SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Open Source Initiative bans co-founder, Eric S Raymond:
Last week, Eric S Raymond (often known as ESR, author of The Cathedral and the Bazaar, and co-founder of the Open Source Intiative) was banned from the Open Source Intiative[sic] (the "OSI").
Specifically, Raymond was banned from the mailing lists used to organize and communicate with the OSI.
For an organization to ban their founder from communicating with the group (such as via a mailing list) is a noteworthy move.
At a time when we have seen other founders (of multiple Free and Open Source related initiatives) pushed out of the organizations they founded (such as with Richard Stallman being compelled to resign from the Free Software Foundation, or the attempts to remove Linus Torvalds from the Linux Kernel – both of which happened within the last year) it seems worth taking a deeper look at what, specifically, is happening with the Open Source Initiative.
I don't wish to tell any of you what you should think about this significant move. As such I will simply provide as much of the relevant information as I can, show the timeline of events, and reach out to all involved parties for their points of view and comments.
The author provides links to — and quotations from — entries on the mailing list supporting this. There is also a conversation the author had with ESR. The full responses he received to his queries are posted, as well.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @12:10AM (20 children)
After reading the linked article, still have no idea what was written in the first place. All I know is that after a 20 year absence, ESR decided to get into a bun-fight with the current people running the show.
1. After 20 years absent, it's not your place to run any more.
2. Irrelevant org fights with irrelevant former founder. This isn't 1995, nobody gives a damn about either ESR or OSI. Get over yourselves. Seriously, what have you guys done since the turn of the century that's relevant to the average user? Or anyone who isn't ESR or a member of OSI?
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MostCynical on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:50AM (10 children)
When volunteer-based organisation have "old guard" members in conflict with the current board/committee/organisers, there are rarely any good outcomes.
either the oldies rally other oldies (often around the cry "change is bad"), and they all leave, making the organisation non-viable, or the oldies assert control, "re-take" the board positions, and all the new people leave, making the organisation unviable, or, everyone fights, everyone leaves, making the organisation unviable
The only real variable is the amount of time it takes to implode.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2, Offtopic) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:03AM (2 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 12 2020, @03:04AM
Not exactly, I think. Basically, just like the GOP has a few different camps, the DNC also has different camps, with two main ones. One is the progressive wing, which is Bernie and his fans. The other is the neoliberal wing, which is Biden (and formerly Hillary, not sure if she's active in the party any more though since we never hear about her) and friends. The GOP has something similar: it has the Christian conservatives, the upper-middle-class people who want to pay less taxes, and the gun nuts. The big, big difference I see between the two parties, however, is that the different GOP camps will more reliably get out and vote for their candidates, even if they don't like them that much. Whereas on the Democrat side, people (especially younger and more progressive ones) will get pissed off and stay home when they really hate their candidate.
If we adopted a better voting system, we wouldn't have just these two parties: they'd break up and we'd quickly have 3-10 different parties, like western European nations do.
Anyway, the big reason this isn't like the DNC is because the OP was describing how these organizations end up collapsing or becoming completely irrelevant. This isn't happening with the DNC (or GOP). This kind of in-party turmoil really isn't new; they have lots of fights and change over time. Maybe you've forgotten, but back in '68 the Dems had a similar fight, with one popular guy getting the shaft by the party so they could push their unpopular candidate, and they both lost to Nixon. The DNC didn't die; they still had plenty of seats in Congress after that, and finally got a President elected (Carter), though it took a while. Of course, then we had 12 years of GOP presidents, but then we had 8 years of Clinton, and 8 years of Obama after W's two terms. Neither party is going away; Duverger's Law prevents it.
(Score: 2) by Lester on Thursday March 12 2020, @08:38AM
What does DNC stand for?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:40AM (6 children)
AKA "Emrace, Extend, Extinguish" accelerated by moles.
I KNOW I'm paranoid, but I'm starting to think I'm nowhere near paranoid enough.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:38AM (2 children)
I saw this happen in organizations with zero significance, power or otherwise. It's human nature. Now having said that, it's not going to take rocket science for a powerful outsider to exploit such an inclination for their own sinister purposes.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:05PM (1 child)
> with zero significance
The good old People's Liberation Front?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:46PM
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday March 12 2020, @01:04AM (2 children)
Never assign malice where incompetence would explain things.
Never assign incompetence where pettiness would explain things.
Never underestimate how much damage petty people can do.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday March 12 2020, @09:51PM (1 child)
I'm having trouble imagining that high a level of incompetence or pettiness - I really think malice is the better explanation, and this is just a part of a much larger plot.
Especially if they're also malicious.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday March 12 2020, @10:22PM
It is actually worse when they "mean well" and have "best intentions" because they " know what's right"
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 5, Informative) by NotSanguine on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:07AM (4 children)
Because you didn't bother to read the source material, as I'm doing now.
Apparently, the brouhaha stems from several threads started by ESR on the License-discuss mailing list [opensource.org]. Those threads are:
[License-discuss] "Fairness" vs. mission objectives
[License-discuss] "Ethical open source" and the Persona Non Grata clause.
[License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Dual Licensing for Justice
AFAICT, an additional thread also feeds into this:
[License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas
Unfortunately, the author of TFA declined to discuss the content of these exchanges and, as such, if you want to have any real idea about it, you'll need to read the threads above.
Personally, I didn't see anything all that outre from ESR in the threads above, but I'm sure he has enemies who were ready to pounce, given what a dick he's been in the past about other things.
I don't see that as a valid reason, but it may well be true.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:19AM (3 children)
After a quick look, it's just another stupid philosophical war with no real-world import. Does anyone really submit licenses to OSI for "approval" any more? I mean really, who gives a shit if they approve or disapprove of a license. Just read the license and either accept it, reject it, or ask for a modified version.
The OSI was started as a hobby horse vanity project, and it has never gone much beyond that. When they first announced its' creation, I said "who cares?" Turns out not many, and not much. Such is the problem with vanity projects that don't meet a real need. There was never a need for a "gatekeeper of the licenses."
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @07:15AM (1 child)
You're sure putting a lot of time and effort into something you claim not to give a fuck about.
I guess it's just another opportunity for you to talk out of your ass.
Good times!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @07:24PM
Not sure why she hates OSS so much, but she reaaaalllly hates it.
(Score: 2) by Lester on Saturday March 14 2020, @09:32AM
Well OSI used to save me the time to read the license and understand it, legal texts are not always easy for non-professionals.
I used to trust that if OSI said it was open source it was open source. And if wasn't in the list OSI-approved, it was because it was not open source.
There could be some false negatives: Some not in approved ones were still queued waitting for revision, or the developers had not yet submitted the approval request, or they will never be included because the project leader would never submitt a request because didn't care what OSI said.
Not any more.
Now, maybe it's not in the list of approved ones just because OSI doesn't like its CoC or one of its developers.
(Score: 2) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:45PM (3 children)
I've been trying to distill many years of experience moderating an _interesting_ forum into a book, and one of the big questions to address is the role of tone policing in forum administration.
Inclusiveness isn't a dirty weasel word and the fact is that a forum can lose valuable people if nobody keeps abuse off their backs. There's also the need to keep discussions on track instead of turning into flame wars.
That's not to take a position on this case, which I have no adequate information about.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:12AM (2 children)
That's what the view threshold is for. Everyone can select what they're comfy with. If someone sets it to -1 Raw and uncut, and then complains, it's kind of like the prude who complained about their neighbours nude sunbathing, and when the cops show up, they're standing on a step-ladder on the top floor balcony with a pair of binoculars and going "see, see!"
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 12 2020, @03:08AM (1 child)
That was always suggested back on the green site. The problem with that there, and here, is that anonymous posters always get stuck at -1, so doing that means you can't see AC comments. And sometimes there's good reasons people post AC: they're posting something that can personally identify them.
Honestly, I think it'd work better on a Reddit-style forum where every post starts out at a neutral moderation value, and then really awful posts can be very quickly down-modded with a single mouse click (unlike here, where you only have a handful of votes, and using them is actually a bit of a pain and takes you away from your current view).
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:39PM
If you're not willing to put your name your comments, then why should you start as anything other than -1? Seriously, even a nym is no big deal, it's pretty much the same as anonymous unless you use your real name, which almost nobody does because "OMG I might be DOXXED", whereas doxxing is nothing to be afraid of.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Mojibake Tengu on Wednesday March 11 2020, @12:26AM (17 children)
This kind of license will be enough for both sapient humans and sapient machines:
No funny trinket clauses attached.
Rust programming language offends both my Intelligence and my Spirit.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:00AM (2 children)
I like my Cracker Jacks. https://www.pinterest.com/zstargranny/cracker-jack-toy-prizes/ [pinterest.com] The trinkets are worthless and useless, but it's fun to dig them out, to see what they are.
Alas, they're replacing the worthless trinkets with online games. https://crackerjack.com/#/unlock/home [crackerjack.com]
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:03AM (1 child)
Hey, I got my drivers license in a crackerjack box. Well, I didn't, but it sure seems that most people did.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:14PM
It's where I got my Shwarts
-Yogurt
(Score: 4, Informative) by Zinho on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:03AM (8 children)
FYI, your license proposal is redundant with the existing WTFPL:
http://www.wtfpl.net/ [wtfpl.net]
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:30AM (7 children)
It is not. WTFPL uses legalese. It ought to be possible to simply state your will in unambiguous plain-text, rather than template everything around copyright templates and prose like the WTFPL and many others.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Immerman on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:26AM (6 children)
I've got to disagree - if you're waiving your legal rights, a certain level of explicitness is called for.
"Do anything you want."
What if I want to turn your refined software into a buggy, crappy morass malware and back doors, while still publishing it as your creation? That's not obviously something you intended, but it falls under the license. So long as you have to explicitly waive your legal rights it's harder for such bad apples to operate within the law.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:47AM (2 children)
>What if I want to turn your refined software into a buggy, crappy morass malware and back doors, while still publishing it as your creation? That's not obviously something you intended
No, that would be an acceptable result to me if I were to waive my rights. Anyone receiving software under such a license should be critical as to the source--they would naive to believe the stated author was the actual author unless they had concrete proof.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:17PM (1 child)
>Anyone receiving software under such a license should be critical as to the source
Under what license? Proprietary? GPL? The sleazy intermediary can release it under any license they like, and most customers probably won't be aware one way or the other. They just know "your" software is a bunch of malware ridden crap, and stay away from it in the future.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:55PM
Or, worse/better, put in a transphobic and/or anti-semitic statement in a comment or commit message under the "author"'s name, and watch them become persona non grata overnight.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:33PM
I agree with the AC. That's a valid use of the software under the license.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:19PM (1 child)
What if I want to write a wholly original buggy crappy morass of malware and back doors, and publish it with your name on it? Seems that would do the same harm to your reputation, while making your license choice completely irrelevant.
Wouldn't whatever defamation etc. laws your country has to prevent my scenario also apply to yours, even with the license? A license to use copyrighted code is not a license to libel.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:30PM
XYZ Criminal Activity on a computer, isn't a novel criminal activity.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by sgleysti on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:18AM
Setting aside the issue of whether humans have free will (I would believe it if it turns out we don't), I tend to use the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication [creativecommons.org], which has much the same effect but is a proper legal document.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:13PM (3 children)
So, I can also patent the methods used in the code and ban the creator for touching it, right?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Mojibake Tengu on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:52PM (2 children)
Yes, machine, you can try it. It's your will, after all.
But maybe, you underestimate the street.
We have no use for lawyers.
This is why the License does not use legal wording: it stays out of legal paradigm of privileges and slavery.
Rust programming language offends both my Intelligence and my Spirit.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday March 12 2020, @09:44AM (1 child)
Nowadays we have levels of control that exceed what was dreamed up by orwell in 48, so I would not be very confident in the long term.
How about the licence coming from The Guy?
"Freely you have received, freely give". Matthew 10:8
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Mojibake Tengu on Thursday March 12 2020, @05:34PM
Sounds like a machine irony in a true moment of organics' pandemy.
Rust programming language offends both my Intelligence and my Spirit.
(Score: 2) by bart9h on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:52AM
But... Everybody loves Eric Raymond [geekz.co.uk]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:12AM (1 child)
Corporate cuckoos' eggs hatched strong and active chicks. Now they own the nest.
(Score: 1) by bug1 on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:50AM
Yep;
We are free to forge the chains that are used to enslave us, thats as much freedom as our corporate overlords will allow us.
FOSS is dead.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:04AM
He's defending the anti-discrimination clauses. I'll back that 100%, but I'm not sloughing through all the messages to find out if he started talking about using his prosthetic on people who disagreed, or some other terrible thing, so I'm not ready to start going all, "poor ESR."
Either way, people trying to subvert those clauses is pretty fucking alarming and ought to be the bigger story imo.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:06AM (2 children)
Redhat are just NSA shills, Open Source couldn't handle the hacker ethos and the movement behind free software; so they stripped down all the ethical, political, and philosophical concerns to try and appease their corporate over-lords; and Linus Torvalds along with all the rest of them sold out a long time ago. Microsoft now owns Github. You can run Unix-like command lines from Windows now...
Who gives a fuck about Eric S. Raymond. He gets banned from some mailing list he was never active in anyway. At least Stallman was the victim of an entire character assassination. The Free Software movement annoyed the fuck out of the establishment at first, then it began to scare them. That speaks to something. When you can start making Microsoft Nervous; that's a success.
I'm sure Eric is right about his complaints; but, that's just a continuing trend, and one that will continue for some time until people start to study history a little harder than their, 'sociology'.
In my experience, "inclusivity," is rare. Christianity is about as Inclusive as you can get; they want to convert everyone. And often times if you didn't join them, they'd beat you, to death, or burn you alive, or stab you with stabby swords, etc.. Groups tend to be exclusionary. They may have an, 'inclusive phase', in which they desire to grow their numbers; but, after a certain point, the boat is full, so to speak.
Diversity is subjective anyway and a whole other can of worms. People are people. And people tend to be very convinced or who and whatever they consider themselves to be based on many different factors. We all bleed the same, we all have feelings that can hurt, and most of us prefer to be around people who don't enjoy making other people bleed or die, or seeking to damage us emotionally and that sort of thing.
Some times might makes right; and then the challenge becomes mind over matter, until some one with a big enough stick puts an end to that, and then some one thinks of a way to triump over that, etc.. etc..
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:12AM
Open Sores software attracts grifters. Linus is not one of them, nor is Alan Cox, but ESR and Sue-boy Bruce Perils certainly are. And, they are falling off the gravy train. Sucks to be them. True hackers know to avoid the "suits in tie-dye" like the plague, or corona virus. I hope ESR is entitled to full Social Security benefits, from the Cathedral, just like Ayn Rand was. Hypocrites!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @07:18AM
I've been doing that since the 1990s. [cygwin.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by darkfeline on Wednesday March 11 2020, @06:04AM (6 children)
The tl;dr is that ESR objected to "ethical" licenses as open source. "Ethical" licenses are basically licenses that say "you can use our software, but not if you're doing something unethical with it, as determined by us". I think it's obvious that this is being pushed by social justice warriors of some stripe.
Whether it's a conspiracy or not, free software has suffered major attacks. The Free Software Foundation had all but forced out Richard Stallman for making factually correct observations about the circumstances of a person's crime, crucified by people more interested in being angry about a political agenda than careful reading and rational thought. The OSI is no longer safe either, with ESR being banned for a perfectly reasonable objection to irrational demagogues trying to assert their own ethics on users of open source software.
So now my question is, are there any refuges for free software left? Is there a way to fight back, or do we wait for free software to erode away like the rocks of a mountain.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 4, Informative) by quietus on Wednesday March 11 2020, @07:02AM (4 children)
OpenBSD.
On another strand of thought, one has to fear what this will do to female programmers' contribution to open source, or simply to the amount of women programmers/IT professionals.
A couple of days ago, a lawyer over here got into hot water. He stated not to hire women anymore, after he had had a bad experience with a recent hire.
She had alleged improper conduct. He's now under investigation for discrimination.
Less emotional people will find less open ways to disqualify or discourage perfectly capable women. This will hinder progress for all of us: women have made fundamental contributions -- e.g. spanning tree -- to information technology.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Wednesday March 11 2020, @09:15AM (2 children)
Funny you should say that. I saw a chap over at Hacker News or some other forum who suggested that Theo de Raadt is going to be the next one on the cross. His personality won't do him any favors, as the wielders of CoCs will take advantage of the smallest of flaws. Even Cardinal Richelieu needed at least six lines to hang someone.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 4, Interesting) by quietus on Wednesday March 11 2020, @09:57AM
(Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:39PM
That's because Cardinal Richelieu was bragging about his honesty. In practice, you don't need any lines at all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @08:28AM
Fucking rapey perv! Hope he gets at least 23 years! Men simply will not get away with this shit, at all, from here to forever. Understand, incel?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:38PM
i think the moles should be killed.
(Score: 2) by quietus on Wednesday March 11 2020, @10:07AM (2 children)
(Score: 4, Informative) by quietus on Wednesday March 11 2020, @10:25AM (1 child)
Huh. The above linked article considers the reasons and the strategy for destroying Github.
In the very last para, an update was given by the author (who died 2 years ago).
He mentioned that the scenario was playing out full well, as the original instigator, Julie Ann Horvath, (made unfounded sexual harassment claims against the original Github founder) was replaced [archive.is] by somebody even worse, in terms of destroying the culture that made Github great.
The name of that person: Coraline Ada Ehmke -- who is now behind this Eric S Raymond ousting.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:15PM
well. i try not to be biased.
but if i were to reluctantly judge a book by its cover... she reminds me of a sort of female ex-uber ceo (travis or whatever the broseshjam guy was named).
They both look shifty, but she's got an additional layer of conniving on top. Both looked like they assessed the situation purely for personal gain. Like when working with people, the only people to hang with are tools to use, and any tool not willing to be used is subject for disposal.
Men and women often have different means to achieve the same ends, with different measures of success, with the ultimate goal with these types as being in charge regardless of the cost to others. they may even make it rosey for the people loyal to them via whatever methods that can come with success, either to keep them in line or because they actually are pretty good tools when used.
Sometimes the tools even know they are being used as tools to be used, but often they they think they're there based on merit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:41PM
There is no such thing as a knowledge exchange in the Internet anymore because the entire Internet is a companies playground now. This is exactly like a TV news, where if a message would risk the profit, half of population may get poisoned but it will be censored at all costs (no, not a biological, this is about series of toxic fumes emission from American industry in early 70s, and with recent epidemic affairs, just remember who was barking very loud at Chinese markets right before). Now, if you do a really nice and welcoming community based on a friendly documentation and description system, giving a nice common level for all contributors, this would be bad too! Modern companies talk to people with childish ads, and ads have to show that there is no knowledge needed - like in these ads in which a man shaves with a foam and surprisingly becomes the richest man on earth :). So if you see that the community becomes a head patting club, you can evacuate or request payment as an actor in the ad, because this is the ad. One critique and you're out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @04:47AM (1 child)
dozens of comments and zero real discussion of the whys and wherefores, even from people who purport to have dug into it.
barb hudson, thanks for pointing out the html links and the poor quality of the article. Made it faster for me. Appreciated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @08:30AM
ESR has people who, um, "service" him. It is not pretty, or ethical. It is rather disgusting.