Summary: Microsoft’s ‘embrace’ of Novell (and of Nokia among many other examples) seems to have taught nobody in the media what those Microsoft ‘embraces’ always lead to
A COUPLE of hours ago we saw H2S Media publishing yet more of that WSL nonsense. That site keeps pushing WSL advocacy, serving over 30 MB (yes, MEGABYTES) per page… for just a few poorly-written paragraphs. Do they realise WSL is an attack on GNU/Linux? They probably know that. Just watch who's behind WSL. See the warnings and the advocates.
“They want to get closer, sure, in order to ‘move in’… for ‘the kill’.”There’s no practical reason to use WSL. Those who were fooled into it would vastly better off (much better experience) with something like VirtualBox running any GNU/Linux distro of one’s choice. We all know that, right? Better yet — either install VirtualBox under GNU/Linux (for Windows to run in it) or install WINE for Windows-only applications. WSL serves no purpose at all, just like Novell’s SUSE or decade or more in the past. Microsoft keeps setting up traps in which to drive us into extinction — or so they hope. Stop giving Microsoft this leverage; it doesn’t love GNU/Linux at all. These people love nothing but themselves and their cult. They want to get closer, sure, in order to 'move in'… for ‘the kill’. █
Send this to a friend
Summary: The Linux kernel’s Code of Conduct Committee now includes Intel, so a company of multi-continental antitrust violations and endless criminality nowadays gets to decide who to banish from Linux and various events
a few weeks ago: “Side-note, yes, the website at http://www.kernel.org/code-of-conduct.html is not up to date with the list of the current members of the kernel code of conduct committee, nor does it contain this or the prior report yet. I’ll get that working soon…”
Greg is Torvalds’ so-called ‘right-hand man’ (as ), so that kind of matters, irrespective of our opinions about him and his past at Novell (when Novell acted like a de facto department of Microsoft).
The Linux CoC Committee is now available for all to see.
Kernel.org has just updated its CoC page (this page was updated yesterday, based on the RSS feed). We could not flag the differences and the Wayback Machine has only (maybe it just hadn’t been modified since, until this week).
The Code of Conduct Committee is shown as follows:
The Linux kernel Code of Conduct Committee is currently made up of the following people:
Kristen Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@全民彩票网址intel.com>
Mishi Choudhary <mishi@全民彩票网址linux.com>
Shuah Khan <skhan@全民彩票网址linuxfoundation.org>
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@全民彩票网址linuxfoundation.org>
Committee members can be reached all at once by writing to <conduct@全民彩票网址kernel.org>.
Choudhary is OK. I get along pretty well with her. I regret that she recently did a panel discussion of the SFLC with Microsoft on the panel, though it’s probably not her choice/fault. But the first person in that list comes from the same employer as a notorious drama maker, who picked on all sorts of kernel hackers, including Greg Kroah-Hartman. These people all have a lot of power; they can oust people from Linux, even based on selective enforcement hinged upon broad rules (maybe something which was tweeted a very long time ago). They’re like bosses in a sense. We saw weakly-backed accusations used for targeted witch-hunts before. Its sets precedents and deterrents.
But let’s also put things in perspective; the committee now has in it employees of a company that assaulted a charity which had promoted GNU/Linux in Africa (for kids’ education). The company committed many other actual crimes (we have ample documentation of those). Who are they to police ethics?
Linux Kernel Code of Conduct Committee: September 2018 to July 2019 report
In the period of September 15, 2018 through July 31, 2019, the Committee
received the following reports:
- Inappropriate language in the kernel source: 1
- Insulting behavior in email: 3
The result of the investigations:
- Education and coaching: 4
We would like to thank the Linux kernel community members who have supported
the adoption of the Code of Conduct and who continue to uphold the professional
standards of our community. If you have questions about this report,
please write to <conduct@全民彩票网址kernel.org>.
Side-note, yes, the website at
http://www.kernel.org/code-of-conduct.html is not up to date with the
list of the current members of the kernel code of conduct committee, nor
does it contain this report yet, but that will be resolved next week
when I have a chance to fix it up. Sometimes web site changes are hard
for kernel programmers :)
To let everyone know, the current members of the Kernel Code of Conduct
Committe [sic] are:
One other person has been nominated, but due to travel issues has not
formally accepted. Their name will be added to the above web site when
that happens in a few weeks.
Notice that list at the end. Intel is the new addition. Shuah Khan is at the Linux Foundation, so Accardi is the first corporate member of the Committee. Does paying the Foundation help get your staff in that Committee? The Foundation has already banished all community participation in its board, so…
The person per se is not a problem. We are not personifying the issue. , she’s technical (“Kristen is a Linux kernel engineer working on power management for Intel’s Open Source Technology”), but we know where salaries come from and that’s who the person is loyal to.
The Foundation became just a company or a front for several. This is how they fire people (even those not on the payroll). Earlier today we mentioned this in relation to Debian. Ultimately, this lets the world’s richest people be in charge of everything, even Free software. █
Send this to a friend
SAP openwashing (image from Swapnil’s Web site)
Summary: The price of deception is high and some companies with billion-dollar marketing budgets are willing to pay that price for corporate reputation laundering; among the facilitators we unfortunately — and increasingly so nowadays — have the Linux Foundation
; he modified the from “Microsoft buys a start-up whose software limits access to sensitive data” to “Microsoft Buys Open Source Data Privacy 全民彩票官网登录” (so desperate to keep openwashing Microsoft, which is still suing Linux using patents). He did the same for VMware (another prominent violator of the GPL) on the Foundation’s payroll in its Web site that offers “creative services” (PR). In the article he cites right now the term open source isn’t even mentioned until the third paragraph and it involves twisting the facts (pure Microsoft marketing); the acquired company has some .com Web site and is generally proprietary. But never let facts get in the way…
“Journalists are not the same as ‘journalists’ (the ‘corporate’ types) and we’ve noticed that some so-called ‘journalists’ conflate “having corporate access” with “success”. Having amicability from/with corporate high-ups means you’re a sellout, you’re PR.”Amid the : “why not invest a coffee or tea break in listening to my discussion with Swapnil Bhatia [sic] of TFIR from this year’s SUSECON.”
More openwashing of SAP ‘aka’ SUSE (they’re increasingly the same). Journalists are not the same as ‘journalists’ (the ‘corporate’ types) and we’ve noticed that some so-called ‘journalists’ conflate “having corporate access” with “success”. Having amicability from/with corporate high-ups means you’re a sellout, you’re PR. Not journalism. These corporations fear people who are actually objective and inquisitive. Unlike those who just print what PR departments ask them to. Guess who’s paid by them. And the Foundation is a facilitator of these ‘transactions’.
“Having reviewed its IRS forms (the finer details) last weekend, the Foundation clearly doesn’t care about the image of Linux (spendings less than 2% of its revenue) but about the image of its sponsors, i.e. companies like Microsoft, VMware and so on.”We’ve long taken note of this that boils down to PR. He’s like a PR agent for hire, still not finding his place in this world. It’s the business model is reputation laundering; some sort of “I’ll get you positive press for some cash”…
It’s sad to see that the Foundation is immersing itself in this underworld of PR tactics, borderline AstroTurfing. Having reviewed its IRS forms (the finer details) last weekend, the Foundation clearly doesn’t care about the image of Linux (spendings less than 2% of its revenue) but about the image of its sponsors, i.e. companies like Microsoft, VMware and so on. This is a problem.
The Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) for the , “Director of Public Affairs for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and General (Ret.) James Clapper.” We mentioned this in passing before (back in May). “If you can’t make it good, at least make it look good,” Bill Gates (in)famously said. The Foundation manages to take some of the most ‘difficult’ organisations and make them sound fun, just like "puppies". Is Clapper too a “puppy”? Would she say so, based on his physical apperance? Her colleague Angela Brown, who manages LF events, had only the following things to say about Microsoft (which Jim Zemlin compared to a puppy):
In 3 years that’s all she had to say about Microsoft. It’s all about Microsoft giving money () to her employer. These "thank you" services (literally paying for thanks) wouldn't be unprecedented. █
“After Novell sold out the community, the Linux Foundation wants another Microsoft partner to join up and participate in groups working on legal topics?” –Pamela Jones, Groklaw
Send this to a friend
Summary: It certainly ‘feels’ like SAP ‘took over’ SUSE and it has been ‘long time coming’
, who had come from SAP, which is a Microsoft ally that was almost acquired by Microsoft at one point. The media, however, wasn’t paying any attention to what happened to SUSE’s official blog. Over the past couple of months it was almost ‘hijacked’ by SAP, as I pointed out repeatedly in social control media sites. I’d hate to use "tweets" as 'sources', but these mostly link to the originals from SUSE’s own site. Here we go, in chronological order: █
Send this to a friend
“I saw that internally inside Microsoft many times when I was told to stay away from supporting Mono in public. They reserve the right to sue”
Summary: In an effort to make exFAT (a patent trap) the ‘industry standard’, even inside Linux, Microsoft now wants exFAT inside the very heart of Linux and people are pushing back
With food came the appetite and shortly after being allowed into a secretive circulation of flaw information — the kind of information former Microsoft employees use to come up with brands, logos, buzzwords and Web sites to hype up and profit from Linux and FOSS bugs (e.g. "VENOM" and “Heartbleed” [1, 2] — it’s already progressing even further. Suffice to say, corporate media isn’t interested in Microsoft’s bad history (it's just spamming us 24/7 with "Microsoft loves Linux" revisionism).
Michael Larabel has (as recently as yesterday evening) of filesystem guru Ted Ts’o writing: “Personally, if Microsoft is going to be unfriendly about not wanting others to use their file system technology by making patent claims, why should we reward them by making their file system better by improving its interoperability? (My personal opinion only.)” (those last 4 words are an expression of fear of association, like bullying through one's boss/employer)
It was a discussion among some Microsoft people and former Novell people. They’re still up to no good. They’re not serving Linux; they serve Microsoft, which promotes Windows.
“It was a discussion among some Microsoft people and former Novell people. They’re still up to no good. They’re not serving Linux; they serve Microsoft, which promotes Windows.”Ted Ts’o is not a person who trusts Microsoft (never did!) and the same person who tried to portray Torvalds as sexist (back when the person was female, not male) Ted Ts’o was spun as a “rape apologist” based on some very old message — obviously taken out of context to make Ted Ts’o like an an abominable, unemployable person. We recently recalled and highlighted issues related to this [1, 2].
At the moment Microsoft charges patent tax through companies like Tuxera, so the point raised by Ted Ts’o is absolutely legitimate. But if Microsoft’s entryism inside Linux is working as expected/hoped, even senior and prominent developers like Ted Ts’o can be ousted or at least silenced somehow. Microsoft is now officially inserting patent traps into the kernel used on billions on chips. Sometimes it feels like the kernel is being ‘sold’ to Microsoft by Zemlin et al at the Linux Foundation (they became millionaires by doing so). It often feels, now with people like Cox gone, like the Foundation is nothing but the corporate cabal its Board has become (Microsoft, Oracle and so on). First they kicked out community members, then their journalists and editors. So what’s left? Peripheral PR people, 3 developers on the payroll and an operation that ‘sells’ (passes) Linux+FOSS code to surveillance companies. In this particular case they hope to impede ongoing efforts to replace exFAT with non-Microsoft things. What we see here is how Microsoft uses its ‘moles’ inside Linux (the kernel) to make Microsoft ‘the standard’. It’s not hard to achieve when one ‘controls’ both Windows and Linux, where the latter is a lot more widely deployed.
“There are lots of angry comments about this in Phoronix right now (almost 50, tenfold the usual/average).”Microsoft’s participation was all about pushing proprietary things of Microsoft. Just as one would expect…
Larabel brought up OIN, but even after joining OIN Microsoft is not only threatening but also suing using patents, claiming the usual claims. It demands billions of dollars for patents. And yes, it’s about Linux and Android.
EEE moves so, so very fast inside Linux. There are lots of angry comments about this in Phoronix right now (almost 50, tenfold the usual/average). █
“He [Bill Gates] is divisive. He is manipulative. He is a user. He has taken much from me and the industry.”
Send this to a friend
Microsoft would rather have its longtime friend, Greg (from Novell), in charge of Linux
Summary: Things aren’t too rosy at the ‘Linux’ Foundation where Linus Torvalds is increasingly being marginalised (thanks in part to Microsoft-friendly media) and propped up to replace him are those who worked on Hyper-V (proprietary software for Windows) and similar Microsoft-centric projects at the Microsoft-occupied Novell
FAMILIAR tactics necessitate familiar reactions and responses. The corporate media keeps shaming Torvalds for exercising free speech while ignoring much worse words from Microsoft executives including Bill Gates (who bribes the media to paint himself as a Saint). Is there a well-planned strategy here? Just earlier today we wrote about Microsoft ousting critics by embarrassing them in front of their employers (or blackmailing the employers into firing them).
“This is Greg K-H (Kroah-Hartman) almost inviting Microsoft. He has been attacking various GNU/Linux vendors but not Microsoft.”Over the past decade or more something about a Microsoft move “which if approved would allow Microsoft to tap into private behind-the-scenes chatter about vulnerabilities, patches, and ongoing security issues with the open-source kernel and related code…”
This is Greg K-H (Kroah-Hartman) almost inviting Microsoft. He has been someone told me: “A glance at the changelog for the 5.0.15 Linux kernel is peppered with his sign-offs, often along with Greg Kroah-Hartman, a fellow at the Linux Foundation. It was therefore not surprising to see Kroah-Hartman vouch for Levin. Kroah-Hartman pointed out that Levin has full write permissions to the stable kernel trees, and applauded Microsoft’s application to sign up.”
“So GKH has ‘non-existent tolerance for #ZFS’ (licensed under a free licence!) but he’ll clap for Microsoft?”
He worked for Novell on Microsoft stuff, such as , ]: “You’re assuming Microsoft has good intentions. Instead, they’ve decided it’s easier to suck the marrow from the bones if they can sneak inside the host under a flag of truce, like many other common parasites.”
A quick Google search shows that coverage has been mostly limited to the above sites and some readers wrote to us about it (after we had filed it under openwashing and chose to move on rather than dwell on character assassinations).
This was discussed yesterday in our IRC channels, as well. To quote a portion:
<__martin__> greetings, do you dr. roy think it’s meant to be a warm-hearted effort or eee smear tactic?
<MinceR> why do people still expect anything microsoft ever does to be benign?
<MinceR> i guess words speak louder than actions after all
<XRevan86> MinceR: It’s big. Inate trust in the authority.
<MinceR> who made those criminals an authority?
<XRevan86> * innate
<schestowitz> anyway, see the comments in The Register
<__martin__> cite: Just more infiltration, entryism. They try to sell Windows and Azure. See comments on this article, e.g.: “You’re assuming #Microsoft has good intentions. Instead, they’ve decided it’s easier to suck the marrow from the bones if they can sneak inside the host under a flag of truce, like many other common parasites.”
<schestowitz> I saw some yesterday
<__martin__> thx I see now (=
<XRevan86> MinceR: Money, money, money; always sunny, in the rich man’s world.
<schestowitz> people aren’t stupid
<schestowitz> but companies like Red Hat and Canonical are controlled by Microsoft cash now
<schestowitz> Zemlin PAC also
<schestowitz> Azure money and all
Curiously enough Slashdot decided to cover ‘news’ from one week ago. Hours ago it published (that’s exactly what Slashdot does here as well, it’s “by EditorDavid”). Torvalds publicly complained that his interviews are being nitpicked by the likes of Slashdot for something insulting or ‘scandalous’ that he said (because such headlines ‘sell’).
Is this part of the effort to remove Torvalds? Look who wrote the two cited articles (the only ones we saw); they’re Microsoft boosters. Are they trying to sanitise the Linux Foundation for corporations like Microsoft, getting rid of charismatic people who simply, after provocation, say that unwanted code (for technical reasons) is like cow’s feces?
If that’s the intention, this isn’t a new strategy; but now with the CoC there’s more ammo with which to shame and even scare Torvalds. They try to lower his impact.
From Slashdot (this afternoon):
“The thing is,” reports the Register, “crucially, Chinner was talking in the context of specific IO requests that just don’t cache well, and noted that these inefficiencies could become more obvious as the deployment of PCIe 4.0-connected non-volatile storage memory spreads.”
Here’s how Chinner responded to Torvalds on the mailing list. “You’ve taken one single statement I made from a huge email about complexities in dealing with IO concurrency, the page cache and architectural flaws in the existing code, quoted it out of context, fabricated a completely new context and started ranting about how I know nothing about how caches or the page cache work.”
The Register notes their conversation also illustrates a crucial difference from closed-source software development. “[D]ue to the open nature of the Linux kernel, Linus’s rows and spats play out in public for everyone to see, and vultures like us to write up about.”
It’s very much slanted against Torvalds and so are the comments. The cited articles are from Linux bashers (with history to that effect). So Torvalds is bad because he mentioned poo, unlike Microsoft putting “boobs” inside the kernel (yes, Linux) — not even a sackable offense by Microsoft's exceptionally sexist standards.
“The LF case is very important,” one person told us. “I think it has driven 全民彩票官网下载 the problem of entryism. However, while all that was/is happening, the various FOSS projects are tied up with CoC fiascos.”
We recently mentioned Richard Stallman being silenced similarly [1, 2]. █
Send this to a friend
Attorneys/lawyer全民彩票网址s for millionaires, muzzling the ‘little people’
Summary: Novell’s last CEO, a former IBMer who just like IBM decided to leverage software patents against the competition (threatening loads of companies using "platoons of patent lawyer全民彩票网址s"), has decided that siccing lawyer全民彩票网址s at us would be a good idea
online friend and , this letter
[PDF]came out of the blue from unexpected persons. It hasn’t even been a year since I last received ludicrous SLAPP letters and here they go again, hoping to suppress the record and twist history by means of omission. Censors. They think money can buy them anything they want.
“It hasn’t even been a year since I last received ludicrous SLAPP letters and here they go again, hoping to suppress the record and twist history by means of omission.”We have lots to say to refute this letter, but why bother replying to it directly? Just look at this utterly ridiculous and legally-invalid letter. The picture in question, of Mr. Hovsepian, was posted in tandem (next to the original) to ensure people knew it was satirical, but more importantly age does not in any way invalidate the claims made, supported by a lot of media references. He is wrong. What I wrote at the time was correct. Workers were fired. They told me. So he’s basically lying about what he did. This man probably has tens of millions of dollars (salaries and bonuses), yet here he is hiring a law firm to keep pestering publishers (maybe not only me). Here’s the full text from one of his two E-mails (he kept sending it to several accounts):
Fwd: Removal Request re: Ronald Hovsepian
Dear Dr. Schestowitz:
I sent you the following correspondence earlier today at a different email address, and received an automated reply that advised sending it here for quicker response. The earlier message now follows:
I have been trying to reach you since March 7 regarding an article that you wrote about my client, Ronald Hovsepian. The article is now fairly advanced in age, but it does continue to cause difficulties for Mr. Hovsepian. With this being the case, we are requesting its removal at this time.
Please see the original letter (copied in below) that I initially tried to route to your attention via an email address that may not have been ideal for such purpose.
I look forward to your response. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and best wishes for now,
———- Forwarded message ———
From: Steve Seinberg <steve@全民彩票网址seinberglaw.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 4:20 PM
Subject: Removal Request re: Ronald Hovsepian
March 7, 2019
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Re: Request to Remove Damaging Content
Dear Techrights Editorial Staff:
My firm has been retained to represent Mr. Ronald Hovsepian to address his concerns regarding the confusion and damage to his reputation that have been caused due to the following article remaining available on your website:
As of this writing, nine years have passed since this article was originally published. Mr. Hovsepian left Novell less than a year later. Unfortunately for him, his reputation continues to suffer due to the negative portrayal of who you perceived him to be nearly a decade ago.
The image that grafts the lower half of Steve Ballmer’s face onto Mr. Hovsepian’s head is not especially helpful, but in a more significant objection, my client also maintains that contrary to what your piece reports, no SUSE employees had been terminated at the time the article was posted online.
While Mr. Hovsepian has of course secured subsequent gainful employment, such as his tenure as President and CEO of Intralinks, your article continues to cause him difficulties in the professional arena.
Due to the possibility that potential future business associates, partners, investors, and clients will also see and become influenced by this article, we respectfully request that you remove it from your website.
Please feel free to contact me should you wish to discuss this matter. We look forward to your prompt response.
/s/ Steven A. Seinberg
Steven A. Seinberg, Esq.
Attorney at Law
The image in question is shown next to the original too (Steve Ballmer next to the Ballmer/Hovsepian crossover). There would no doubt in anyone’s mind that it was doctored for satirical purpose and there’s absolutely no legal basis upon which to request this removal.
“In the above example, from Steven A. Seinberg, what we have is lawyer全民彩票网址s from another continent trying to gag a site based in Europe. And on what legal basis? Nothing. Nothing at all.”Remember that it was also the French who came up with the utterly ridiculous concept of RtbF (Right to be Forgotten), which is basically saying criminals or even child abusers have a “right” to hide their past, even by forcibly censoring search engines. Will the likes of Battistelli try to leverage similar legal stunts, having already sicced several law firms at me (all based in London)? At the moment CEIPI helps him hide. People like him who leave office and lose immunity, which he once upon a time enjoyed at the European Patent Office (EPO), prefer keeping a lower profile to avert/avoid prosecution.
Let’s also remember that almost a year after António Campinos joined the EPO as President Techrights is still blocked. The EPO has blocked my site for almost five years (it’s still blocked right now). Not for being wrong. Not for being vulgar. But for being correct, for being credible and effective. Censorship in Europe is alive and well and it helps protect crooks from their critics and exposers. In the above example, from Steven A. Seinberg, what we have is lawyer全民彩票网址s from another continent trying to gag a site based in Europe. And on what legal basis? Nothing. Nothing at all. █
Send this to a friend
Or why we’ve dropped most coverage about US patents and patent cases
Summary: An old priority of ours, eliminating software patents in the United States, is no longer quite so relevant because such patents are perishing in US courts, with or without outside intervention such as activism
THIS site is turning 13 later this year. It started by focusing on Novell, but then it increasingly focused on Microsoft and GNU/Linux (related to Novell). Around 2010 we turned almost all our attention to software patents — a natural extension of our coverage regarding Novell’s patent deal. The common theme has all along been preserving the freedom of Free software although software patents pose a great threat also to proprietary software developers. So we’re generally for the interests of programmers, no matter if their code is publicly shared or not. Software development oughtn’t necessitate an army of lawyer全民彩票网址s and should not involve reading hundreds of thousands of patents. It’s beyond impractical and such patents aren’t even necessary, unlike copyright law.
“…we’re generally for the interests of programmers, no matter if their code is publicly shared or not.”Invaluable information about internal European Patent Office (EPO) affairs came through to us in 2014, perhaps based on our track record covering abuses at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and to a lesser degree the EPO (we hadn’t criticised the EPO much before that, except when it came to software patents in Europe). Seeing that António Campinos is not changing anything for the better, and moreover seeing that the SCOTUS precedence (notably Alice) secured 35 U.S.C. § 101 — something that the USPTO cannot change and CAFC as well as ITC must respect — a couple of months ago I decided to mostly drop USPTO coverage, which occupied entire weekends (all my time), turning again to GNU/Linux and Microsoft with the newly-availed time. Seeing that the UPC is rapidly dying (running out of time), several months ago we began also focusing, yet again, on software patents in Europe — a subject increasingly covered by Florian Müller as well. We used to be vocal critics of his writings, but things have changed since. He no longer takes money from Microsoft.
The EFF has, in our view, become somewhat alarmist lately. It says there's a comeback of software patents in the US and belatedly bemoans Iancu (we did so when the warning signs became apparent, based on what he had done and said in prior years). This morning we saw some articles from the patent microcosm (days-old posts) claiming that Iancu tries to pressure courts/judges/politicians to help him bring back software patents, but he lacks the authority to do this. He merely discredits the Office, that’s all. We’re still monitoring the matter and will leap back on the saddle if the danger materialises. It has not happened, at least not yet. Based on the latest figures from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the PTAB-hostile Anticipat (against inter partes reviews (IPRs)), decisions involving 35 U.S.C. § 101 still rise in number. Various tweets from patent maximalists are still obsessing over PTAB overturning examiners’ decisions, usually against software patents and only in rare cases (notable exceptions) the other way around. So there’s definitely no turnaround and the silence in many blogs speaks volumes. Some of them openly express pessimism and defeatism. Let it be so. █
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »