sure why Carla lost her job, but we can only guess based on her vague explanation. This post is not about ZDNet the global site, which is a liability that the UK site does not deserve to justify. And to be fair, ZDNet UK has some talented writers whom I like and have praised before, e.g. Rupert and Jamie (the occasional blogger). I must be forgetting some. Ingrid Marson was also very good and we mentioned her before.
This post is not intended to dismiss ZDNet UK but rather to explain what I have gone through since someone there published an article about me (an article I had not known about until Microsoft Florian and Microsoft Jack started joking about it with each other, insulting me in the process and asking for my attention in Twitter). Some people tried to imply some kind of collusion or even insinuate that I was the blogger over there. It’s all nonsense. The only person there whose name I recognise is “The Mad Hatter” and that’s because he occasionally comments in Techrights as well. Yes, these are the small things that happen and Techrights does not cover because it would rather cover issues, not gossip. Florian and his Microsoft groupies (he mostly talks to Microsoft people these days) are just busy heckling people and lying about them too; that would harm their future career, which is counter-productive and immature at best.
Anyway, one thing we do notice is that David Meyer (of ZDNet UK, he is generally a good journalist even though he focuses on pro-OpenSUSE and Novell news sometimes — surely a scarcity these days [1, 2]) has been quoting Microsoft Florian recently (and vice versa), which may suggest that Florian’s flood of identical E-mails — bar cosmetic personalisation — that are sent to heaps of journalists, is having an effect on him (assuming he too is on Florian’s massive list of recipients). He deserves to at least know how Florian is gaming the press, quietly, behind the scenes. That’s why he is seen quoted sometimes. He asks people to embed quotes of him, which he supplies in several forms for embedment (prepared inaccurate statements). Having been a lobbyist for Real Madrid and others, he sure knows how to play this game. It’s his job. Journalists hopefully are immune to these tactics, which simply de-legimise otherwise-decent publications.
Anyway, the latest article from Meyer talks about CPTN. Is is cited by Florian, who celebrates/anticipates Novell’s passage of patents to Microsoft. The report is based on the SEC filing and it says:
Novell’s sale of hundreds of open-source patents to a consortium featuring Microsoft, Apple, Oracle and EMC has become more likely to go through, as the US Department of Justice has failed to block the sale.
The antitrust division of the Department of Justice (DoJ) had made Novell and the consortium, CPTN Holdings, agree to not carry the sale through until 12 April, so the DoJ could review the sale. In a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on Tuesday, Novell said that date had arrived “without action from the DOJ to enjoin the sale”.
For a little bit of background also see:
The thing about writers in ZDNet UK is that in formal “articles” they usually lack linkage. No burden of proof on authors (they rarely, if ever, provide links) means that they can make claims without them being backed by links. Even some of the blogs on the site are better than the “articles” based on this criterion. But that’s just why journalism (in the old sense) is dying. My response to the blog post about me was a rarity; I mentioned it a couple of timed before [1, 2], just because I need to clarify if I comment in other sites. Well, even though I have heard from pro-GNU/Linux people that ZDNet bans account and deletes comments in an unfair way which suits the editors’ judgment/convictions (this does not occur in other sites where karma and comment scoring are used instead), I decided to get involved. I saw commenters spreading false information about me and without rebutting it, there is greater likelihood that it would spread. Later in the same conversation it came up that something in ZDNet’s site looked like a paid endorsement, so I asked a question. That’s where it went downhill and they deleted many comments of mine. I then decided to check with local/remote cache and see/verify if I can retrieve the deleted comments, which were polite and not problematic at all (by most people’s standards). Eventually, after some further discussion with the community and news editor I received some more polite response which also provided copies of the deleted comments, asking me to justify the claims off-site, in order for the comments to be reinstated. So I shall do this here where ZDNet UK has no liability for the appearance of these sincere comments. Quoted below is my respond to Karen, in full:
Dear,
Please find below the comment posts you made on ZDNet UK that were
removed as containing allegations against specific companies that need
to be verified.
If you can provide first-hand or independent substantiation of the
allegations you make, we will be happy to consider re-instating the
comments. I have pasted the removed comments below for you as
reference.
I hope you understand why we have taken this step. When you signed up
for your account on ZDNet UK, you agreed to abide by the terms and
conditions and code of conduct on the site. This includes:
Be legal
Don’t use unlawful language (for instance, language that is libellous
or obscene) or participate in other unlawful activities in the
community – if you do, we will remove the posting without warning and
are likely to close your account. You are responsible for all the
content you post on the site, which includes making sure you don’t
break any applicable law.
Please let me know if you have any questions about why we have taken this step.
Regards,
Karen Friar
Community and news editor
Thank you for allowing me to solidify my points. I will do so inline because it seems like the most convenient form. Because of copyrights, I will quote just my own comments from your site (could not be extracted from Google cache after the deletion) and highlight/quote those parts which editors (whether ZDNet agrees with them or not I do not know) removed.
Comments listed below have been removed as they make allegations that
need substantiating:
1) Well, while we’re at it, Techrights also published leaked E-mails
from Waggener Edstrom — E-mails that very clearly show how Microsoft
coordinated with ‘reporters’ the planting (their term, not mine) of
news which was hostile towards Linux, which is why my suspicion of the
likes of Jack is not unfounded.
The evidence can be seen in the following court exhibit from the Comes vs Microsoft case. Microsoft paid to settle the case and Groklaw had grabbed a copy of the exhibit (it has the full download logs to verify authenticity)
http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/PX04081.pdf
Microsoft is not just a normal technology company, it’s more like a
marketing company. And I can’t help but feel baffled by the account
summary of http://twitter.com/zdnetuk_News because it says “All the
latest business technology news, covering security, mobile, Microsoft
and much more”.
Why is Microsoft the only brand mentioned? It’s not even the most
highly valued technology company anymore. Let’s talk about the real
issues, not about people. You’re steering the debate towards ad
hominem.
This is a question that ZDNet UK can hopefully answer. I see that in some ways the commenters addressed the question.
2) Microsoft’s Public Relations department, Waggener Edstrom, edits
Wikipedia. It’s well documented.
http://techrights.org/2008/12/05/waggener-edstrom-wikipedia/
As the above post shows (links therein), IP addressed from Waggener Edstrom are editing Microsoft-related articles in Wikipedia. Waggener Edstrom has roots in Microsoft and it is listed as the media contact at Microsoft.com. It is common knowledge to those who research Microsoft.
3) [continued]
[quote]
There was (possibly) malware on a computer owned by Spanair. That
computer was at headquarters, hundreds of miles from the plane and
crash, and was used to file maintenance reports. Its connection to the
crashed flight was that if all had gone well, a day or two *AFTER* the
crash, a maintenance report on that plane was due to be filed, and the
computer was supposed to then notice that the plane had had the same
problem three times in a short period (a problem unrelated to the
crash), and flag for further investigation. There is speculation that
this flagging would have perhaps failed due to the malware.
[/quote]
That’s beside the point. There was malware there. The context in which
I wrote this post was a claim from Microsoft Florian (the lobbyist)
that IBM was to blame for the crash — a lie which he repeated several
times.
Florian used different medium types to claim that IBM’s mainframes caused the crash. The matter of fact is, Windows-based systems were supposed to produce alerts that would have prevented the incident, but they were infected. The same thing happened in the Deepwater Horizon debacle, as reported by the New York Times last year (given testimony about blue screens of death affecting the monitoring systems).
[quote]
I’ll stop with the examples now, although I have dozens more (some
hilarious, like a fairly recent one claiming that the iPad–excuse me,
hypePad–has been a big failure commercially).
[/quote]
Got more example? Go ahead. Don’t entertain the audience with mythical
ones. SCO said it had “mountains of evidence” that Linux was a ripoff
of ‘its’ UNIX. Did it show these “mountains of evidence”?
Transcripts and record of that are at Groklaw by the way.
4) [continued]
[quote]
Next time he writes about Clinton and Gates and their “special
relationship”, he’ll cite the second article, so you’ll have to click
through twice to see original sources and find out his claim is not
supported.
[/quote]
There are many examples which you could find. Search Techrights to
find external links, too.
I gave a link to the Wall Street Journal. It helps substantiate my claim of overlap (same staff in both sides, similar agenda).
[quote]
Here’s another good example of poor research:
http://techrights.org/2011/01/12/kinect-vs-move-and-truth/. He praises
Sony for selling 4.1 million Moves in 2 months, and says it is beating
Kinect. I invite you to do the research that Roy either didn’t do, or
purposefully ignored. You’ll find Kinect did 4 million in ONE MONTH,
and by two months was at something like 8 million. (Oh, Sony’s numbers
were “sell in”, and Microsoft’s were “sell through”. The former is how
many have been pushed into the sales channel, the latter is how many
have sold to consumers. I.e., Sony’s numbers included stock sitting on
shelves).
[/quote]
Sony seems to have gamed numbers by channel-stuffing, much in the same
way that Microsoft always done (and Techrights kept good record of
that). If the Sony ‘numbers game’ fooled us, then we may have an error
there, one error in a pile of 13,000+ posts (which may make the above
nitpicking on being deceived by Sony, makers of rootkits and lawsuits
against PS3 enthusiasts).
I do not see anything specific needing a defence of my response to the anonymous person confronting me.
[quote]
A final example:
http://techrights.org/2010/08/26/aviation-and-windows-2/. He claims
the crash of a Spanair plane was caused by malware. This is an
outright lie. The crash was caused by the flaps being in an incorrect
position at takeoff, because the pilots did not go through the
preflight checklist. There was a warning system that should have
warned them of this–but it was not a computerized warning system.
[/quote]
That seems like revisionism from you. It has been well established
that malware caused it.
The crash was caused by a combination of factors, including those which failed to prevent it by alerting as they should. Aviation systems are complex beasts.
5) [...cont]
More people deserve to be aware of the shady industry which calls
itself PR and is sometimes the creation of companies which become its
clients (it is proxifying). One company which Microsoft uses (and was
created by a former Microsoft employee) brags about methods of
auto-finding critics and auto-generating blog comments from templates
in order to rapidly respond to criticism, so it’s semi-automated. If
the message cannot be shot down, the messenger gets disgraced; if
that’s not enough, this sometimes escalates to intimidation and harm
(not physical harm).
I have assembled evidence in posts which are summarised in the wiki:
http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Visible_Technologies
I should add that Microsoft employees have publicly compared me to
Unabomber, a serial killer. Those who accuse me of “libel”
conveniently take a one-side, double-standard approach. If they have
an issue with something I wrote they should speak out as we have a
good track record of correcting errors (we amended about 20 blog posts
among 13,000+). Just because someone does not like an opinion does not
make this opinion “libel”. Blogs provide opinions a lot of the time
and Techrights is carefully worded.
The abusive claims from the Microsoft employees (a technical evangelist) were posted in his blog. He is based in Asia there the laws regarding marketing vary and his name is Jonathan Wong. I reported the incident to the FTC, which replied to me with a letter.
If someone wishes to ask questions, issue a correction, and also find
out that we are amicable people can join us at the IRC channels. We
are not of the stereotype our detractors claim us to be.
NB – it appears as though the ZDNet comment component just devoured
links that I put in my previous comments, e.g. the one from Wired Mag.
———
This comment has been removed as it suggests another reader is
attacking you – if you are prepared to remove the part about ‘Beck’,
it can be reposted:
I referred to the reader’s use of the term “Glenn Schestowitz”. Yes, amending the semantics would help remove ambiguities that may otherwise seem like a non-existent allegation.
[continued]
[quote]
I challenge you to actually SERIOUSLY read Techrights for a couple of
weeks. By “seriously” I mean read each article and do a good fact
checking on it. Follow the links until you get to original sources.
Check those sources and see if (1) they actually support what
Schestowitz is citing them for, and (2) if they seem to be legitimate
sources.
[/quote]
Thanks for urging people to read it from the source rather than by
hearsay about the site.
[quote]
I guarantee that if you do this, you’ll be posting another blog entry,
retracting this one.
[/quote]
This does not seem to be the case, does it? And I’ll tell you why.
Over the years we’ve had people who entered the IRC channels only to
troll us. And you know where these people are today? They are on the
channel defending us. They defected. They realised that they have been
incited against a site which actually *does* defend their interests.
You can go ahead and try comparing me to Beck all you want, but people
who actually spend a day reading me on Twitter/Identi.ca will see a
stereotype mismatch.
————–
This comment has been removed as it is part of the series that makes
allegations that need verifying. I am happy to reinstate this on its
own if you like, but it makes little sense without the others:
I would appreciate followup questions in case something is unclear or a link is needed. I did try to embed links in my first ZDNet UK comment, but it got minced by the content management system.
[continued]
[quote]
Here’s a good example. In this article,
http://techrights.org/2010/03/17/rich-uncle-bill-explored/, he writes
about Bill Gates and Bill Clinton. They both testified before Congress
on the same day urging an increase in US spending on global health. He
also notes that there are photos of Bill Gates and Bill Clinton
sitting next to each other.
[/quote]
There is far more than that. If one follows the links and does further
digging, it will become apparent. Did you know, for example, that the
new speech writer of Bill and Melinda is Clinton’s? I wrote a lot more
about it than the above, but it takes patience to learn. I could
provide links here, but ZDNet devours links that I put with the
hypertext.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303362404575580340735524682.html
[quote]
Then, about nine months later, he writes this article:
http://techrights.org/2011/01/02/vietnam-with-proprietary-software/.
In that article, he cites the first article as showing “the special
relationship between Clinton and Gates”. Testifying on the same day in
Congress and being seen sitting next to each other is a special
relationship?
[/quote]
No. What you say is akin to claiming that just because Biden sat next
to Geffen/other on some arbitrary date we can suddenly deduce that
Biden is in Hollywood’s pocket (with copyright policy). You use an
anecdote to infer that it is an *isolated* example. It’s not.
I wish to thank Karen for her polite responses, which were nowhere as childish and rude as those from Jack Schofield, who keeps using the chilling effect to threaten opposition or at least to gently gag it (preventing it from criticising — politely — his points of view). Before Karen contacted me I had attempted to explain why it would be counter-productive to remove my comments rather than address points inside them and carry on publicly. I wrote:
Karen Friar,
I find the removal of about 7 of my comments rather insulting as they contained no obscenity and did not contain any improper material (you can unmask these comments for readers to judge). It is a form of censorship, which is why I was reluctant to comment in ZDNet to begin with, but I was polite and all my claims have verifiable sources to back them. So again, I’m very disappointed that you removed comments and then suggested that there was something unlawful in them. This is exactly the type of thing which makes Techrights necessary.
And also:
Karen,
The insinuation that discussion like this needs to be done privately is counter-productive as I don’t even have the comments you deleted (I will try Google cache). I think the action taken by the editorial team only serves to validate the original poster’s point, which is about the targeting of a messenger for merely expressing an opinion (with sources) that others may find objectionable even though it’s true. I don’t want to start a whole debate about what’s bad about censorship as there is plenty of literature about it. We take great pride in the fact that we never deleted any comments from Techrights (in over 4 years of running the site), not even those with vile language in them.
In my field of research (image analysis), if we had suppressed work which does not conform to the mainstream methods, do you know what would happen to scientific progress?
Respectfully,
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
So basically, this has been my experience participating in ZDNet UK (full thread can be found here). I won’t throw the baby out with the bathwater because the site does have some decent coverage sometimes. I was hoping for my opinions to be treated respectfully in the sense that they should not be removed; instead, they can be rebutted, even stomped upon using an adult debate which does not gag the opposition but provides counterpoints or evidence to the contrary.
It ought to be known that removing what one does not want others to see just leads to the Barbara Streisand effect. Moreover, trying to keep secret an unethical activity is always bound to backfire, as Wikileaks and Comes vs Microsoft help show. Transparency breeds trust. █
‘The author of the email, posted on ZDNet in a Talkback forum on the Microsoft antitrust trial, claimed her name was Michelle Bradley and that she had “retired” from Microsoft last week.
‘”A verbal memo [no email allowed] was passed around the MS campus encouraging MS employee’s to post to ZDNet articles like this one,” the email said.
‘”The theme is ‘Microsoft is responsible for all good things in computerdom.’ The government has no right to prevent MS from doing anything. Period. The ‘memo’ suggests we use fictional names and state and to identify ourselves as students,” the author claimed.’
–Wired Magazine
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in America, Europe, Law, Patents at 1:55 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The EPO is increasingly influenced by the agenda of large companies, not the people of Europe; the US meanwhile approves a symbolic ‘reform’
IF developers do not drive patents away, those patents will — in due time — drive developers away and replace them with pointy-haired bosses and lawyers. There is a fight for people’s brains and it’s not the sort of fight this phrase typically suggests; paper-pushers and so-called ‘knowledge workers’ wish to take intuition and common tasks away from developers, converting them into paper form with a stamp from some patent office somewhere; this weakens developers and empowers bureaucrats, including monopolists. They use law-making to gain more power at the expense of craftsmen.
In the United States, things are pretty grim and there are articles about it every day (stories like this one will continue coming all the time, amidst obvious unrest). There is something called “patent-reform bill”, but it’s a joke (like many of those jokes from Leahy at al.). It does not actually address the real problems [1, 2, 3]; it hijacks the term “reform” and makes it seem like a nip/tuck job was actually what developers sought. Here is what The Hill says (just parroting talking points from people who are not developers):
The House Judiciary Committee approved comprehensive patent-reform legislation on Thursday, sending the bill to the House floor by a vote of 32-3.
“This important legislation is long overdue. The last major patent reform was nearly 60 years ago,” said House Judiciary chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who has worked closely with Senate Judiciary chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to usher the bill through Congress.
“Since then, American inventors have helped put a man on the moon, developed cell phones and launched the Internet. But we cannot protect the technologies of today with the tools of the past.”
Over in Europe, the pseudo-industry of patent lawyers is eager to see a new loophole for unification with the USPTO (bridging litigation prospects and furthering software patents):
From the admirable Steve Peers comes good news: the European Commission’s proposals for the fate of the patent system in divided-we-stand, united-we-er-argue Europe are now available online and in English.
Terrible news. Here is the EPO celebrating “all-time high”. Of quality? Of course not. The lower they set the quality bar, the more business (patents) they get. The EPO is being hijacked by interests other than the people’s, just like in the United States. Here is a US-oriented patent lawyers’ blog echoing the EPO’s sentiments:
Number of patent applications in Europe hits all-time high
* The EPO received 235,000 European patent filings in 2010, the highest number ever in the office’s 34-year history. Over 33% of the filings came from European states, 26% from the US and 18% from Japan. EPO’s president Battistelli states that, “after a 2-year slump, the EU and US are nearly back to their levels of patenting before the crisis.” Is this a sign that the economy is improving?
Science and technology will be destroyed if lawyers and monopolists get their way. As Groklaw remarked today, “Dude, the Internet is not patented, by the choice of the inventors, which is why it is contributing to the world’s economy the way it has. Software and patents need to get a divorce. They are a tax on innovation, not an encouragement.” █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Apple, FUD, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Security, Windows at 1:32 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The more Microsoft speaks against Google, the dumber it sounds, and top-level Microsoft staff keeps jumping off the Microsoft ship
MICROSOFT has lost its marbles and it is also losing major, long-standing, and lucrative contracts. To demonstrate just how bad things are for Microsoft, there is a wave of “security” FUD from Microsoft (champion of insecure software itself) against Google. Yes, that’s right. Microsoft is singing the merits of “security”. There is a bogus controversy over the subject and the story was pushed through heavily by the mobbyists of Microsoft. Groklaw rebuts the FUD:
If you were as puzzled as I was by the blog fight, as Geekwire calls it, between Google and Microsoft over whether or not Google was FISMA certified, then you will be glad to know I gathered up some of the documents from the case, Google et al v. USA, and they cause the mists to clear. I’ll show you what I found, but here’s the funny part — it turns out it’s Microsoft whose cloud services for government aren’t FISMA certified. And yet, the Department of the Interior chose Microsoft for its email and messaging cloud solution, instead of Google’s offering even though Google today explains that in actually its offering actually is. It calls Microsoft’s FUD “irresponsible”.
The case is being heard in the United States Court of Federal Claims. Google filed what is called a bid protest. The context is that the Department of the Interior wished to procure a cloud solution to unify and streamline its email and other messaging systems “while simultaneously reducing its risk of data security breaches”.
That’s the amazing part. If it wanted to reduce the risk of data security breaches, why would it choose Microsoft?
When Google had security issues it was because of Windows and Internet Explorer. Subsequently, Google dumped Windows and instructed all employees not to use it.
Is it not hilarious that Microsoft uses “security” as a sales pitch for its Windows toys?
On the security side, nothing goes right for Microsoft these days (new record highs on the vulnerability sheet) and even though journalists refuse to call out Windows, all Google employees — including those who were hired from Microsoft* — are forced to move off Windows and into something like GNU/Linux or Mac OS X. Here is a new example of an article which fails to name the operating system affected:
U.S. authorities claimed one of their biggest victories against cyber crime as they shut down a ring they said used malicious software to take control of more than 2 million PCs around the world, and may have led to theft of more than $100 million.
A computer virus, dubbed Coreflood, infected more than 2 million PCs, enslaving them into a “botnet” that grabbed banking credentials and other sensitive data its masters used to steal funds via fraudulent banking and wire transactions, the U.S. Department of Justice said on Wednesday.
GNU/Linux and Mac OS X users need not worry. They are gradually winning the operating systems war. They rise from the bottom (phones for example) and inevitably they’ll move upwards through sub-notebooks, tablets, etc. █
____
* According to this new report, Microsoft exodus continues because “Kevin Timmons, who helped build the data centers that power Microsoft’s global cloud computing operation, has left the company and is expected to take a leadership position at Apple.”
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Antitrust, BSD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Vista 7, Windows at 1:12 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: There is a light at the end of the tunnel for desktop GNU/Linux because a new push tackles the OEM swindle
EVERYTHING is changing so fast, and very much for the better. Discrediting GNU/Linux, for example, has become a tough task. Right now more of the Linux FUD has something to do with patents because on technical merit GNU/Linux has already proven itself and its advocates rebutted disinformation which used to repeat itself, only to be challenged over and over again. Are Linux advocates needed when those who advocate it in massive numbers are Android users showing their phones to friends (the phones have it preinstalled)? Are LUGs needed? Well, that depends.
One of the areas where GNU/Linux has not found justice is the OEMs, particularly in the area of desktops and laptops. As part of the TechChoices banner we have written on this subject before (piles of material gathered over the years). We have also amassed antitrust exhibits which we arranged in our “Hardware” wiki page (confidential OEM contracts and the likes of that).
The next push which is definitely worth pursuing was alluded to by Peter Brown from the FSF when he wrote about the Web browsers ballot. He said that the Commission was addressing the wrong problem by assuming that it was acceptable for Microsoft to continue its monoculture at the operating system level. Not so much has happened since then as not many people voiced their complaints about forced sales of Windows, usually Vista 7 (although Microsoft also counts XP sales as Vista 7, in order to produce fake numbers). We recently spotted some signs that a parliament member sought to make it a subject of active discussion because André Rebentisch from the FFII wrote about it. There is a new announcement in the FFII’s Web site and it is actually a joint AFUL/FFII press release which calls people to share their operating system bundling tales with the EU. To quote:
The FFII and The FFII and AFUL ask consumers affected by operating system bundling or businesses involved in bundling to provide their evidence to the European Competition authority.
“My choice is Debian GNU/Linux”, explains FFII Vice president René Mages. “Why have I been compelled to pay and erase Windows 7 at purchase time?”
The European Commission admits it was aware of the difficulties encountered by consumers who want to purchase a PC with a non-Microsoft operating system or without any operating system at all. But they also say they lack evidence suggesting that this is the result of practices in violation of EU competition rules.
“We want to crowd source the collection of evidence”, says AFUL’s President Laurent Séguin. “If the EU finds anticompetitive agreements that foreclose competition or abuse a dominant position on the relevant market, that would be a magic bullet.”””AFUL ask consumers affected by operating system bundling or businesses involved in bundling to provide their evidence to the European Competition authority.
“My choice is Debian GNU/Linux”, explains FFII Vice president René Mages. “Why have I been compelled to pay and erase Windows 7 at purchase time?”
The European Commission admits it was aware of the difficulties encountered by consumers who want to purchase a PC with a non-Microsoft operating system or without any operating system at all. But they also say they lack evidence suggesting that this is the result of practices in violation of EU competition rules.
“We want to crowd source the collection of evidence”, says AFUL’s President Laurent Séguin. “If the EU finds anticompetitive agreements that foreclose competition or abuse a dominant position on the relevant market, that would be a magic bullet.”””
There is some great analysis from Groklaw, which carries on collecting accolades while it lasts. “This looks worth doing,” says Pamela Jones. And she continues:
FFII and AFUL would like to crowd source evidence-gathering about the difficulty for customers and OEMs in Europe trying to buy a computer or sell one without having to pay for Windows..
We have been having an IRC discussion about it and for those who are interested it is copied below. We welcome comments if people can add information to it. █
| asdfas2wefw |
http://aful.org/communiques/share-your-operating-system-bundling-tales-with-the-eu |
Apr 16 11:11 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Share your operating system bundling tales with the EU | AFUL .::. Size~: 25.46 KB |
Apr 16 11:11 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[glynmoody/@glynmoody] Leaked: Evaluation Report on EU Data Retention Directive – http://bit.ly/g2kOqS “valuable tool”: well, they would say that (v @whvholst) |
Apr 16 11:13 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Kommissionsbericht zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung « Alexander Alvaro .::. Size~: 52.66 KB |
Apr 16 11:13 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: ? does you handle stand for anything or is it just pot luck? |
Apr 16 11:14 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[glynmoody/@glynmoody] 56% of Peoples’ 1st Wikipedia Edits Are Good – http://rww.to/exKNWD #wikipedia: not dead yet #sharing #cognitivesurpus |
Apr 16 11:14 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: 56% of Peoples’ 1st Wikipedia Edits Are Good .::. Size~: 51.02 KB |
Apr 16 11:15 |
| oiaohm |
my oiaohm= Ok I am over here mate |
Apr 16 11:15 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[glynmoody/@glynmoody] New Zealand’s 3-strikes rule can go into effect in September – http://bit.ly/g0PfJX aka unseemly haste #nz #3strikes |
Apr 16 11:16 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: New Zealand’s 3-strikes rule can go into effect in September – Boing Boing .::. Size~: 42.89 KB |
Apr 16 11:16 |
| asdfas2wefw |
@oiaohm, it is pseudo random |
Apr 16 11:17 |
| asdfas2wefw |
learning IRC |
Apr 16 11:17 |
| oiaohm |
Great New Zealand has 3-strikes and Australia has posiablity of being sued for software patents. |
Apr 16 11:18 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[glynmoody/@glynmoody] Company allows GPLv3′ed Javascript libraries to be distributed as EUPL – http://bit.ly/f8DAAM unusual #licensing |
Apr 16 11:18 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Company allows GPLv3′ed Javascript libraries to be distributed as EUPL — .::. Size~: 30.83 KB |
Apr 16 11:18 |
| oiaohm |
So now both countries sux that I can stay in without any major paper work. |
Apr 16 11:18 |
| *Judas_PhD has quit (Quit: This is a quitting message) |
Apr 16 11:19 |
| schestowitz |
asdfas2wefw: hi, thanks for the links |
Apr 16 11:20 |
| schestowitz |
I already have a draft with about 4 new links on the subject |
Apr 16 11:20 |
| schestowitz |
I intend to think about how to approach the issue productively and I will most likely link to leaked OEM dealsc/contracts we have from Comes |
Apr 16 11:21 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[glynmoody/@glynmoody] RIM Said Weighing Bid to Top #Google Offer for #Nortel Patents – http://bloom.bg/gaUzs7 this could get messy #patents |
Apr 16 11:21 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: RIM Said Weighing Bid to Top Google Offer for Nortel Patents – Bloomberg .::. Size~: 55.15 KB |
Apr 16 11:21 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: something that is commonly overlooked is the crapware effect. |
Apr 16 11:21 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: Windows can cost negitive to put on a machine due to the software bundled with it. |
Apr 16 11:22 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: and there is no requirement of produces to declare this kick back. |
Apr 16 11:22 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: Its a issue against custom builders like me. People people have trouble working out why our machines cost a little more. |
Apr 16 11:25 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: Ie no crap discount. |
Apr 16 11:25 |
| asdfas2wefw |
I don’t see a barrier for the OEMs to having crapware for linux or haiku, it’s not even necessary to port it, just include WINE… |
Apr 16 11:27 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: Does not work. |
Apr 16 11:27 |
| asdfas2wefw |
?? |
Apr 16 11:28 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[ruiseabra/@ruiseabra] RT @kanarip Thoughts on Kolab and (3rd Party) Application Caching http://tinyurl.com/6en5bym |
Apr 16 11:28 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Thoughts on Kolab and (3rd Party) Application Caching | Planet Ergo .::. Size~: 18.83 KB |
Apr 16 11:28 |
| oiaohm |
crapware providers want the crap embeded in the reinstall disk or system provided to the users. |
Apr 16 11:28 |
| asdfas2wefw |
. |
Apr 16 11:28 |
| asdfas2wefw |
embedding crapware can be on Linux re-install disks, too. |
Apr 16 11:29 |
| oiaohm |
Problem you try getting a set of clean reinstall disks for windows. |
Apr 16 11:29 |
| oiaohm |
Without buying another copy of windows. |
Apr 16 11:29 |
| oiaohm |
Linux on the other hand you can just go and download a clean disk and do away with the problem. |
Apr 16 11:30 |
| MinceR |
they could use a non-gratis gnu/linux distribution :> |
Apr 16 11:31 |
| oiaohm |
I personally class what as beening done by many OEM’s as underhanded and in the same class as malware. Supported by Microsoft. |
Apr 16 11:31 |
| oiaohm |
MinceR: Redhat will send out clean disks if you point out disk has malware added. |
Apr 16 11:31 |
| oiaohm |
MinceR: Same with Suse. |
Apr 16 11:32 |
| oiaohm |
Basically its not tollerated treatment of users in the Linux world. MinceR |
Apr 16 11:32 |
| MinceR |
does the crapware author and the average user know this? :> |
Apr 16 11:32 |
| oiaohm |
Remember with Redhat and Suse you have a support contract. |
Apr 16 11:33 |
| oiaohm |
So when you have issue with crap you ring them up. |
Apr 16 11:33 |
| MinceR |
then again, the crapware author themselves could ship a modified distro :> |
Apr 16 11:33 |
| oiaohm |
Some have tried. |
Apr 16 11:33 |
| MinceR |
after all, if you can’t get a clean installer, the solution is to get a clean installer of somet other OS |
Apr 16 11:33 |
| MinceR |
s/met/me/ |
Apr 16 11:33 |
| oiaohm |
eepc classic example MinceR |
Apr 16 11:34 |
| MinceR |
for example, crapware-laden winblows substituted with fedora |
Apr 16 11:34 |
| MinceR |
they don’t sell eeepcs with gnu/linux here :/ |
Apr 16 11:34 |
| oiaohm |
clean versions appear very quicky from other sources in the open source world. |
Apr 16 11:34 |
| asdfas2wefw |
fedora could be pre-loaded with crapware, if that is necessary, using kickstart |
Apr 16 11:34 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: Problem is user can get a clean copy of fedora no trouble. |
Apr 16 11:34 |
| oiaohm |
So user complaining about issues who reinstalls with new version bingo crapware problem gone. |
Apr 16 11:35 |
| oiaohm |
so end of crapware making profit. |
Apr 16 11:35 |
| oiaohm |
Windows user on the other hand is stuck in hell. |
Apr 16 11:35 |
| asdfas2wefw |
that’s fine. the crapware obligation is only on the bundled package. |
Apr 16 11:35 |
| oiaohm |
asdfas2wefw: Problem is MS. |
Apr 16 11:35 |
| oiaohm |
If you have crapware on the bundled package. |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| asdfas2wefw |
M$ has known since the begging of Windoze that many people wipe the machines |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| oiaohm |
MS rules only person who can replace is the OEM provider who gave you the crap disks. |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| asdfas2wefw |
some put on Windoze others put on linux |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[thistleweb/@thistleweb] one step closer to a Police State every day http://is.gd/YWsJcj |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: TSA Investigates… People Who Complain About TSA – Slashdot .::. Size~: 162.2 KB |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| oiaohm |
So the only replacement will be another copy of Windows disks with crap. |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| schestowitz |
There is a proposed solution where the OEM provides images |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| oiaohm |
So crapware authers are happy. |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| schestowitz |
Like the browser ballot |
Apr 16 11:36 |
| asdfas2wefw |
http://www.inquisitr.com/22264/url-shorteners-the-herpes-of-the-web/ |
Apr 16 11:37 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: URL Shorteners – the herpes of the web .::. Size~: 31.76 KB |
Apr 16 11:37 |
| schestowitz |
You get two CDs/DVDs, you load the one of choice (or another), it copies over the image within like 10 minutes |
Apr 16 11:37 |
| oiaohm |
Also more and more you are not even getting reinstall disks. |
Apr 16 11:37 |
| oiaohm |
But just a image on the harddrive. |
Apr 16 11:37 |
| schestowitz |
I.e. install Linux, lose Windows for good |
Apr 16 11:38 |
| schestowitz |
Incentive not to install Linux |
Apr 16 11:38 |
| schestowitz |
Or go back to the shop, pay for someone to install what you already paid for anyway |
Apr 16 11:38 |
| oiaohm |
Even MS openly addmits the crapware is some of the reasons why people have bad times with Windows provided by OEMs. |
Apr 16 11:38 |
| schestowitz |
Big swindle, an MEP recently brought it up |
Apr 16 11:38 |
| oiaohm |
MS own stores don’t take altered versions. |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| oiaohm |
Until they found out no hardware maker was going to supply them. |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| MinceR |
well, of course, m$ likes to put the blame on others |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| oiaohm |
At a competitive price. |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| oiaohm |
MinceR: the blame is valid. |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| MinceR |
doesn’t matter |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| MinceR |
from their viewpoint :> |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| oiaohm |
Lot of the crapware adds background services dials home |
Apr 16 11:39 |
| schestowitz |
!google “microsoft blames” |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
[1] – Microsoft Blames Google for Poor YouTube Support on Windows Phone 7 | http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/04/01/microsoft-blames-google-for-poor-youtube-support-on-windows-phone-7/ |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
[2] – Microsoft blames Windows Phone 7 data usage issue on unnamed 3rd party | http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/01/microsoft-blames-windows-phone-7-data-usage-issue-on-unnamed-3rd-party.ars |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
[3] – Microsoft blames Apple for Outlook 2011 sync snafu – Computerworld | http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9215553/Microsoft_blames_Apple_for_Outlook_2011_sync_snafu |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
[4] – Microsoft Blames Your Laptop—Not Windows 7—For Battery Issues | http://gizmodo.com/%23!5467175/microsoft-blames-your-laptopnot-windows-7for-battery-issues |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| oiaohm |
Yet MS is doing nothing to get ride of the crapware |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| schestowitz |
It’s a marriage of convenience |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| schestowitz |
It keeps BSD and Linux away |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| oiaohm |
Because MS knows the truth. Without windows being worth negitive Linux on the machine might be provided as the cheep solution. |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| schestowitz |
Microsoft+crapware=love |
Apr 16 11:40 |
| oiaohm |
Exactly. |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| oiaohm |
While Microsoft +crapware love exists |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| schestowitz |
It’s like putting poo on more poo |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| oiaohm |
Machines without MS is going to be hard. |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| schestowitz |
Not really |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| schestowitz |
See tablets |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| oiaohm |
Heck MS Office starter is one of the crapwares. |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| schestowitz |
Imagine tablets with Norton AV *LOL* |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| MinceR |
lol |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| schestowitz |
Like you want *that* to eat your battery |
Apr 16 11:41 |
| oiaohm |
If I put MS Office starter on a machine and someone upgrades it I get a min of 50 dollars in my pocket. asdfas2wefw |
Apr 16 11:42 |
| oiaohm |
Yes that crapware is paying commission to the people who place it there as well. |
Apr 16 11:42 |
| oiaohm |
So much to place it and so much if the person upgrades it. |
Apr 16 11:42 |
| oiaohm |
No crapware or at least truthful policy on crapware would make a big difference. |
Apr 16 11:43 |
| oiaohm |
Norton AV trial is a nice kickback. |
Apr 16 11:44 |
| oiaohm |
Mind you arm chips are that many times cheaper than x86 that the negitive price of windows does not help |
Apr 16 11:45 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[clacke/@clacke] ♺ @glynmoody: Why Does The Entertainment Industry Seek To Kill Any Innovation That’s Helping It Adapt? – http://bit.ly/h9Hb58 why indeed? |
Apr 16 11:46 |
| -TRIdentica/#techrights-[thistleweb/@thistleweb] #LasVegas casinos invest their money well, like every other corp http://is.gd/luFUyc in the system, to illegally kill the competition |
Apr 16 11:46 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Why Does The Entertainment Industry Seek To Kill Any Innovation That’s Helping It Adapt? | Techdirt .::. Size~: 73.27 KB |
Apr 16 11:46 |
| TechrightsBot-tr |
Title: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted | Techdirt .::. Size~: 99.56 KB |
Apr 16 11:46 |
| schestowitz |
MinceR: actually it would |
Apr 16 11:47 |
| schestowitz |
oops, oiaohm^ |
Apr 16 11:47 |
| schestowitz |
What you said would be opposite in reality |
Apr 16 11:47 |
| schestowitz |
Negative pricing would make the discount account for more of the relative price of the hardware |
Apr 16 11:48 |
| schestowitz |
Think of $50 discount in $200 machine and same discount on $2000 machien |
Apr 16 11:48 |
| *sebsebseb has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
Apr 16 11:48 |
| oiaohm |
No MS crapware works on arm yet. |
Apr 16 11:48 |
| oiaohm |
We could see something insane with Windows 8 on arm. Machines for nothing. 100 percent crapware funded. schestowitz |
Apr 16 11:49 |
| schestowitz |
google does the same, at least in plan |
Apr 16 11:50 |
| MinceR |
so you can get them at no cost and install a real OS on them :> |
Apr 16 11:50 |
| schestowitz |
But can’t be totally free |
Apr 16 11:50 |
| schestowitz |
Otherwise people would buy and wipe, it’s like the razor model |
Apr 16 11:50 |
| schestowitz |
Norton: we view our software as though it’s an OS. We just need to wrap it ’round something to boot up the system and demand the user to pay us using scary dialogues :- |
Apr 16 11:51 |
| schestowitz |
MAFIAA: the OS is a “content delivery” tool |
Apr 16 11:52 |
| schestowitz |
OEM: the OS is a kickback opportunity |
Apr 16 11:52 |
| schestowitz |
Linux: the OS is the heart of a system |
Apr 16 11:52 |
| oiaohm |
schestowitz: yep youview. schestowitz |
Apr 16 11:52 |
| oiaohm |
youview idea is basically content delivery tool model. |
Apr 16 11:53 |
| schestowitz |
BSD: the OS is like a prick to wave about |
Apr 16 11:53 |
| oiaohm |
Problem is linux is now starting to get its crapware models. |
Apr 16 11:53 |
| schestowitz |
Microsoft: the OS is a recipe for world domination, kickstarting Bill’s bank account before he does some *real* work towards world domination |
Apr 16 11:53 |
| schestowitz |
Apple: the OS does not exist. Buy a Mac. Please. No, not please. NOW! |
Apr 16 11:53 |
| oiaohm |
Linux world we don’t care who you are. |
Apr 16 11:54 |
| oiaohm |
As long as you use Linux come and join us. |
Apr 16 11:54 |
| oiaohm |
Now that does bring some problems. |
Apr 16 11:54 |
| oiaohm |
Great TPM system combin with items like youview |
Apr 16 11:54 |
| oiaohm |
The device might be open source core but there might be no way in hell ever to alter it. |
Apr 16 11:55 |
| oiaohm |
Or get anything out of it. |
Apr 16 11:55 |
| cubezzz |
hmmm, very succinct |
Apr 16 11:57 |
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Site News at 2:59 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Comments thread about Techrights reveals familiar pattern
I DO not think I’ve commented in another site for at least a year, following this change in habit which was a result of people posting under my name, falsely of course. It was Groklaw which taught me never to comment in other sites if there are people pretending to do the same (under the same name) as that would legitimise the fake comments and cause a lot of harm. Pamela Jones (PJ) once taught me that if I prepare to post a comment in another site, then it needs to be announced somewhere where identity can be validated (e.g. in Groklaw in the case of PJ). I thank her for the lesson and I also ought to acknowledge that the comment just added to this piece (in light of concern about the messenger, apexwm, being hackled for merely defending another messenger).
This is a pattern I’ve been seeing for years and some people in IRC alluded to as well. They sometimes observe people who link to Techrights and end up being cursed for it by some anonymous commenters, sometimes by Novell employees and others to whom Techrights is an inconvenient perspective. Please don’t be discouraged and do challenge those people who try to blacklist Techrights. The same tricks were attempted against Groklaw and PJ wrote about it several times.
In any case, I’ve created a ZDNet and responded to apexwm (whom I never spoke to before). The comment which I put together very quickly says:
I never comment in other people’s blogs because some people forge me in them (calling other people “Nazi” and cursing myself), but I’ve just created an account just to thank you for a good post that I never expected (in fact, people rarely bother to defend defamed sources, so I appreciate it).
Do not be discouraged by people who try to derail your blog and be aware of this article from Wired Magazine. It says: “The author of the email, posted on ZDNet in a Talkback forum on the Microsoft antitrust trial, claimed her name was Michelle Bradley and that she had “retired” from Microsoft last week.
“”A verbal memo [no email allowed] was passed around the MS campus encouraging MS employee’s to post to ZDNet articles like this one,” the email said.
“”The theme is ‘Microsoft is responsible for all good things in computerdom.’ The government has no right to prevent MS from doing anything. Period. The ‘memo’ suggests we use fictional names and state and to identify ourselves as students,” the author claimed.”
In Techrights’ wiki I have a section dedicated Microsoft PR agencies I’ve been researching and given concrete examples on. Microsoft is outsourcing what Gates calls “evangelisation” because this way it can blame those “rogue” companies when they get caught. It’s a cultural thing and the Gates Foundation also spends over $1 per day on this “evangelisation” (planting praise in the press). Sad, but true.
Thanks again for explaining to people not just what people associated with Microsoft (including masked employees who later on turned out to be Microsoft TEs) did to me but also what they do to people like PJ at Groklaw. See PJ’s article about how Groklaw was almost driven into closure 7 years ago. It’s often done through intimidation and I saw it first hand. This includes campaigns to get critics fired.
More people deserve to be aware of the shady industry which calls itself PR and is sometimes the creation of companies which become its clients (it is proxifying). One company which Microsoft uses (and was created by a former Microsoft employee) brags about methods of auto-finding critics and auto-generating blog comments from templates in order to rapidly respond to criticism, so it’s semi-automated. If the message cannot be shot down, the messenger gets disgraced; if that’s not enough, this sometimes escalates to intimidation and harm (not physical harm).
I should add that Microsoft employees have publicly compared me to Unabomber, a serial killer. Those who accuse me of “libel” conveniently take a one-side, double-standard approach. If they have an issue with something I wrote they should speak out as we have a good track record of correcting errors (we amended about 20 blog posts among 13,000+). Just because someone does not like an opinion does not make this opinion “libel”. Blogs provide opinions a lot of the time and Techrights is carefully worded.
If someone wishes to ask questions, issue a correction, and also find out that we are amicable people can join us at the IRC channels. We are not of the stereotype our detractors claim us to be.
NB – it appears as though the ZDNet comment component just devoured links that I put in my previous comments, e.g. the one from Wired Mag.
As expected, getting involved in the comment only fueled some of the poisonous people, who under an anonymous nym, randomprogrammer for example, posted insults I’ve seen before (maybe reused). The even funnier thing is Microsoft Jack’s hypocritical responses to it. He tries getting the editor involved, too, because he cannot get his way and he chats quite a lot again with Microsoft Florian. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Content is available under CC-BY-SA