05.11.11

Links 11/5/2011: Linux 2.6.39 is Coming, Skypocalypse Analyses

Posted in News Roundup at 1:29 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Clip of the Day

Introducing Music Beta by Google

Credit: TinyOgg

Permalink 2 Comments      Send this to a friend

ES: El Software Propietario Contra los Derechos Civiles

Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Windows at 8:14 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Co-autor con G. Forbes

(ODF | PDF | English/original)

Resumen: ¿Cómo Windows se utiliza para suprimir los activistas?

Nosotros, en Techrights desde hace mucho tiempo hemos recomendado en contra del uso de Windows por los activistas y organizaciones progresistas como Greenpeace. Aunque idealmente Windows debe ser mal visto por todos, porque es especialmente peligroso para este propósito, donde él activista y/u organización pueden ser objetivo potencial de una interferencia política/empresarial. La NSA (Agencia de Seguridad Nacional) quiere que te deshagas de Windows XP[http://www.neowin.net/news/the-nsa-wants-you-to-drop-windows-xp]. “¿Tiene la NSA una puerta trasera secreta en el Nuevo Standard de Encryption[http://www.schneier.com/essay-198.html]” (tal vez sólo cierto en parte)? “Microsoft niega que Windows 7 tenga una NSA (Agencia de Seguridad Nacional) puerta trasera[http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-7-nsa-backdoor,9130.html]“, dijo un artículo después de una reciente tormenta en toda la Web, basada en que las pruebas habían sido fabricados por lo que es falso. Pero tenemos evidencia que sugieren lo contrario[http://techrights.org/2008/04/30/binary-bridges-and-security/]. La NSA no quiere que la gente utilice sistemas en los que se puede auditar el código[http://www.techeye.net/software/nsa-says-no-to-linux-in-best-practice-advisory]. Lo que al parecer, hace que sea muy seguro, incluso para las agencias secretas puedan crear puertas traseras sin ser descubiertos.

En la última ronda de las preocupaciones especulativas se convierta en realidad, una empresa británica, Gamma, se ve violando la ley[http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00002114.html] al igual que la BBC. Cuando la BBC acumulado ordenadores que forman parte de una botnet, e incluso utiliza el dinero de los contribuyentes para pagar bandas de ciber-criminales, lo que demostró que también era inmune a la ley, por razones misteriosas [1[http://techrights.org/2009/05/21/the-msbbc-wants-windows-botnets/], 2[http://techrights.org/2009/03/19/bbc-windows-botnets-fiasco/], 3[http://techrights.org/2009/03/14/bbc-zombie-pc-crimes-conficker/]].

Hay disturbios en Egipto, Túnez, Libia, Bahrein y otros lugares en el mundo árabe.

Hace dos días, los manifestantes en Nasr, Egipto se hizo cargo de la sede de la Seguridad del Estado egipcio.

Dentro de la sede, los manifestantes accedieron a las cargas de los documentos confidenciales del Estado.

Ahora, considere este artículo titulado[http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/apr/28/egypt-spying-software-gamma-finfisher] “Empresa británica ofrece el software de espionaje para el régimen egipcio – documentos”

Una empresa británica ofrece a vender un programa para los servicios de seguridad egipcios que los expertos dicen que podrían infectar a las computadoras, hackear en el correo electrónico basado en web y herramientas de comunicación como Skype e incluso tomar el control de los sistemas de otros grupos en forma remota, de acuerdo a los documentos vistos por The Guardian .

Dos activistas de derechos humanos egipcios que se encuentran los documentos en medio de cientos de porras y equipos de tortura cuando irrumpieron en la sede del servicio de Estado del régimen de Investigaciones de la Seguridad (SSI) el mes pasado.

Al igual que la BBC, parece estar infringiendo la ley y salirse con la suya[http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/345163-Legal-Advice-needed-U.K.-company-supplying-spyware-to-Egyptian-State-Security]:

Se trata de un directo de C&P desde mi puesto en el subproceso de Egipto, estoy esperando que algunas de las formas jurídicas que frecuentan urbana puede ser capaz de dar una idea o consejo:

La última lata de gusanos para ser desenterrado de Seguridad del Estado es una compra aparente de un malware/troyano/suite de software espía de una filial británica de una empresa alemana.

Este es un problema de Windows.

Como un blog de seguridad dijo[http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/report-uk-firm-offered-custom-malware-egyptian-security-services-042611], “documentos hechos públicos por la inestabilidad política en Egipto en los últimos meses ha sacado a luz el oscuro mundo con fines de lucro, de la creación de malware a medida para los gobiernos de todo el mundo.”

“La empresa contra malware F-Secure llamo la atención a los documentos descubiertos por los egipcios que protestaron en marzo. Lo que incluía una propuesta para vender un producto llamado “Finfisher” para el régimen de Mubarak.”

No hace mucho tiempo activistas rusos fueron arrestados, usando la licencia de Windows como excusa [1[http://techrights.org/2010/10/18/rewriting-history-about-dissent/], 2[http://techrights.org/2011/02/17/gulagware/]]. ¿Cuándo las personas aprenderán que el activismo y Windows son incompatibles? █

Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the esteemed administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

ES: El Huffington Post Ayuda a Menospreciar Android Usando Falsedades

Posted in FUD, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft at 8:08 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

(ODF | PDF | English/original)

Resumen: El abogado contratado previamente por Microsoft, Edward J. Naughton, encuentra una nueva plataforma en la que pinta a Android como una falta de respeto a los derechos de autor, mientras que Microsoft sigue demandando Android en materia de patentes y el ‘Gavilán de patentes’ pierde una.

Un Groklaw y regular Techrights, Wayne Boreal. Recientemente se ha convertido en un colaborador habitual en Semi Accurate, que es un excelente sitio web. Él todavía está frente a la “guerra de patentes[http://semiaccurate.com/2011/05/09/patent-wars-oracle-v-google-part-2/]“, como él la llama en contra de Google. Los escritores en Semi Accurate tienden a favorecer a GNU/Linux, que el establecimiento – Incluidos el Huff y Puff [1[http://techrights.org/2010/01/24/microsoft-employees-at-huffington/], 2[http://techrights.org/2010/03/15/huffington-causecast-and-gates/], 3[http://techrights.org/2010/01/23/gates-subverts-politics-and-huffington/]] – tiende a mirar con recelo y desconfianza. El tabloide americano Huff y Puff (también conocido como The Huffington Post, ahora propiedad de America Online) sigue mostrando que la precisión no importa allí[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edward-j-naughton/googles-android-closing-t_b_857728.html]. Es como Fox para los liberales, todo acerca de las calificaciones. Como Groklaw lo puso el otro día, “The Huffington Post publica de nuevo “afirmaciones” desacreditado a Android”. Para citar la queja en su totalidad:

Bueno, esto es vergonzoso para el Huffington Post. Han reeditado un artículo del abogado vinculado a Microsoft, Edward J. Naughton quien a partir de marzo, presentó reclamaciones de que Google había violado la GPL (Licencia Pública General) con Android. Esto fue desmentido totalmente por Brian Proffitt aquí. Brian preguntó Torvalds sobre el asunto, y Linus dijo lo siguiente:

“Me parece totalmente falso. Siempre hemos dejado muy claro que las interfaces del kernel del sistema llamada no son en modo alguno en una obra derivada de acuerdo con la GPL, y los detalles del kernel (núcleo) se exportan a través de las cabeceras del núcleo de todas las interfaces de glibc normal también ….

“Por supuesto, tenemos nuestra propia “interna” encabezados también, y tenemos cosas que está destinado a ser relevante sólo para el núcleo. Pero no tendría ningún sentido para Google para poder utilizar incluso aquellos, ya que no sirven para nada fuera del núcleo, así que no veo lo que todo el alboroto que se trata. Excepto si se trata de alguien por motivos políticos (o motivada por alguna necesidad de atención) “, continuó.”

Otros, incluyéndome a mí, señaló que Naughton parecía estar tratando de ocultar su asociación con Microsoft. En definitiva, yo diría que Huffington Post probablemente debería contratar a más editores.

Google ha sido objeto de muchos ataques legales recientemente – los ataques que tratan de retratar a Android como “ilegal” o por lo menos “travieso”. Google está tratando de comprar patentes o incluso construir una piscina -de patentes- para hacer frente a eso[http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5gKaMPt6S6JlNuFSukR6zhqk7qCsQ?docId=6801887]. “El fabricante de BlackBerry, Research In Motion (TSX: RIM) podría entrar en la licitación para el resto de las patentes inalámbricas de Nortel”, dice la prensa canadiense, “por sí mismo o como parte de un consorcio que intenta arrebatar el premio de Google, un experto en patentes dijo el lunes. ”

Aquí es nueva imagen de la firma Bloomberg de empresas de Linux[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-09/smeia-red-hat-google-adidas-pepsico-intellectual-property.html] (que rara vez cubre) en un artículo cargado/amunicionado del término “propiedad intelectual”. Tienen muchos artículos como éste, que contienen el término de la Propiedad Intelectual en el titular. “Red Hat, Google, Adidas, Pepsi: Propiedad Intelectual,” se dice en el título y la parte pertinente dice:

Jefe de Red Hat dice que la empresa paga a veces en lugar de luchar.

Red Hat Inc. (RHT) ‘s director general James M. Whitehurst, dijo a Network World que su empresa con sede en Raleigh, Carolina del Norte, en ocasiones llega a acuerdo con los trolls de patentes, ya que no vale la pena el gasto para luchar contra demandas de patentes que puede ser inválidas.

Whitehurst dijo que algunos casos de patentes de software presentada en el Distrito Este de Texas vienen antes jurados que no tienen “conocimientos técnicos” y son tan complicadas que ni siquiera él, con un título en ciencias de la computación, los encuentra muy por encima de su cabeza, de acuerdo con la Network World.

Whitehurst, un opositor de las patentes de software, dijo a la Network World que las patentes evitan que las empresas se muevan en algunas áreas de la tecnología porque están temerosos de las tasas judiciales y de concesión de licencias.

Algunas solicitudes de patentes que la compañía ha enfrentado son “ridículas”, la mera cobertura de algo que aparece en las páginas web comunes, la Network World informó lo que Whitehurst dijo.

Whitehurst se quejaba también de los trolls que tenían conexiones con Microsoft.

“El Gavilán de Patentes”/Odom, quien solía trabajar para Microsoft[http://techrights.org/2008/12/04/ms-employment-patent-hawk/], acaba de tener una patente invalidada[http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2011/05/odoms-patent-confirmed-invalid-by-federal-circuit.html].

Gary Odom dirige su propia firma de búsqueda de patentes, así como su propio blog ley de patentes – el Prospector de patentes- en que presta comentarios picantes sobre derecho de patentes y la práctica. Odom también es titular de una patente. Su patente No. 7.363.592 se dirige hacia una modificación de la “barra de herramientas” y “grupos de herramientas” que son aspectos familiares de la mayoría de pantallas de ordenador de software.

Las patentes son un verdadero problema para GNU y Linux, y debemos luchar para poner fin a las patentes de software. Todos ellas deben ser invalidadas y puestas en el cesto de basura. █

Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the esteemed administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

IRC Proceedings: May 10th, 2011

Posted in IRC Logs at 4:05 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Enter the IRC channels now

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

Jack Schofield Accused of “Lack of Professionalism” for Daemonising Mono Sceptics

Posted in Microsoft, Mono at 3:45 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: How the news about Mono gets distorted by Microsoft zealots, whereas some blogs are willing to acknowledge that the biggest loser in Monocalypse is actually Microsoft

TECHRIGHTS has published many short posts about the layoffs, e.g. this one. There is a lot of coverage out there [1, 2, 3, 4] and none celebrates this news. The Mono boosters lie about Techrights celebrating the layoffs, but it’s merely part of the attempt to daemonise Techrights and distance people from the site. We do not like the layoffs as they are sometimes harmful to everyone. We know the workers will have an opportunity to do well and some are going to find jobs elsewhere despite the “tough time”. Senior and former staff is doing well based on recent appointments in other companies, even in Diebold. Well, they no longer need to serve the Novell interest, which got mingled with Microsoft’s and stayed that way for almost 5 years. Novell used to be a great company. IDG’s Dave Kearns wrote about Novell’s Craig: ‘Craig was one of the first employees of Novell Systems in the early 1980s, being named VP of marketing in 1984. In his book “Surfing the High Tech Wave,” Roger White says of Burton: “Craig proved an exceptionally good planner and articulate spokesman for the open systems marketing and technology approach.” White credits Burton and his future wife, Judith Clarke, with creating the powerhouse that Novell was in the late 1980s.’

“White credits Burton and his future wife, Judith Clarke, with creating the powerhouse that Novell was in the late 1980s”
      –Dave KearnsOur problem is Novell’s management, which did deserve to be fired. And there is no need to cry for it, either. These people are still paid massive benefits, even when their staff is laid off massively.

Those who misrepresent/misinterpret this site’s view often use the words of people who merely read or link to the site, pretending that it somehow constitutes the site’s stance. It does not. The Mono lobby is lying and distorting the truth. Microsoft Jack (SCOfield) has been using the same sort of tactics for a long while, and not just against Techrights, either. He uses his position to daemonise other Microsoft critics, too. We are going to show some of his latest deeds in just a moment because his disgusting, rude, filthy personal attacks on me (that link quite knowingly to libellous USENET posts with my name in them) deserve this response. Microsoft Jack is to journalism what Monckton is to climate science.

For those who wish to cut to the chase, watch this borderline PR (masquerading as objective news) from Microsoft Jack, a longtime pro-Microsoft zealot. He covers Linux issues only when he has something negative to say, just like Microsoft Florian (whom he speaks to). He also badmouths Android, obviously. It was only yesterday that we wrote about groups or people masquerading as rights group when in fact they are attack dogs looking for companies to hire them to attack competitors. They prey on corruptible reporters.

So anyway, what is it about Microsoft Jack’s latest? Well, for starters, he tries to describe people whom he disagrees with as “Microsoft haters” and this time too he does this by typing: “This effort, which should make Linux more attractive to businesses, has led to some hostility, particularly from the Microsoft-hating faction of the free software movement.” Jack’s boogeyman is “Microsoft haters”.

The first comment rebuts this as follows:

I have to find your lack of professionalism rather appalling.

Rather than take the technical reasons why Mono is not a good idea for free software, you choose to reduce it to a tabloid style ‘haters will hate’ blurb.

Laziness both physical and intellectual can ruin even the best of plans.
They also take away any credibility you might have.

There are scores of very well known free software developers as well as activiists like Eben Moglen (who is called all kinds of names by mono proponents who you seem to emulate) who dont agree with including a non-free infrastructure from both technical and legal reasons, not too mention ethical ones as well.

Of course, Ive followed the attacks on people like Simon Phipps by Mono proponents who dare to even suggest that Mono isnt a good idea. Phipps who is extremely well respected compared it like talking about Scientology.
They too see ‘haters will hate’ as some kind of excuse.

When it comes to the Novell/Mono group against people like Jeremy Allison, Phipps, Perens, Moglen and others who are all gentlemen who keep the discourse polite, I will go with the first group every single time.

You could take a lesson from writers like Glyn Moody and try to inform your readers rather than cheeky soundbytes.
Maybe then you could gain some respect like Moody has.

The Mono booster who created an account just to attack me in that site at one time (going by the name “TheKernel”, ironically enough) soon appears at the scene to do some PR for Mono (comment #2). How typical. For background see [1, 2]. Well, in the remainder of the comments it’s just amicable chat between Jack Schofield and the anonymous Mono booster who created a puppet account just to smear me and defend Mono when ZDNet wrote about me.

“I personally used to have ‘don’t worry, be happy’ approach to Mono, but since the recent patent litigation explosion, I’ve become a lot more cynical regarding the project.”
      –Thom HolwerdaNow, one might say that Jack’s coverage is defensible. But then, how come he is the only one doing this? Compare that to Neil from IDG. He put it more professionally and he gives validity to Mono critics by writing: “Some will say good riddance. The specter of Microsoft has always haunted Mono, particularly among those zealots who consider any technology from Redmond to be anathema to the open source movement. They fear Microsoft will wait until the Mono platform is mature enough, then subvert it by asserting hitherto-undisclosed patent claims, leaving anyone who developed applications using Mono in a lurch (and presumably, beholden to Microsoft).”

Moreover, due to the issues explained by the FSF, this is a popular opinion. And even a Microsoft apologist like Thom Holwerda, who among other things remarked on SUSE, had this to say about the Monocalypse: “Mono, of course, has always been a controversial project. It implements several technologies patented by Microsoft, and as such, has been shunned by many Linux distributions. I personally used to have ‘don’t worry, be happy’ approach to Mono, but since the recent patent litigation explosion, I’ve become a lot more cynical regarding the project. It would be understandable if Attachmate wanted to kill their involvement with Mono out of fear of possible patent litigation, but it would seem that isn’t the case at this point.”

Other Microsoft boosters covered the news without mocking Mono’s critics, either. It’s just Jack and his zeal. It’s nothing new. Here is yet another example among many that we have accumulated [1, 2, 3]. It is possible to be objective if one describes himself or herself as a real journalist and as this one site correctly put it, “Mono is now important to Microsoft as a way of ensuring that .NET is cross-platform at no cost to it.”

Yes, and this is why Mono is not liked by some people, understandably. There are other fake ‘reporters’ whom we know are being handed material to "plant" for Microsoft (and attack Linux). One of them, a notable member of he SCO/Microsoft fan club, covered the news with the headline “Attachmate Guts Novell”.

In other pro-Microsoft circles, apart from some Novell takeover coverage [1, 2] there is some fair coverage as Ravi Mandalia correctly states: “If the report is to be believed, it is indeed a major setback, if not devastating for Microsoft, as well as for the whole of the .NET community.”

Yes, Microsoft will suffer from the Monocalypse. GNU/Linux can triumph. GNU/Linux does not need cheap copies of Microsoft's patented APIs. It’s all about API domination, which is what Microsoft spent billions on yesterday (Skype).

Mono is not totally dead yet. Mono’s legacy includes Pinta, a pastime project of a Novell employee. Without Novell’s financial support the interest will hopefully be lost. Meanwhile, the Microsoft/Mono boosters are trying to poison Android and Ubuntu. There is news like this with others joining in to promote Mono in Android:

Resco is announcing the awaited release of Android edition for MobileForms Toolkit 2011, shortly after the official release of Novell’s MonoDroid.

Well, a site that promotes a lot of .NET weighs in by stating: “The third aspect of Mono is the mobile tools line, another commercial venture. Here we find the most angst amongst the general community. Developers are increasing turning to MonoTouch and Mono for Android as an alternative to completely rewriting their applications for each type of mobile device. Unlike enterprise developers who can continue to use the free/open source version of Mono or move back to .NET, mobile device developers are betting heavily on this technology and if the platform is abandoned they face a major rewrite.”

It is premature to celebrate the end of Mono, but this will probably happen unless Microsoft or one of its partners rescues the project (which might in fact happen). Mono is about spreading .NET, not about Open Source. The “Open Source” part is just a marketing proposition. █

Permalink 3 Comments      Send this to a friend

News Reporters Bribed to Spread Google FUD

Posted in Apple, FUD, Google, Microsoft at 2:42 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Rivals of Google and probably Microsoft use PR agencies to spread propaganda through television and the Internet (shown above is a Korean leaflet bomb)

‘Reporter’ Jim Goldman (CNBC) has praised Microsoft for several years and got access to Microsoft’s CEO for it. I wrote about this several time. Jim Goldman was a total phony who did more Microsoft promotion than actual reporting and Henry Blodget says that he has has been busted for “Spreading Lies About Google For Unnamed PR Client” (Blodget names Burson-Marsteller, which we exposed last night). This is some nuclear stuff given the smear campaign that we know Microsoft has been engaging in, not to mention Goldman’s poor coverage over the years. He was a Microsoft booster. Was he paid for the bias?

USA Today reports the latest chapter in big-PR sleaze, this time involving former CNBC tech correspondent Jim Goldman, who is now a PR rep at Burson Marsteller.

According to USA Today reporters Jon Swartz and Byron Acohido, Goldman tried to pitch USA Today on a story about scandalous Google privacy violations in a Google product called “Social Circle.” When Swartz and Acohido looked into the story, however, they found that many of Goldman’s claims were untrue.

[...]

Goldman was apparently working this anti-Google “whisper campaign” in partnership with another Burson Marsteller executive, former political columnist John Mercurio. Last week, Mercurio wrote a long email to a blogger trying to persuade him to write an Op-Ed about the same alleged Google privacy violations. Mercurio offered to help the blogger, Chris Soghoian, place the story in the Washington Post, Politico, The Hill, Roll Call, or the Huffington Post–all read in Washington DC, where the government crackdown on Google is proceeding. (Soghoian posted Mercurio’s email here.)

Blodget loves to blame Apple, but Apple has no history launching such smear campaigns against Google. Groklaw accused Blodget of trying to harm Apple using false rumours. USA Today, which is the source of the above article, probably did not point a finger that way. The party which bribed Goldman was most likely middleman for Microsoft. Microsoft habitually uses PR agencies in this way to move away liability. █

Permalink A Single Comment      Send this to a friend