05.16.22

Linux Foundation Does Not Speak for GNU/Linux Users

Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, IBM, Red Hat at 8:25 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 6759b9235a976845e4a96a5fa8b9968c
They Do Not Speak for Us…
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: There’s a serious problem in the “Linux” world as the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation claims to speak for us (the GNU/Linux community) while in fact speaking against us (on the payroll of those looking to extinguish us)

THE thing called Linux Foundation ‘Research’ (so-called 'research', meaning just marketing) released this 3AM press release early on a Monday. Yes, 3AM ET and before midnight where they’re based (so technically Sunday). The press release is shown in the video (I rarely just read what’s shown on the screen like some folks do; it’s just useless). It’s a bunch of talking points from suits who neither use nor understand what they’re talking about. This is very typical and is symptomatic not only among the Zemlins. Looking and reading between the lines, it’s more of that same openwashing.

And speaking of openwashing, I’ve decided to show this morning’s double standards of opensource.com. After recording the video I checked where it’s hosted right now (it has long been outsourced and now it’s in Fastly; see screenshot below).

Organisations that cannot lead by example do not speak for us. The same is true for the OSI, but the video does not focus on the OSI.

Fastly/opensource.com

IBM’s Lennart Poettering on Breaking Software for Pseudo Novelty

Posted in GNU/Linux, IBM, Kernel, Red Hat, Videos at 5:44 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 39c71c961410d5ff77c6d2e547b01df4
Lennart Poettering versus backward compatibility or API stability
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: Recently-uploaded ELCE 2011 clip shows a panel with Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox, Thomas Gleixner, Paul McKenney, and Lennart Poettering (relevant to novelty or perceived novelty [1, 2] that mostly degrades the experience of longtime users, e.g. Wayland and systemd)

Notice how, some time along the way, Torvalds violates the Linux Foundation‘s Code of Conduct by using a "bad" word (in the above clip I actually find Lennart Poettering to be more provocative, rude, even trollish; words are just “style” and one can ‘politely’ abuse people). Torvalds would not risk this again (he hasn’t for years); bad for the health, so to speak…

Linus Torvalds health

Yes, he used to look a lot healthier before being sent to "manners" therapy for merely governing his own project (as he had very successfully done for nearly 30 years).

Notice how Torvalds cautions about certain features becoming a security baggage/liability — to the point of necessitating painful removal. In recent years a lot of what the corporate media calls “Linux” holes are in fact critical bugs in systemd. In the video, which is timeless, one can see who’s being rude.

05.10.22

IBM/Red Hat Promoting Microsoft Surveillance and Proprietary Software Instead of Freedom-Centric, Self-Hosted, Privacy-Respecting, and ‘Real’ GNU/Linux Servers

Posted in IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat at 6:24 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 200351d9ae015457f5966b0ee418dac9
IBM Outsourcing to Microsoft
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: IBM is not interested in Free software and under IBM the company formerly known as Red Hat does not have a positive vision (a lot of the technical staff has already left)

THIS morning’s Microsoft puff piece in a Red Hat-controlled site is just one of many examples of the company’s lack of edge. It’s promoting mainframe era thinking, where Microsoft instead of IBM is in control of everything.

Red Hat shilling Microsoft proprietary software and surveillance isn’t a new thing, but I’ve decided to respond in a video today because Red Hat has become a useless company…

Yesterday Lennart Poettering pretended systemd was modular and permitted choice (this is false, everything is interconnected and is designed to work as a monolith) and it seems like IBM — now together with Microsoft — promotes vendor lock-in, i.e. the very opposite of freedom. “Azure cloud is a large, changing ecosystem,” says the site, “and still relatively new in the context of the company’s long history.”

GeminispaceNo, it’s very old and it is failing. It started 14 years ago and now there are layoffs. There’s no compelling reasons for IBM to even bother with it…

As noted above in the video — that’s Falkon and a Gemini client (Lagrange) — part of the problem is that Red Hat keeps recruiting from Microsoft, even for management positions. We gave an example a couple of months ago. What’s more, there is cross-pollination in the patent department (e.g. Marshall Phelps) and in yesterday’s article as shown in Gemini (the image on the right shows the ongoing expansion of Geminispace; we’re investing an increasing amount of time in it) we showed that IBM can be just as big a bully as Microsoft when it comes to software patents.

Historically IBM has been on our side. But don’t assume that’s still the case. IBM is mostly trying to privatise the whole thing and to IBM the “community” is just unpaid slaves. Don’t help these executives, who do not even themselves use GNU/Linux.

05.09.22

When It Comes to Software Patents, IBM is Still a Big Bully (and Red Hat’s Patents Can Become Part of the Big Blue Bullying)

Posted in IBM, Patents, Red Hat at 9:57 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 77142030821a25ea75f02d1a500590a8
IBM Patent Bully
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: Big Blue Bully (BBB) or the international blackmail machine is still lobbying for software patents and is still weaponising software patents, even in courts; what does that mean for a company like Red Hat, which kept assuring us that there’s no need to worry about its patents?

OVER the years we’ve repeatedly challenged Red Hat to justify its poor stance on software patents, seeing that it was amassing some of its own (there’s the old theory about Red Hat stockpiling patents to increase the sale price).

“Back in 2005 Red Hat had a different stance…”We’ve written several dozens of articles on this subject* for almost 15 years, occasionally noting that Red Hat was starting to pursue many software patents, including on systemd. Back in 2005 Red Hat had a different stance; it fought against European software patents, which were controversially being granted by the EPO. The problem never ended; the issue never stopped being an issue and instead we saw IBM actively lobbying Europe to allow software patents, at one point even falsely claiming that “Open Source” innovation had been made possible owing to software patents — clearly an eyebrow-raising lie.

“Heck, do not expect what’s left of the media to provide commentary on the matter…”The video above deals with the latest example of IBM bullying companies with the help of software patents. The lawsuit was filed 7 days ago, but we don’t expect anyone from Red Hat to speak about this. Heck, do not expect what’s left of the media to provide commentary on the matter; I casually show examples of IBM manipulating the media and in the video I share a new example of this with IBM’s longtime paid shill, Timothy Prickett Morgan. We’re meant to think that patent shakedown is OK, even when Red Hat’s patents can be at stake and we’re talking about nonsensical patents, likely rendered void by Alice/35 U.S.C. § 101 (SCOTUS). IBM is — quite frankly as usual — trying to compensate for the lack of merit/quality using quantity. Red Hat contributes to this quantity.
_____
* To give just a small sample of such coverage:

05.02.22

A Look From the Inside: Open Source Initiative’s Voting Process is a Sham, Large Corporations Are in Charge

Posted in Free/Libre Software, Google, IBM, Microsoft, OSI, Red Hat at 3:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum a054cb54824c30e259b1ff0412d9ee8b
OSI Controlled by Billionaires
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: The Open Source Initiative (OSI) is dominated by openwashing, self-serving giant corporations that are neither Open Source nor tolerant of the Free/Open Source community (they mostly try to dominate or overthrow the community, using money and smear campaigns)

“STEP ASIDE, Richard Stallman, we’ll take it from here!”

“Move over, Bruce Perens, we’ll do a much better job! Everything is now Open Source!”

“Go away, ESR, we know better what we’re doing. Leave it to the professionals, the rich adults in the room!”

That’s the sort of attitude we nowadays see in the OSI, which wasn’t always this bad. According to part one of this very long write-up, the voting process too is a sham, and not purely due to technical reasons — a subject we’ve covered here many times before.

In the eye of an ‘insider’, Willis: “So it’s a troubling ballot to look at. There’s an ostensibly non-profit organization that’s an official OSI affiliate trying to run its CEO as an individual candidate while also running a second member (a board director) on the appropriate, affiliate ballot in the same election. There’s also two financial sponsors running candidates on the individual ballot, one of them (Red Hat) running two candidates at the same time for the two open seats.”

“The OSI is willing to berate and banish even its own founders. Criticism isn’t permitted.”LWN has already mentioned this, but there are no comments at this time. “Nathan Willis,” LWN says, “took a long look at the Open Source Initiative’s 2022 board election and wasn’t entirely pleased with what he saw.”

If Willis said this about the Linux Foundation, there would be disciplinary action. As we noted recently, the Code of Conduct (CoC) Committee received “2 reports of concern that several CNCF ambassadors were airing grievances about not having talks accepted at the event, which belittled the work of the program committee”.

So merely questioning a process is a CoC violation?

Anyway, this is where we stand now. The OSI is willing to berate and banish even its own founders. Criticism isn’t permitted.

“They know who bosses them. The oligarchs bought and paid for both of those institutions, in effect rendering them lobbying apparatuses for the billionaires, who use the Code of Conduct to ban people who criticise them.”The OSI is already sold (to Microsoft mostly, as that’s where most of the OSI’s budget goes). Like the so-called “Linux” (only in name) Foundation, community is now something to be marginalised and “disciplined”. The corporations are concern-trolling us. They wait for a reaction and then they attack the community.

The OSI and the so-called “Linux” (only in name) Foundation are broken beyond redemption. They cannot be redeemed anymore because everything in them is controlled by corporate money. Their chiefs are a mix of corporate employees and people hired using corporate money. They know who bosses them. The oligarchs bought and paid for both of those institutions, in effect rendering them lobbying apparatuses for the billionaires, who use the Code of Conduct to ban people who criticise them. Openwashing is being force-fed now. Polluters are "green", proprietary spyware is “open”, and racist corporations working for the Pentagon are all about inclusion and diversity (they claim).

LWN says Nathan Willis “wasn’t entirely pleased with what he saw.” What an understatement! We’ve not even seen part 2 yet. I express my views on the matter in the video above.

04.18.22

IBM and the War (on General-Purpose Computing)

Posted in GNU/Linux, Hardware, IBM, Red Hat at 7:53 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum b02c1ae0c220f3f9ac2c852f65e11846
IBM Learns That Some People Do Use Older PCs
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: IBM keeps engineering its own blunders (own goals); in the latest example of it, which is rather revealing, IBM considers suspending the misguided plan to abolish BIOS support or assigning the task to a new special interest group (SIG)

IBM’s Fedora ‘project’ (formerly known as community, back when Red Hat was more tactfully running it) is going to learn the hard way that working against the community leads to backlash. Each such backlash erodes the project’s brand/image and therefore puts off existing users or potential (future, prospective) adopters. Why does IBM fail to understand these very basic things? Can it not grasp what it bought?

Judging by weekly numbers that are shared in official Fedora sites, the project already struggles. Not much is left except IBM staff. And many are leaving (the company, not just the project). IBM’s takeover has already done a lot of damage; does IBM’s leadership even care? How many IBM managers even use the platform? It’s hard to ‘monetise’ some platform if you constantly piss off not only its users but also its developers.

“Let’s hope that strong pressure from users of GNU/Linux will compel IBM to move away from its planned obsolescence agenda.”The latest backlash, which we too participated in, has led to this face-saving action. It’s a “we need to talk” moment. IBM’s Matthew Miller says: “It’ll obviously be difficult to find a time where _everyone_ can participate, so this wouldn’t be a deciding-things meeting, rather a “talking about possibilities and hopefully coming to more mutual understanding” meeting. And I would make sure there are good notes.” Many of the replies there are from other IBM employees. IBM’s Ben Cotton wrote about it in his blog some days ago.

They’ve still not apologised for (mis)using lawyers to silence a Fedora volunteer, who earned many badges from Fedora before getting treated like trash. Over the past few years IBM banished quite a few longtime volunteers. Some of them used to speak out against companies like NVIDIA (how "unprofessional"), but apparently only IBM staff is authorised to criticise companies. Miller et al enjoy selective enforcement. This sort of Hubris will, in due course, alienate contributors.

So anyway, IBM may be backtracking on its attack on BIOS. As our associate put it, “the attacks on the BIOS, Restricted Boot, TPM, and Pluton are all hammering the nails in the coffin of general-purpose computing. In Apple there are the M1 and M2 chips doing the same.”

“If IBM is trying to piss off both corporations (many used and invested in CentOS) and people, then it’s doing a spectacular job.”Let’s hope that strong pressure from users of GNU/Linux will compel IBM to move away from its planned obsolescence agenda. IBM pays the Linux Foundation for greenwashing campaigns, which are inherently incompatible with planned obsolescence. As someone in LXer put it 11 days ago: “We dropped Fedora because it’s not as good as Tumbleweed. Anyway, do the work. Many of the advantages are grossly overstated btw (if not just plain misleading). Just stop it. You know? Fedora, creating landfill… for the good of the planet.”

“This is a kid’s joke after CentOS 8.x support ( new face of RH ) was aborted,” said the following comment.

If IBM is trying to piss off both corporations (many used and invested in CentOS) and people, then it’s doing a spectacular job.

IBM ought to hire someone (or someones) that can understand the Free software community and advise the managers accordingly. All these blunders contribute to bad karma.

04.08.22

IBM and Fedora: Stop Being Poor! Buy a New PC!

Posted in GNU/Linux, Hardware, IBM, Red Hat at 7:30 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 25f3b4c70c42c5e203128cf3d4337f39
IBM Against Diversity
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: The planned obsolescence complex of IBM is showing; things that are widely supported and also very much needed are now candidates for abandonment

THE news, or rather this Wiki proposal attracting some attention, is spreading fast today. Hours ago Slashdot cited a recent post (from yesterday’s Daily Links) and during the above video I found some more coverage. Despite its support for BIOS (not difficult to maintain, but it’s about money to them!), IBM seems eager to force everyone to move away from it. Some people may think it only affects Fedora users, but I explain why that’s clearly not the case and IBM basically commits crimes against the environment (while the Linux Foundation is greenwashing IBM). Some people have already justly complained about that, e.g. in blog comments. They live in poor countries and use ‘old’ computers.

“Some people have already justly complained about that, e.g. in blog comments. They live in poor countries and use ‘old’ computers.”“About foisting new purchase onto end users,” an associate of ours put it moments ago, “Microsoft had a strategy with Intel to force new purchases every other year or so.”

There’s no compelling reason to adopt UEFI. There are many reasons to reject it, keeping things only as simple or complex as they need to be.

Don’t think it’s the end of it. Only two hours ago Phoronix published “Fedora 37 Considering Removal Of Legacy X.Org Drivers,” citing Ben Cotton in the mailing list and this wiki page.

03.16.22

[Meme] IBM: FSF Bad, Microsoft Good

Posted in IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat at 4:19 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Microsoft.NET

Today in the IBM-sponsored ‘news’ sites:

Project Aims to Port .NET Framework to Power
Microsoft is ‘courting’ us… on its own terms (spreading Microsoft’s .NET). Like trying to push people to Windows (WSL*) instead of improving WINE…

Summary: IBM (or ICBM as we increasingly call it) isn’t fighting for Software Freedom; heck, sometimes it actively helps Microsoft and Microsoft’s proprietary software agenda

« 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