Summary: Another show with Gordon Sinclair may be the first among many where he is a regular
THIS is our ninth episode. Gordon, Tim, and Roy speak about news from the past two days (everything that matters since the previous show). This show mostly focuses on GNU/Linux, it hardly mentions Apple at all, and Microsoft is secondary at best. Tim’s site, OpenBytes, will soon publish some show notes (we put the audio out there as soon as possible while the news covered is still fresh). We have finally found a way to structure the show such that it covers everything which needs to be covered rather exhaustively.
Today’s show ends with “A Violent Yet Flammable World” by Au Revoir Simone (published in SXSW 2009 Showcasing Artists). We hope you will join us for future shows and spread the word if you enjoy this show. Also consider subscribing to the show via the RSS feed. If you have an Identi.ca account, consider subscribing to TechBytes in order to keep up to date. █
During the discussion of criticisms of Jono Bacon’s “Open Respect” efforts, I couldn’t help but notice a rather striking incongruity between one side being characterized as “the Fedora people”, “the Fedora community”, “certain people in Fedora”, “Fedora is the vocal proponents of this whole protest”; while the other is presented as “people are individuals”, “people are not their jobs”, “something that Jono has taken up as a personal project”, and “it’s not Canonical, it’s him”. How does one reconcile the defense of a person based on his individuality and independence of action while at the same time disparaging others as collectively indistinct from their own project affiliations?
I’m always opposing this habit of people doing things which they say are independent from their paymaster. For example, an ACCESS troll (who now admits in his blog also being a “patent troll”) was attacking his paymaster’s threats outside work hours. There are also examples from other companies like Microsoft ISVs. If someone makes a payment, the context of any action does not matter much; it’s the vested interests. Politics and revolving doors present the same conflicts.
I apologise if I made that sound like a Fedora issue; I phrased it poorly without preparation. I could sense at the time that I said some foolish things in this episode.
Centralised or federated censorship/filtering platforms (also known as "social [control] media" [sic]) aren't the way forward; we're therefore a little surprised that Linux Weekly News (LWN) bothers with that languishing bandwagon all of a sudden
António Campinos is lying to his staff and losing his temper when challenged about it; Like Benoît Battistelli, who ‘fixed’ this job for his banker buddy (despite a clear lack of qualifications and relevant experience), he’s just robbing the EPO’s staff (even pensioners!) and scrubbing the EPC for ill-gotten money, which is in turn illegally funneled into financialization schemes
While the EPO‘s António Campinos incites people (and politicians) to break the law he’s also attacking, robbing, and lying to his own staff; thankfully, his staff isn’t gullible enough and some MEPs are sympathetic; soon to follow is a video and publication about the EPO’s systematic plunder (ETA midnight GMT)
epo.org has been turned into a non-stop propaganda machine of Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos because the EPO routinely breaks the law; it’s rather tasteless that while Ukrainians are dying the EPO’s mob exploits Ukraine for PR purposes
António Campinos persists in attention-shifting dross and photo ops; none of that can change the verifiable facts about the EPO’s connections to Lukashenko’s 'science park' in Minsk
What became known as the so-called ‘Leenode’ is a cautionary tale, but maybe it is also a blessing in disguise because IRC as a whole seem to have become a lot more decentralised (as everything should be)
Earlier today SUEPO mentioned this new article demonstrating that EPO President António Campinos can very obviously and blatantly violate the Code of Conduct of the Office without facing any consequences; there are translations too, so the report is now available in four languages
saulgoode said,
November 18, 2010 at 2:34 am
During the discussion of criticisms of Jono Bacon’s “Open Respect” efforts, I couldn’t help but notice a rather striking incongruity between one side being characterized as “the Fedora people”, “the Fedora community”, “certain people in Fedora”, “Fedora is the vocal proponents of this whole protest”; while the other is presented as “people are individuals”, “people are not their jobs”, “something that Jono has taken up as a personal project”, and “it’s not Canonical, it’s him”. How does one reconcile the defense of a person based on his individuality and independence of action while at the same time disparaging others as collectively indistinct from their own project affiliations?
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
November 18th, 2010 at 7:30 am
I’m always opposing this habit of people doing things which they say are independent from their paymaster. For example, an ACCESS troll (who now admits in his blog also being a “patent troll”) was attacking his paymaster’s threats outside work hours. There are also examples from other companies like Microsoft ISVs. If someone makes a payment, the context of any action does not matter much; it’s the vested interests. Politics and revolving doors present the same conflicts.
I apologise if I made that sound like a Fedora issue; I phrased it poorly without preparation. I could sense at the time that I said some foolish things in this episode.