05.11.21

The FSF Needs to Reject OSI (and Open Source) Along With Much-Needed Rejection of the GNOME Foundation (Not the Same as the GNOME Project)

Posted in FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, OSI at 5:15 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link

Summary: Response to a good little speech (unscripted apparently) by Geoffrey Knauth, who explained his position on Open Source about a year ago

THE current FSF president is a good guy. Geoffrey Knauth is a good and welcoming speaker (reminiscent of Peter T. Brown). But since his talk that I saw this morning a lot has happened in the OSI and it merits a discussion.

“Their petition backfired so badly that all they do with it right now is remove signatures.”The above started as a spontaneous response to this video of Geoffrey Knauth (from last year). Here it is for context:

Video download link

“A lot of those conferences are run by women… and we really have no conflicts,” he notes. A lot of what he says makes perfect sense and I agree entirely. What Knauth says about “Open Source” (around 9:00 onwards) I may have agreed on a year ago, but a lot has changed since then. The video explains what and why… I show this blog post from the OSI and explain the situation with the GNOME Foundation, where most chiefs proceed to sellout, becoming Microsoft employees. The GNOME Foundation is extremely problematic (it has tried to cancel RMS for over a decade), but so is the OSI. And by extension the “Open Source” brand…

Berlin scenesThe problematic blog post from the OSI was the start of something; a month and a half later the OSI (with zero full-time and permanent staff; it's defunct and cannot even organise an election) took/chose a key role in attacking the person who had most stubbornly protected the mission statement, initiating this attack based on complete nonsense including distortion of some very old stances. They just waited for an opportunity to pounce and then attack the FSF, collectively. Yes, they sought collective punishment, too.

It gets worse.

Well, they (Bully de Blanc and the Interim GM of OSI, a former IBM et al stooge) have been concurrently attacking software freedom even before the 'cancel mob' was assembled with support from biased and subjective media, based on almost nothing at all (just a little announcement about a return to some board, not even leadership, which Geoffrey Knauth maintains). Their petition backfired so badly that all they do with it right now is remove signatures. Karma still works, doesn’t it?

05.08.21

Pro-Software Freedom Advocates and Free/Libre Software Supporters Face Barriers Due to Domination of Communication Channels (Beyond the Media)

Posted in Debian, Free/Libre Software, GNOME, GNU/Linux at 9:08 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Safety… for the monopolies and for those in power

Censorship censored
The thing about censorship is, it’s hard to see the censorship (because it’s censored)

Summary: A carefully-checked assessment of an overlooked aspect surrounding the 'cancel mob', which incites and brainwashes people based on lies; there’s an attempt to control channels of communication (e.g. Open and Free Technology Community and Freenode) and to generally suppress people who support the founder of GNU/Linux

As we’ve just noted, foes of Free software sponsor and thus control a lot of the mainstream/corporate/mass media, including so-called ‘tech’ media where people like Dr. Richard Stallman are proudly defamed.

In social control media giants (like Twitter and Facebook), there’s a similar problem. They get to occlude or omit certain messages or messengers. Some get banned. Some get shadowbanned or throttled. This can easily distort public perception.

This morning an associate sent us a pointer to this new video about Twitter, noting that “journalists [are] getting warped perspective via Twitter…”

All they see is the cancel mob and the slander. Facts aren’t checked and truth isn’t being rewarded; it’s about emotion and corporate agenda, where some of the voices are literally sponsored (or salaried) by monopolies.

“Facts aren’t checked and truth isn’t being rewarded; it’s about emotion and corporate agenda, where some of the voices are literally sponsored (or salaried) by monopolies.”But it goes even beyond the mainstream media and social control media. Someone recently told us about Open and Free Technology Community (OFTC) and even Freenode, which Techrights has used for many years. So does the GNU Project, the FSF and many others.

To the people named or mentioned in this article the identity of the source may be easy to guess. To the casual reader, however, it won’t be obvious and it probably does not matter, either. The concern here is that voices are being removed (or censored or ‘canceled’), so we might be led to think that the FSF and Richard Stallman (RMS) are very unpopular. It should be noted that, as per Richard Stallman’s Web site: “On May 10, RMS will give a remote talk for the University of Buckingham Free Speech Society, starting at 7pm UK time.” That’s 2 days from now. So cancel culture failed. “RMS” or “Richard Stallman” is still ‘a thing’. He still gives talks.

The censorship is 'safe space'This is why they keep attacking him and have planned to attack him again even more than a month after he returned to the FSF's Board. The GNOME Foundation has been doing this for well over a decade! It always fails, but they do some damage in the process…

“I’ve been targeted by some of these same people for years,” a source told us, “and am trying to sort it out with OFTC and Freenode right at this very moment…”

We recently became aware that people were being silenced. And because they’re being silenced it’s hard to know that the silencing has been happening. It’s like a ritual mob. The source said s/he “may be able to provide information that will help your effort [...] a few years ago I was targeted in much the same way Daniel Pocock was and it went on for years — to the point where both OFTC and Freenode networks’ staff got involved [...] an ancient story now, but, ties in to current…”

Long story short, there seems to be a cabal of people with mixed loyalty or a conflict of interest. This begets censorship.

“Long story short, there seems to be a cabal of people with mixed loyalty or a conflict of interest. This begets censorship.”Some of this censorship has since then been clarified, even undone. But that takes a lot of effort and work because some staff has a conflict of interest, albeit not all. Bans can be lifted “by talking to their staff,” we’re told. So there’s a quasi-’political’ element to it all. We were told of some names of the people involved and would rather not reproduce the names here (it would be counterproductive).

Our source said that “the issue here is both of these people are tied up with the weirdness around Debian/GNOME Foundation and are leaking into positions of control at Freenode, which is a central hub of activity for the open source community, and are using that access control to suppress pro-RMS campaigning, which leads me to believe there will be another wave after all the key players who jammed up their last effort are gone.”

We’ve long said there would be another wave. GNOME Foundation has done this for over a decade, so why stop now? “I believe if the tensions increase,” the source told us, “the bad actors leaking over from OFTC/GNOME/Debian will absolutely engaged in reputation management operations or access purging to that aim [...] the small fry fish from that camp are targeting signers of the pro-RMS letter but not to any real serious impact, the more dangerous influencers will go for the people exposing this or investigating this…”

It ought to be clarified upfront that we’re not accusing OFTC or Freenode as a whole. They’re collectives of different individuals with different agendas and beliefs. “Freenode is not a ‘coherent’ entity in that they will have widely variant responses to this situation depending on which staff member you get,” our source noted. “It’s the ones that are also in with OFTC staff counts that are going to be the problem. [...] It’s the ones that are staff at OFTC that are staff at Freenode that are the problem there” (they issue bans in parallel).

“It’s the issue that matters and the pattern that’s relevant; the names of pertinent actors matter a lot less.”“Debian crossover and GNOME Foundation crossover is in every instance I’ve seen be[ing] the common association of every actor involved [...] What I’m getting at here is that these all involve coordinated behaviours from people all associated with the same project [and] it consistently ties back to Debian and their sphere of influence which includes [name redacted], [name redacted], and some of the other Freenode staff — not all of them. Freenode’s official position will probably stay neutral while these bad actors run amok [and] most of this can be verified if you map these people on a board and look at their project associations.”

Perhaps at a later stage we’ll reproduce and publish more information. For the time being, however, names have been omitted. It’s the issue that matters and the pattern that’s relevant; the names of pertinent actors matter a lot less. We know the names and we keep detailed notes. No need to admonish or vilify anybody.

04.27.21

The Anti-FSF Petition of GNOME Foundation and OSI Continues Losing Signatures

Posted in FSF, GNOME, OSI at 8:30 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: There are further removals (diff below, based on the changes made in the past day or so), whereas the support letter keeps growing (albeit slowly)

Individuals

[...]

59d124
< akurushimi
2627d2691
< Seraphim R.P. (Kerygma Digital)

GNOME Foundation and OSI versus FSF
Notice the curve below going down (visibly). Won’t be long before the hate letter has 2,000+ signatures, compared to 6,000+ (or 6,500+) for the response to it.

Creating Parallel ‘Movements’ (Backed by Monopolies) to Marginalise the FSF, GNU, and GPL

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, FSF, GNOME, OSI at 11:38 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Concern-trolling or sheer opportunism?

Summary: The GNU General Public License (GPL) is a thorn in the side of monopolies and monopolists; can groups funded by monopolisers and run by professional vilifiers do enough damage at the behest of their corporate masters? The video above offers some additional background

THE GPL has long been attacked by proxies and concern trolls like Black Duck (Microsoft-connected) and it has not exactly worked. The GPL is still hugely popular, no matter what firms say based on GitHub data (i.e. based only on what’s controlled by Microsoft’s proprietary software trap). Even recently we saw high-profile examples of defections to the GPL and even AGPL.

Google, IBM, Microsoft and other such firms aren’t happy about this. They work with the GPL where they have no other choice, e.g. the kernel (Linux is GPLv2). It is predicable and we should very much expect attacks on messengers or public faces of the GPL, notably the FSF and its founder, Richard Stallman. It’s the concepts — the ideas to put it another way — that are under attack. They conveniently personify the issues. Never forget that…

It’s not Dr. Stallman himself that the monopolies fear; it’s the things he created, the ideas and his licences in particular…

“They’ll surely be coming back with another sneaky attempt, be it a bigger “cancel mob” or some attempt to override software freedom with buzzwords and catchphrases (like “hey hi” and “ethical”).”The same people slandering the FSF’s founder and blackmailing FSF board members into mothballing the whole thing (yes, canning the FSF by means of abandoning the Board of Directors altogether) also receive money from those very same monopolies. Take SFC for instance. Not only did it lobby the FSF to oust Stallman (both from within and outside the FSF), it’s continuing with a trend of disturbing statements while racking up money from Microsoft and Google. Bradley Kuhn from the SFC was pushed out of the FSF’s Board for a conflict of interest (looking to promote the agenda of the SFC, which he chose over the FSF when he left the Board). The SFC has become in some sense richer (as a funnel of funds) than the FSF, as they hire more people and they’re bringing in millions of dollars to the SFC (only two salaries are being paid as of 2 years ago).

Working for OSI, a force of corporate occupation and a coup, some people went out of their way to attack the very existence of the FSF. Some of these people work partly for Microsoft.

A reader recently pointed out to us various problematic things that she had observed. She wished to share her findings, as she suspects people who cannot code (and never coded anything) basically take over the movement, not for the betterment of freedom but for their selfish agenda funded at least partly by monopolies.

“We will first discuss the principles of digital autonomy,” one recent presentation says, with Google and Amazon logos next to it (see slides/cover). As if listening devices and CCTV inside our homes gives us “digital autonomy”…

This whole “digital autonomy” thing is mostly being promoted by Bully de Blanc. “Digital Autonomy push by bad actors,” according to our reader, should be a cause for concern. “I wanted to mention something of a slight concern,” she said, “last year and must mention to someone. Molly and Karen are pushing digital autonomy.”

Those slides are self-discrediting because of the sponsors.

“Then,” she added, “they spoke at Hope.”

Well, all this “autonomy” thing seems like another attempt to redefine Free Software, as the "ethical source" people do. They try to build and shield some new identity for themselves, just like a group of developers now hijack the acronym/name “GNU”…

Bully de Blanc open coreThe OSI is in this too by the way. The OSI together with the GNOME Foundation try to redefine Free Software and Open Source. They collaborate on this, just like they did on the hate letter.

“Open Source” was having a go at creating a “parallel movement”, seeking to replace the original (Free software) by co-opting the followers, distracting from the real thing, and in turn diluting the message, celebrating openwashing instead of things that completely comply with the seminal definitions.

“Then,” our reader noted, “for this Gnome conference – during the presentation, they [had it] mentioned… previously presented at Hope and Debconf. Using the previous presentations for credibility. [...] Presentation does not equal endorsement…”

They’re basically chaining past ‘credentials’ to make up for lack of skills and experience. This is a very Bully de Blanc ‘thing’. Then, consider which corporations fund this pair of presenters.

I was then made aware by our reader that “recently Karen [Sandler] and [Bradley] Kuhn [of SFC] gave a keynote for an ethics and AI session.”

“Hey hi” (AI) is basically a stupid buzzword, whereas ethics are a broader concept (even Microsoft claims to stand for ethics!), so we’ll see their next step. “Karen,” our reader sighed, “giving a talk about ethics.”

But I don’t have anything like real piece of evidence to suggest she is not ethical. So let’s leave her out of this and focus on Mr. Kuhn instead. As far as we know, Karen Sandler did make some rather problematic statements about Stallman, but that’s nowhere as bad as what Kuhn did.

Bully de Blanc on RMSI managed to convince our reader that Sandler isn’t the problem, though she may be led by sponsors and colleagues with another agenda. “I agree,” she said, that “there is no valid, verified evidence – and, she is a lawyer. However, she seemed to be Free software. Maybe she was at that time. She is the SFC director, and they did have a Microsoft-sponsored event.”

“Anyway,” our reader said, “I have serious concerns… although I can never really figure out the endgame. Do not even know where the digital autonomy push is going… or if it even will continue after all this. One thing I noticed is there are people who jump on fashionable topics, and perpetrate their expertise on the matter. Some are convincing. I don’t really believe Molly is the mastermind or puppetbully… Of course, I have no evidence. Maybe someday!”

In any event, we need to watch out for those things because the above-mentioned people played a role in the anti-FSF coup attempt, both two years ago and last month. They’ll surely be coming back with another sneaky attempt, be it a bigger “cancel mob” or some attempt to override software freedom with buzzwords and catchphrases (like “hey hi” and “ethical”). It would be unwise to overlook the possibility.

04.21.21

Overt Abuse and Mischaracterisations by Bully de Blanc

Posted in Deception, FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, GPL, IBM, Microsoft, OSI at 1:36 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Blue hair is not a substitute for skills and experience

Blue hair, Bully de Blanc
This screenshot is real and it is a real account, not a prank

Summary: The campaign to ruin the FSF and silence its founder, Richard M. Stallman (RMS), goes months prior to the hate letter set up by Bully de Blanc, her boss, and the Microsoft-sponsored OSI; they just attack the licence (GPL/copyleft) and they try to redefine things for the corporations which fund them

A reader of ours recently wanted to add some more information on Molly de Blanc, whom we dubbed “Bully de Blanc” last month because of the bullying (some people have since then copied the name; MinceR says “Bully the blanc” or “the blank”).

“Earlier this year (in February) Bully de Blanc attacked the very definition of Free software (in apparent collaboration between the GNOME Foundation and OSI) and the desire to attack RMS was already expressed out in the open (in Bully de Blanc’s blog) months before he even came back to the FSF’s Board.”When someone engages in character assassination (based on deliberate distortion, libel, and a gish gallop of falsehoods), he or she should not be shocked to find online criticism of him or her. This is why when it comes to Bully de Blanc we’ve shown no particular remorse; we objectively explained what we had observed. Earlier this year (in February) Bully de Blanc attacked the very definition of Free software (in apparent collaboration between the GNOME Foundation and OSI) and the desire to attack RMS was already expressed out in the open (in Bully de Blanc’s blog) months before he even came back to the FSF's Board. So they must have waited for an excuse or a “trigger” event.

This post contains a polite, calm, and fact-checked interpretation. It will also quote, anonymously, some people who read this site and have researched the matter themselves.

“I have noticed your video here,” one reader noted. “Please put attention here on [the] official Molly de Blanc profile” (in Debian.org).

“As where she tries to be “Debian developer” but it most probably is over,” the reader said, “as status is “Closed”. That is contradictory information and false representation which in the end is also illegal act. She is stating there to be “I also work at the FSF, and serve on the Open Source Initiative board of directions.” — whereby I do not think she is now at FSF — please verify and use your connections to remove that profile, or archive it. This page says she is not on the board. Maybe she was on both boards, but it is very obvious that she has no clear policy neither on “Open Source” [nor] on FSF, she is image maker. As a conclusion, I wish to point out to a pattern of false representations by Molly de Blanc. I think that it would be worth putting it into the timeline, as I have seen pattern of false representations.”

DreyfusWe too have noticed some of that. “All the roles are past roles,” a reader noted. “She doesn’t remove the roles from web sites, she keeps using all these titles as a substitute for skills.”

To us, it doesn’t necessarily matter whether the credentials are false, outdated, or acquired by means like a romantic relationship. What matters to us is the persistent and ongoing agenda, which was outlined even months before the hate letter was put online, backed by corporate media sponsored by the same corporations that control the OSI and GNOME Foundation. Don’t think those people are just going away and won’t be coming back. They try to induce fear and self-shame to keep RMS silent. He’s still reluctant to do new interviews with us (or with anyone else for that matter). The hate letter was updated just over a week ago, just to say that aren’t accepting a public apology from RMS. Nothing he does will ever make them happy. They’re still concern-trolling the FSF, trying to shun it while taking money from Microsoft (which bribes officials, not just the OSI and Linux Foundation).

To better understand what we’re up against, we must understand the agenda and also understand whose agenda that is. IBM, which is now under fire for abuses against workers, has many reasons to dislike what RMS says.

“If thought can corrupt language, then language can also corrupt thought.”

George Orwell

04.11.21

“The Fighters of Freedom”

Posted in Free/Libre Software, FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, OSI at 3:26 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Some anime fans have made this video about recent events

04.09.21

Hate Letter Against Richard Matthew Stallman (RMS) Backfired So Spectacularly That Signers Asked to Revoke Their Own Signatures and the List Was Then Frozen Permanently (Updated)

Posted in Deception, FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, OSI at 3:14 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

They wanted to cancel RMS; instead they canceled their own petition!

RMS petitions latest

Summary: “An open letter in support of Richard Matthew Stallman being reinstated by the Free Software Foundation” tops 6,100 signatures (graph generated just moments ago)

Today we learned that people who had set up the defamatory hate letter “don’t want any more individuals to sign up for some reason” and “oddly, that decision came after several people submitted pull requests asking to get de-listed” (I have heard of a few, spoke to a few, and here’s one more). So it is perfectly possible that the real number of signatures on that RMS hate (defamation) letter may be going down. So they froze the process. Wouldn’t it be embarrassing if the number of signatures started to decrease? “Kind of interesting that they stopped accepting signatures 3 days after the support letter surpassed them,” Artem told us in IRC. So basically, they’re just spreading libel and running away when it backfires instead of retracting and apologising like adults would do. Anyway, the way things are going, it should be clear for everyone to see that the hate letter based on lies was a very bad idea and it’s possible that the blue curve (above) should in fact be going downwards. People realise they were conned and they want nothing to do with this con job anymore. Oh, the irony! Will someone at OSI and GNOME Foundation resign? Maybe the whole Board? Microsoft tenants at the GNOME Board of Directors too…

Update: Graph with numbers added.

RMS petitions at 6100

04.04.21

Who Signed the Hate Letter Against Software Freedom (or Against FSF Bringing Back Its Founder)

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, FSF, FUD, GNOME, Google, IBM, OSI at 1:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link

Summary: The concern trolls who are associated with FSF-hostile groups (sponsored by monopolies) didn’t manage to build enough momentum to sabotage the FSF; the media operatives on their side, however, try to tell us that the FSF is destroyed (monopolies pay them to say this, hoping for self-fulfilling prophecies)

NOW that the hate letter has reached a standstill (barely passed 3,000 signatures, whereas the response to that may soon reach 6,000 signatures) I’ve decided to record a quick video to explain who prepared and signed this letter (and why). Many of the names are very much expected (same as 2 years ago) and institutions are barely recognisable. Many have the strong conviction against the FSF because they’re BSD projects. Some have nothing whatsoever to do with code. In the case of the GNOME Foundation, they’ve attacked software freedom for many years (well over a decade!) and the OSI is a blatant attempt to steal the thunder from FSF. There should be no expectation of them supporting the FSF. They can only pretend.

“Many have the strong conviction against the FSF because they’re BSD projects.”The video above uses mostly polite language, unlike the letter that was signed. At the end they accomplished almost nothing. If anything, as people pointed out to me recently, the FSF became only more closely aligned with the uncompromising ideology of its founder. Some of the others left the FSF. Maybe that’s for the better.

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts