Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on September 04, 2006 01:31 AM
I sympathize, and agree that you must do what is necessary to protect your mental well-being.
It's unfortunate, but probably true, that part of what has driven you to take this step has been activity by Microsoft astroturfers.
We all know that Microsoft is a company that will do anything to protect their monopoly position. That includes breaking the law by, among other things, committing fraud and sabotage. Consider, for example, Microsoft's past involvement in undermining WordPerfect, or the OpenGL standards development. Or, look at Microsoft's attempt to sabotage Java, in their own words, to "Kill cross-platform Java by grow[ing] the polluted Java market." Or, look at Microsoft's payments to SCO, and various "pretending to be independent" political action groups, such as the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute.
So, years ago (probably 1998), when Microsoft held a strategy meeting on how to stop Linux, someone would have proposed the following idea:
> Infiltrate Open Source Development Teams and... > - submit polluted (e.g. broken) code > - push complexity and bad ideas > - create dependencies on proprietary software > - slow down progress in general > - make life miserable for other developers > - argue every minor detail, disrupt discussions > - be pedantic about OSS concepts > - polarize every discussion -> no common sense > - hound and drive out the best developers
We know that Linux threatens to take a multi-billion dollar market away from Microsoft.
And we know that Microsoft has no morality, and little fear of the law.
And so, Microsoft would have chosen not to follow the above strategy... why? Because it's not nice?
We see Microsoft astroturfers at work all the time, writing FUD articles, or posting obvious lies in various forums.
Thus, I take it as a given that Microsoft has people involved with the most major Open Source projects, trying to do exactly as suggested above.
As some have pointed out, it can be difficult to interfere with a project such as Ubuntu, where a benevolent dictator can identify and kick out the troublemakers.
But it is relatively easier to infiltrate a highly democratic project, such as Debian.
Likewise, I expect that Microsoft has people in the FSF. Those people would not be arguing against Free Software, on the contrary, they would appear as the most extreme supporters of FSF principles. They would attempt, for example, to make GPL3 so extreme as to prevent its success in commercial venues, as they may have previously succeeded in making the FSF's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net replacement unusable in business, through overly-strict licensing.
Unfortunately, sabotage has always been one of Microsoft's most effective weapons. While Microsoft's technical incompetence is such that they have never defeated a strong competitor through actual competition, various acts of sabotage have allowed Microsoft to come out ahead against DR_DOS, Geoworks, WordPerfect, OS/2, Go, AmiPro, Netscape, and Java, among others.
Also unfortunate is the fact that it is hard for a democratic group (political parties, unions, Debian, etc.) to prevent this sort of infiltration. After all, you can't go around accusing everyone of being an agent, or you create an atmosphere of paranoia, which just plays into the infiltrator's hands.
Thus, what we are usually left with is simply to continue to fight the good fight. Keep arguing with the jerks until it becomes obvious that they are jerks. Make them ineffective, and force them to start again with a new identity, and no credibility. And continue to push the project forward, even if at a slower pace.
Note that I am not trying to talk you into changing your mind. If you feel the way you do, then you should rest. Let the young idealistic hotshots carry the torch. As for you, if you still want to be involved with OSS, then choose your own project, where you can avoid the astroturfers and the jerks. There is plenty to do.
It is exhausting fighting an evil that is as relentless and well-funded as Microsoft. Hopefully enough people can continue the fight until it is no longer necessary, i.e., until Microsoft is irrelevant.
Are you old enough to remember the joy of working with the Commodore 64? Remember the joy of the early days of the PC, before Windows? Everything was open -- anything was possible! Remember the same joy when you discovered Linux?
Although it is still possible to find that joy today, by focussing on a particular project and ignoring the politics, the day will come when Microsoft is no longer in a position to push their poison, and that joy once again becomes the norm in the computing industry.
Meanwhile, you should find something that will make _you_ happy. Best wishes!
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Microsoft Rabble-Rousers are Probably Involved
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on September 04, 2006 01:31 AMIt's unfortunate, but probably true, that part of what has driven you to take this step has been activity by Microsoft astroturfers.
We all know that Microsoft is a company that will do anything to protect their monopoly position. That includes breaking the law by, among other things, committing fraud and sabotage. Consider, for example, Microsoft's past involvement in undermining WordPerfect, or the OpenGL standards development. Or, look at Microsoft's attempt to sabotage Java, in their own words, to "Kill cross-platform Java by grow[ing] the polluted Java market." Or, look at Microsoft's payments to SCO, and various "pretending to be independent" political action groups, such as the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute.
So, years ago (probably 1998), when Microsoft held a strategy meeting on how to stop Linux, someone would have proposed the following idea:
> Infiltrate Open Source Development Teams and...
> - submit polluted (e.g. broken) code
> - push complexity and bad ideas
> - create dependencies on proprietary software
> - slow down progress in general
> - make life miserable for other developers
> - argue every minor detail, disrupt discussions
> - be pedantic about OSS concepts
> - polarize every discussion -> no common sense
> - hound and drive out the best developers
We know that Linux threatens to take a multi-billion dollar market away from Microsoft.
And we know that Microsoft has no morality, and little fear of the law.
And so, Microsoft would have chosen not to follow the above strategy... why? Because it's not nice?
We see Microsoft astroturfers at work all the time, writing FUD articles, or posting obvious lies in various forums.
Thus, I take it as a given that Microsoft has people involved with the most major Open Source projects, trying to do exactly as suggested above.
As some have pointed out, it can be difficult to interfere with a project such as Ubuntu, where a benevolent dictator can identify and kick out the troublemakers.
But it is relatively easier to infiltrate a highly democratic project, such as Debian.
Likewise, I expect that Microsoft has people in the FSF. Those people would not be arguing against Free Software, on the contrary, they would appear as the most extreme supporters of FSF principles. They would attempt, for example, to make GPL3 so extreme as to prevent its success in commercial venues, as they may have previously succeeded in making the FSF's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net replacement unusable in business, through overly-strict licensing.
Unfortunately, sabotage has always been one of Microsoft's most effective weapons. While Microsoft's technical incompetence is such that they have never defeated a strong competitor through actual competition, various acts of sabotage have allowed Microsoft to come out ahead against DR_DOS, Geoworks, WordPerfect, OS/2, Go, AmiPro, Netscape, and Java, among others.
Also unfortunate is the fact that it is hard for a democratic group (political parties, unions, Debian, etc.) to prevent this sort of infiltration. After all, you can't go around accusing everyone of being an agent, or you create an atmosphere of paranoia, which just plays into the infiltrator's hands.
Thus, what we are usually left with is simply to continue to fight the good fight. Keep arguing with the jerks until it becomes obvious that they are jerks. Make them ineffective, and force them to start again with a new identity, and no credibility. And continue to push the project forward, even if at a slower pace.
Note that I am not trying to talk you into changing your mind. If you feel the way you do, then you should rest. Let the young idealistic hotshots carry the torch. As for you, if you still want to be involved with OSS, then choose your own project, where you can avoid the astroturfers and the jerks. There is plenty to do.
It is exhausting fighting an evil that is as relentless and well-funded as Microsoft. Hopefully enough people can continue the fight until it is no longer necessary, i.e., until Microsoft is irrelevant.
Are you old enough to remember the joy of working with the Commodore 64? Remember the joy of the early days of the PC, before Windows? Everything was open -- anything was possible! Remember the same joy when you discovered Linux?
Although it is still possible to find that joy today, by focussing on a particular project and ignoring the politics, the day will come when Microsoft is no longer in a position to push their poison, and that joy once again becomes the norm in the computing industry.
Meanwhile, you should find something that will make _you_ happy. Best wishes!
#