Homeless Hacker Turns Snitch

John, this is just an update regarding “homeless hacker” Adrian Lamo (or should I say “Lame-O”). As you already know, I met him back in 2001 at a 2600 Hackers gathering by Embarcadero Plaza…after which he visited me at my humble abode, to exchange some computer hardware. He was then 20 yrs. old. I found him to be an unpleasant sort, rather high strung, the “faggoty” type, so to speak. I later learned (through the news) that he is a Jehovah’s Witness, which only adds to his unlikeability. So he eventually becomes the notorious “homeless hacker” and his reputation skyrockets in the global hacker community.

But as it turns out, he is now being vilified as a gov’t snitch, and I think, rightly so. I have learned a long time ago, that these faggoty types (as opposed to non-stereotype or non-”drama queen” gays) are prone to stabbing their friends in the back. He also describes himself as “bisexual” which is not likely, as bisexuals do not have that faggoty trait.

I only discovered, today, that Adrian is the one responsible for snitching on that gay soldier who released secret military documents to Wikileaks. Here are five news reports on this matter (3 text, 2 videos):

Former Grey-Hat Hacker Adrian Lamo Turned Snitch

WikiLeaks ‘Snitch’ Hacker Faces Wrath of His Peers

Adrian Lamo: hacker who betrayed Wikileaks mole

CNN – ex-hacker ‘adrian lamo’ exposed wikileaks suspect [video]

Guy who snitched on Warlogs leaker gets trashed by hackers [video]

Which reports only affirm my conclusion that the Linux groups here in the Bay Area have all been usurped and infiltrated by right-wing and/or Libertarian scum…as have most other progressive groups of any stripe.

Hmmm, might be interesting to check out again (after a 9-year absence) these 2600 gatherings at the Embarcadero. They meet the first Friday of each Month starting 5pm…so the next meetup is Nov. 5. Hopefully, no one will recognize me…I’ll loiter around the fringes. It’s an outdoor event on the ground plaza, so that should be easy.

–Finally, this excerpt from Wikipedia:

Wikileaks and Bradley Manning
Main article: Arrest of Bradley Manning

In June 2010, Adrian Lamo reported to U.S. Army authorities that Specialist Bradley Manning had leaked classified information to him. Lamo also claims that Manning confessed to him having provided the video footage of the July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike incident in Iraq to Wikileaks. Lamo claims that Manning also leaked thousands of pages of classified data and diplomatic cables to Wikileaks, though Wikileaks claims otherwise. Lamo told Glenn Greenwald in an interview that he offered Manning protection under both journalist shield laws, and the clergy-lay confidentiality tradition, and said that Manning declined.

According to German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, a reporter from Forbes has published information, according to which Adrian Lamo works as a “security specialist” with “project Vigilant”, a private security institution which also works for the FBI and the NSA.

Lamo has been criticized by fellow hackers such as at Hackers on Planet Earth 2010.

–end of excerpt

Let The Games Begin

Quoting “seanofmiami”:

{{ He sounds terribly dry. Most attorneys will announce who and what they are. }}

Know what? You’re right.

{{ A private investigator would be more covert. }}

Ditto.

{{ This guy could be on a fishing expedition. Maybe not an attorney, but a scam artist investment peddler. }}

Always a possibility…but it is quite rare I get such calls. I got one for life insurance over two years ago, and that’s it.

{{ We’re probably reading too much into this. His tone of voice is not that sophisticated. He could simply be someone browsing your site or reading the bar. The question is, how did he get your number? }}

I’m thinking it’s a friend of Akbar’s brother.

Or: someone from a Linux group, which I have recently condemned for their elitism, specifically that from “Rich Monkey” (but not exclusively). Will soon make my third, and final, salvo very soon. It will also be the strongest.

Well, nothing else has occurred, so we’ll just have to wait and see.

I’m enjoying Berkeley once more, after having been away for over a month. Au Coquelot, dining on a blueberry scone and a glass o’ English Breakfast tea. F*ck the geeks…I’m better off w/o ‘em, they’ve sold out too, they’re mostly snotty Libertarians.

But I nonetheless still love Berkeley, and they can’t take that away from me! The Spirit strives on! Just got a bunch of used computer games from Half Price Books…now I need to find and download the cheat sheets. The games are:

Legacy Dark Shadows, Reverse the Curse! Ankh, The New Adventures of the Time Machine, Walking with Dinosaurs, and Penumbra Overture (whatever that is, says “..an enticingly eerie horror game”; I’m scared already).

BTW, there’s now a Peet’s Coffee underground at the Shattuck Station. Don’t know if I can keep up with all these changes!

El Blog Del Narco Y Barfo

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:50:51
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: Berkeley Linux User Group
Subject: El Blog del Narco

MEXICO CITY – An anonymous, twentysomething blogger is giving Mexicans what they can’t get elsewhere: an inside view of their country’s raging drug war.

Read the rest of the article here:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100813/LT.Drug.War.Mexico.Narco.Blog/

The actual link to El Blog del Narco is:

http://www.blogdelnarco.com/

(NOT appropriate for minors, sorry Nate et al.)

I’d say that Wiki Leaks and El Blog Del Narco are two excellent examples of how the use of open source services (wikis and blogs) and an open Internet, empower individuals who are passionate for justice to be served. Such potent tools never existed before, and couldn’t come at a better time when our conventional news sources have failed their duty to keep citizens informed, including as whistle blowers against gov’t, military, religious and corporate skulduggery.

Even for individuals, such as myself, in a time when all local progressive activism has been usurped (for the most part) by egotistical, self-serving Libertarian types who really have no sense of justice or democracy, and only see such groups as stepping stones towards some sort of career, celebrityhood, or (gasp) sabotage.

If you have something to say, do not wait in some imaginary line in hopes of having your voice heard in a newspaper, local gathering, or radio call-in. Just go straight to the Internet, where you will discover many effective venues to contribute your proposals, philosophy, and maybe even some startling revelation that is the hallmark of courageous whistle blowers everywhere.

---

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:08:07
From: Dan R
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Hi Zeke,

I’ve been subscribed to this list for some time and you seem to write a fair bit here so thanks for this and all of your contributions. I want to ask you to tone down your political comments however. Calling libertarians egotistical, self serving, and lacking a sense of justice and democracy is purely inflammatory and was wholly unnecessary to your message. ALL political philosophies have very intelligent and reasonable proponents, and I’d hope that if you’re going to attack any of them, you’d go beyond name calling and ad hominem attacks.

Cheers,

Dan

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 02:17:47
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Quoting Dan Roberts :

{{ALL political philosophies have very intelligent and reasonable proponents,}}

Like Tea Baggers, Nazis, Fascists and Aryan Brotherhood? Some political philosophies *need* to be condemned. I don’t look the other way when an egregious wrong is going on.

{{I’d hope that if you’re going to attack any of them, you’d go beyond name calling and ad hominem attacks.}}

Nah. Libertarians *do* suck, of any stripe. Especially since they’ve fully incorporated Ayn Rand’s horrid, vile ideological invention called “objectivism”.

So if someone joined this list who is a Scientologist, I must then remain silent on my disgust of that ideology too? Ooops, did I offend anyone out there who is a Scientologist? Good.

How about capitalism? Anyone offended when I say capitalism sucks?

Seriously, I don’t think we have any serious Libertarians in this group…don’t know why you are so thin skinned.

Some aspects of the Democrats sucks, too. Should I be afraid of speaking out against crooks who happend to be Dems…especially Dixiecrats and Centrists? They suck rotten eggs big time!

How about Republicans? They suck so bad, I don’t see why anyone even gives them the time of day any more.

Cheers!

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 03:00:03
From: Paul I
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Well played, Zeke.

As a registered Green, I take personal offense that you did not mention how much *we* suck. From the naive doves, to the fringe conspiracy theory types, we suck for not even liking our own ‘kind’ most of the time.

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 03:07:47
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: Paul I
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Quoting Paul I:

{{Well played, Zeke.}}

Hey, finally, another participant with a sense of humor! WOOT! Yeah, I don’t like the American Green Party in the least. But the European version…excellent. You are so *right* about the doves, too, and the weirdo fringe types.

Sucks that I left them out. My apologies.

Cheers!

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 03:31:59
From: Sameer V
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

This is still a Linux User Group, right?

Sameer

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:48:32
From: Jack D
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

{{This is still a Linux User Group, right?}}

Sometimes it is hard to tell… :/

The point that I believe Dan was (quite politely) trying to make is that this is in fact a Linux users group with many different people who appreciate Linux/open-source for many different reasons, and the point of the list is to discuss the things that we all have in common – namely an interest in OSS. It is not a soap-box by which to try to gain converts to any political way of thinking or to spread propaganda (whether accurate or not) for any political cause.

The truth is, Linux and OSS are so awesome that all sorts of people with all sorts of political opinions use it and appreciate its different values. Many such people are represented on this list. Because of that, I think discussions that focus on Linux/OSS and not on the things that divide us are much more productive, and in fact are the point of group – to unite people with common interests (surprisingly, the point was not to create a political debate group).

So, in conclusion, let’s try to keep things on-topic and productive. Now, everyone go have a drink of choice and relax. It is Saturday! I’m going to be doing some weekend coding.

Cheers!

Jack

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 10:21:04
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Quoting Sameer V:

{{This is still a Linux User Group, right?}}

The original post by yours truly clearly makes that so. Any other questions?

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:47:52
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Quoting Jack D:

{{Many such people are represented on this list. Because of that, I think discussions that focus on Linux/OSS and not on the things that divide us are much more productive, and in fact are the point of group – to unite people with common interests (surprisingly, the point was not to create a political debate group).}}

Consider me your token Linux activist. I keep alive a welcoming space for those who are passionate about Linux as a tool for social change…for the better, of course. If we consider ourselves a diverse group, that must be allowed.

{{So, in conclusion, let’s try to keep things on-topic and productive. Now, everyone go have a drink of choice and relax.}}

Or a joint.

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 11:45:21
From: Larry C
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

+1 Jack and Sameer.

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:15:38
From: Bill S
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

My thoughts as well, Sameer, Jack, Larry.

This last thread had only the barest relation to Open Source, and not at all about Linux. I don’t believe that the word Linux appeared in your email at all. So I think Sameer’s question was quite to the point. I don’t think BLUG needs a ‘token’ Linux activist… it already has *actual* Linux activists.

The mailing list isn’t a blog. You already have one of those, post these things to it and link to it, if you really must. I like to reading interesting articles about FOSS and Linux. However, I’m kind of tired of the political/economic rants (even the ones I agree with). And I’m definitely sick of the political digs and name calling (even the ones I agree with). Calling it humor doesn’t wash. It’s not really relevant and its certainly not polite discourse.

Just my 2 cents.

Bill

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 19:27:07 -0700 [08/14/10 19:27:07 PDT]
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Quoting Bill S:

{{My thoughts as well, Sameer, Jack, Larry.}}

Umm, Jack was opposed to Sameer and Larry’s kneejerk reaction.

{{This last thread had only the barest relation to Open Source, and not at all about Linux.}}

The original post, mine, was indeed an open source topic…how it impacts political and social mores. Much of the *comments* however, were inappropriately oppositional, yours included.

{{I don’t believe that the word Linux appeared in your email at all.}}

Oh the horror.

{{So I think Sameer’s question was quite to the point.}}

Albeit pont *less*…more like a troll than a respectful participant.

{{I don’t think BLUG needs a ‘token’ Linux activist… it already has *actual* Linux activists.}}

I *am* a real Linux activist.

{{And I’m definitely sick of the political digs and name calling (even the ones I agree with). Calling it humor doesn’t wash. It’s not really relevant and its certainly not polite discourse.}}

How hyperbolic of you.

I had no idea how many EMO types subscribe to this list!

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 20:12:21
From: Jack D
To: BerkeleyLUG
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Zeke,

I am “opposed” to all rhetoric on this list whose only main effect is polarizing the group over issues that are not directly related to Linux/OSS – this includes many posts in the past (even some from myself). While the subject of your original post is probably within reason for a LUG list, I think some of the rhetoric (the stuff Dan pointed out) in the post was exactly the type that serves no purpose other than to incite a reaction over an issue that is outside of the
realm of OSS.

And, quite frankly, yes I would request that you (and everyone else) keep your opinions on Libertarians, scientoligists and whatever other irrelevant group off of the list. I respect your right to have strong opinions on this issues (and I might agree with you on many of them), but this list is not a soap box for expressing these opinions. Doing so, does nothing but make the list less welcoming for all involved. This list is intended for discussing Linux/OSS related topics and the
activities of the BerkeleyLUG.

So, to put it bluntly: please try to keep discussions on the list related to linux/OSS. Do not include rhetoric whose main effect is to incite a reaction over issues outside of Linux/OSS. I.e. keep personal opinions on polarizing social/political issues off the list. I really don’t want to censor the list; that would really be a bad precedent, and I quite frankly don’t have the time. So please, keep the discussion on the topic Linux/OSS and express your opinions on
polarizing topics in a different venue.

Now seriously, we all have better things to be doing on a saturday night! For the love of tux, let this thread die!

Cheers,

Jack

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 22:36:57
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

Quoting Jack D:

{{So, to put it bluntly: please try to keep discussions on the list related to linux/OSS.}}

My intent, obviously, was to open a dialogue about the favorable impact of OSS applications–such as wikis, blogs and social media–on the effectiveness of activism. OLPC (One Laptop per Child) is prime example, and has been discussed numerous times on this list, and in our group). I would enjoy other’s opinions on what they think of such political movements based on OSS tools.

But in the least, such topics posted from time to time, show potential members who would enjoy discussing the political aspects of OSS, that they are just as welcome here, as the dedicated coders, who don’t want to spend so much as a nanosecond on such issues. (I must say, however, what is now being shown, is thoughtless *hostility*, intended to discourage activist-type participants. This is no accident.)

I think this is something to celebrate: how effective and ubiquitous open source has become, in supporting progressive revolution. Business, corporations, and industry are not the only aspects impacted…OSS has gone a long way in forwarding humanitarian concerns that have nothing to do with the almighty dollar.

If people only want to discuss coding, fine. Just stay off any thread that enthusiastically shares opinions and links about the political, social, educational, philosophical, scientific (and even perhaps) religious impact of open source. But to make rude comments and attempts to sabotage any such discussion, is pretty darned underhanded.

I think the activists at Wiki Leaks et al are excellent folks, who’ve made fantastic use of open source, to further important causes, risking their own lives in the process. This is an incredible result of open source, far beyond (and worthier than) the praise so often heaped upon corporate use of OSS. OLPC is great too, but no one has to take such great risks in that effort.

I can’t imagine what sort of progressive political and social change could be achieved these days, without the existence of open source. There’d certainly be no Wiki Leaks, OLPC, or El Blog del Narco!

There are many Libertarian ideas espoused by some Linux users, which because of their destructive agenda, should not be ignored. Such as the use of slave labor worldwide (to produce all these computerized products we so love), to benefit an elite handful. And no health care, job protection, etc. for more and more workers in the advanced nations. No safety net, either. That’s all Libertarian dogma.

I think that whenever people praise such ideology, they should be challenged. To censor someone because he puts a label to it (“libertarian”) is to obfuscate a serious matter, and suppress dissent. Every progressive group (including the techy ones) has been considerably infiltrated by elitist ideas such as Libertarianism. And of course, its advocates will do whatever’s necessary to silence the opposition.

As I wrote in my blog entry, “Open Source Can Do No Harm,” I pointed this out quite clearly, with linked references, that others might be better informed.

I know my occasional posts regarding OSS’s political impact is really not that big a deal. But small minded people with a hidden agenda will whine and spew nasty accusations in an attempt to censor those contributing worthwhile ideas to better the lot of the poorly advantaged. And I am most enthusiastic that Linux and Open Source now play a major role in this (though chagrined that it is also being utilized, more and more, for harmful purposes under a Libertarian banner). Obviously, some others in this group do not share my enthusiasm.

For a really classic example of vile (and ultimately *pointless*) attacks perpetrated by Libertarian style geeks, read the thread entitled “Seek the Wisdom Of Our Elder Geeks” on this page:

http://www.weak.org/pipermail/buug/2010-March/subject.html

I was the OP (and ironically, the *founder* of that group and list); and the attacker is a Unix expert of great reknown…though *is* somewhat notorious, also, for his nasty behavior on mailing lists. Don’t know why he’s like this (why he chooses to soil his good reputation in a public venue) but you, Jack, have also commented to me about his unsavory manner. (As have a few others, over the past decade or so.)

For me not to speak out from time to time, regarding very real culture wars going on in the OSS community–as it does in all other groups–would be to remain silent in the face of a flood of Libertarian/right-wing dogma that now plays a majorly *negative* impact on the once largely progressive and anti-capitalist Linux geek community.

And in so remaining silent, I’d contribute to the empowerment of one of the most destructive forces now ravaging this planet: Libertarianism. I’d rather be *booted* off a mailing list, than comply with unnecessary self-censorship. (I’ve said the word “Libertarian” nine times, in this one message alone, thus far!)

–
Zeke Krahlin

http://zekeblog.wordpress.com

–
Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian
Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian
Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian Liberatarian

---

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 23:06:19
From: Zeke Krahlin
To: berkeleylug@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: El Blog del Narco

ADDENDUM

I should also take this moment to point out a particular star in the Linux community, who is generously distributing laptops to the poor children in Afghanistan, via the OLPC project. In fact, here is a video where she is featured, and sitting beside her is (lo and behold) our longterm Berkeley-LUG member, Grant Bowman:

The star is Carol Ruth Silver; and I wonder: Grant, do you know who this remarkable woman is, her incredible history and accomplishments?

Wonderful Ms. Silver is, politically speaking, out of the old-school left wing. She served on San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors during the time Dan White shot Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk. More than that: she was first on Mr. White’s list of victims, but by good fortune Carol had already stepped out of her office at that crucial time.

–I now quote Wikipedia [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_Ruth_Silver ]:

Carol Ruth Silver (born 1938)[1] is an American lawyer and former politician. She was a Freedom Rider arrested and incarcerated for 40 days in Jackson, Mississippi…

Silver’s 1977 election was part of a shift toward diversity on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors; she was described as “the board’s first unwed mother.”…

Silver then retired from politics and continued her philanthropic work, which had included founding San Francisco’s Chinese-American International School in 1982…

In the summer of 2002 she traveled to Afghanistan to explore ways that American citizens could extend a hand of friendship to the Afghan people…

In 2007 she was appointed Director of the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office of Prisoner Legal Services.

–end quotes

Regarding her recent position w/the Sheriff’s Office, from which she voluntarily retired two years after beginning that post.

–Here’s why:

In recent years Carol was the directing attorney for Prisoner Legal Services of the Office of Sheriff. But she resigned her position effective today. Carol has said: “I was participating in a system that made me feel criminal.” She told of one experience where a woman, who was in jail, needed Carol´s help to place her children in foster care. The woman was is in prison for pot charges. That upset Carol: “She should not be prosecuted, she should not be in jail, and here I was helping to place her children.” Silver announced that she was joining Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and would campaign to end the war on drugs.

–end quote

That quote is from the blog “Classically Liberal”, see:

http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2009/02/good-for-carol-ruth.html

So I just thought you should know this, Grant, if you don’t already. Ms. Silver is not just a wealthy old lady with a kind heart, who has decided to join the OLPC project. She is a dyed-in-the-wool progressive, whom I doubt very strongly, would *not* speak out against Libertarian intrusion in any group in which she held some interest.

It is important to make those aware that many progressive people have created this wonderful OSS community, but who are now being forgotten, supressed, silenced, trivialized and scorned by newer members who overrun these organizations with their foolish and mean-spirited ideology.

The Eternal Wound

My comments as “HoboHomo” (and a kind response) from article about
Christian fundamentalist dogma on Alternet.org, a progressive message board:

---

Subject: Homophobia: Our Achilles Heel
Posted by: HoboHomo on Mar 30, 2009 9:23 PM

The universal hatred of gay people by most religious and even non-religous societies has provided an eternally-open wound by which those in power can control and decimate all others.

When all sorts of people composing a MAJORITY of the culture, rabidly partake in the persecution of gays (or any other group, but homosexuals have been the chosen scapegoat for at least a millenium), society constructs its own DE-construction, and begins to experience the very terror they’ve so gleefully spawned upon the non-hetero minority.

In your own ignorance, you did not see this coming. It is not too late, IF and ONLY if, enough citizens aggressively resist homophobia and create laws and sanctions of ZERO TOLERANCE against gay bashing.

Otherwise, enjoy the hell you’ve created by your own demonic thoughts, if not outright actions.

---

Subject: MCC has the “jesus” domain name.
Posted by: Bliss Doubt on Mar 31, 2009 9:15 AM

www.jesus.com

HoboHomo, my feeling is that christianity is so dysfunctional and mixed up, and has so much bad baggage in the inquisition, witch hunts, crusades, holy wars, the oppression of third world people by missionaries who have insisted that native peoples were savage heathen, gay bashing, right wing political intrigue, that I wouldn’t want them, and don’t feel left out by not belonging to one of their churches. I found my spiritual path in the 80′s when I began hearing about the Goddess.

Anyway, for what it’s worth, I’d point out that no particular cult of organized christianity owns Jesus. One of the official statements of Metropolitan Community Churches is “homosexuality, not a sin, not a sickness”.

I was touched by the pain of a friend who died just over a year ago. In his last years on this planet, I think he knew he was going to die young. He’d been raised Catholic, and as a gay man felt rejected by God. He lived his last years in search of answers about pain in this life, about the validity of one’s identity, about higher power that you can lean on, our responsibility to each other and to God, and whether or not God really takes an interest in us. He died without finding his answers.

---

RE: MCC has the “jesus” domain name.
Posted by: HoboHomo on Mar 31, 2009 12:17 PM

HoboHomo, my feeling is that christianity is so dysfunctional and mixed up

Everything you said: so true! Do you know that when missionaries reached Alaska, their depraved teaching drove many Inuit people insane? That’s because being told they were sinners by nature caused a severe psychosis of depression, a disconnect with their creator who is most beloved in their native worldview. They couldn’t imagine being in any way, so intrinsically offensive to their God, it broke their spirit!

Many indigenous societies were most accepting of alternative sexual inclinations, and found ways to incorporate that into their culture in loving, rational ways. But–thanks to the dogma of Christianity–they now are violent gay bashers even when otherwise getting back to their roots. They may reject the distorted overlay of a conquering culture (for the most part), but maintain one of its worst influences: homophobia.

I found my spiritual path in the 80′s when I began hearing about the Goddess.

I am essentially a Pagan myself…more specifically, an animist, which is one who believes all that exists (even a rock) is imbued with universal consciousness. My paganist ideas are obvious in my tales, poems and essays that you can read on my web site or blog.

One of the official statements of Metropolitan Community Churches is “homosexuality, not a sin, not a sickness”.

While I have found little personal reward in joining gay-friendly churches (and believe me I’ve tried) due to the overall conservatism that has sadly become part of gay society…I believe that reclaiming Christianity on their own terms is a most important and effective political maneuver. That is why I’ve dedicated my own activism towards reinterpreting religious mythos on behalf of sexual minorities. My web site is entitled The Final Testament (or “Faggot Bible”), which you may visit here: gay-bible.org

Bemusedly, I didn’t realize until several years aftern naming my web site, that “Final Testament” is also the pet name Muslims give to their own bible, the Q’uran.

On my home page is a link to my “zekeblog”, where my most recent writings and activities are recorded for anyone interested.

I was touched by the pain of a friend who died just over a year ago.

Thank you so much for being his friend; that will bless you the rest of your life. I believe that gay people have a spiritual destiny above and beyond the average hetero person…and that we walk Christ’s path more closely than any other group…as implied by our long and noble history of persecution and humiliation. It is our (gay) destiny to bring the world into a better existence, by example and long-suffering.

And it is meant to be a total surprise for most.

Thank you, Bliss Doubt, for a MOST thoughtful comment. I consider you a true friend on this bumpy road we call life. May the Great Spirit bless you this day, with a sign that brings joy.

Seek The Wisdom Of Our Elder Geeks

I think what needs to be acknowledged, is Open Source’s emergence from an earlier movement that was largely composed of renegade, left-wing, anti-establishment types. Since then, obviously this movement has expanded to include the mainstream corporate community. And from what I’ve just studied regarding this history, Open Source Software (OSS) established itself as separate from Free Software (FS), to assert a growing membership of business entrepreneurs and corporate interest. And this has come with considerable antagonism and upset from the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and related groups.

So of course, you are going to have the occasional clash between the two camps. However, newer members of OSS should not be surprised at all, when some participants reflect more of the original ideals of the FSF, including distaste towards the status quo, which of course includes the corporate world…as well as Republicans, Libertarians, and other right-leaning types. So whether one likes it or not, this *is* the history of Linux/FS, from which OSS sprung (or broke off, depending on whom you ask). This needs to be underlined (using Open Source loosely, to include *both* OSS and FS):

Open Source is *not* Google, as some would have us believe. Open Source is *bigger* than Google. In fact, it’s even *bigger* than all corporate entities of our struggling planet put together! In short: Open Source is *bigger* than capitalism!

In order to grow into a diverse group, you need to acknowledge that aspect of our origins. Ergo, do *not* expect every single member to be excited about the corporate aspect of OSS, and application of Linux to facilitate capitalist goals. Just so you know: in spite of this ideological rift, FS and OSS advocates do come together on various projects, when the purpose matches the ideals of the more liberal camp.

Be that as it may, Berkeley-LUG remains a very small group, for which such a low number could not possibly reflect much diversity. But as it grows under Jack’s leadership, please be aware that you will acquire more participants of a left-wing stripe, besides myself. That is: unless you allow pro-business peer pressure to drive them away.

When I first joined, it was under the umbrella of Linux advocacy/Free Software. Some time later, Jack stated his wish to use the term “Open Source” in order to form a broader base of interest. Fine with me, however I was not yet aware of the serious ideological *rift* between the FSF and OSS communities. Only when I decided to learn more about how the term “Open Source” came to be, did I understand.

It is my impression that many of the newer advocates to OSS, are not aware of this ideological clash, and therefore blithely assume (as I had) that “Open Source Software” was simply a term to broaden our community of Linux and Free Software advocates. I have only recently learned: that is most definitely *not* the case. It will be a challenge to incorporate members of such opposed camps, but knowing your good character, I believe you are more than up to it. The payoff will be incredible, both personally and communally.

Now, while I am made to feel *alone* in my perspective, I realize that is far from the reality. *Many* anti-corporate Linux advocates live and thrive in Berkeley and surrounding regions. In fact, I am talking about our *pioneers* of FS, GNU, and open advocacy…all free and accessible to even the financially strapped: such is the *intent* of these forefathers. Allow me to employ the title “Elder Geeks” to these most generous and intelligent souls…both male and female, queer and hetero, and politically/socially progressive. BUT most definitely *not* Republican or right-wing, or even conservative (except perhaps if you include certain moderates in that circle).

These Elder Geeks tend to be largely anti-corporate, and frown on this latest phenomenon of the business world, where FS/OSS is utilized to build their monied empires. At least, this has been my observance over the years, of what Elder Geeks promote and practice. Granted, they may not project such a political *bias* as I do…just the same, they harbor distaste for the corporatization of things Linux. Which distaste may be enunciated w/o any sort of politics in mind.

These Elder Geeks are pioneers of programming, hacking, and free and generous sharing of their sofware and knowledge…to *anyone* who makes even half an effort to listen carefully, RTFM, and apply this knowledge to the real world (of cyberspace) effectively. So before you run off with fantasies of fat wallets dancing around your gifted cranium…give a thought to our Elder Geeks, and consider that perhaps (just perhaps) they have a *valid* reason for their distaste, outside of my own sharply political reasons for criticising Google, Red Hat, Sun, Oracle, et al.

It does not become such obviously talented minds to maintain willful ignorance of our history and OSS origins, and thus isolate and trivialize those not hell-bent on turning Linux into a financial Gold Rush.

Does it really benefit your education, to ignore the wisdom of our Elder Geeks, by never learning from them, exactly *why* they refuse to ride the corporate bandwagon? Do you really think that all their brilliant contributions that literally *created* and *shaped* this marvelous world of Free & Open Software you now enjoy, did not spring from a beloved philosophy *outside* the corporate empire?

I invite you to one of our Elder Geek gatherings, to kindly ask them their opinions about using FS/OSS in the corporate environment. Ask them their viewpoints on lucrative companies that utilize FS/OSS (including free operating systems), such as Google and Red Hat. Are there any for-profit agencies using FS or OSS, that they favor? Where should we draw the line between earning a living, and using Free/Open programs to earn that living?

Assuming you approach them with genuine interest and respectful regard (and knowing your character somewhat, I see no reason why you wouldn’t), they most likely will *not* chase you out of the room.

I’m certain they will be most pleased that younger OSS advocates even care to ask. So come to our next BUUG meeting, or the one after that, and learn valuable perspectives of our Linux Pioneers, what sorts of philosophies inspire them, and what their opposing views may be, regarding this latest evolution of OSS into the world of Wall Street.

Most sincerely,

Ezekiel J. Krahlin
Old-school advocate of Free Software

Gaga For Google

Quoting Jack D:

But, Zeke, I personally think you are wrong in your attacks on Google. (I mean that in the friendly discussion way) Here is what I think of Google and Buzz in particular.

Fair enough. I am not interested in suppressing anyone’s opinions. Suffice it to say I am definitely against advertisements, and have always been, no matter in what form they appear, which of course includes old media such as radio, television, and billboards. I am certainly *not* interested in any sort of “service” that fine tunes their schlock to my personal “tastes” (as they perceive them). In fact, any ad that is particularly annoying or intrusive, inspires me to *never* buy that product, or use that service. (Not that I have much money to throw around in the first place, but you get my point.)

Before I continue my rant, let me iterate that I use Google simply as an *example* of what’s wrong with our cowboy capitalism…and that, even though Google is a far less nasty example (by a long shot) of American big business, it is nonetheless culpable to a considerable extent. But Google *is* just an example, and my criticism applies to a highly immoral system that is endemic across the board. Sad to say, bellwether voices like Upton Sinclair’s at the turn of the previous century, are still needed, likely even *more* so today, than back then…thanks in large part to the emergence of global slave labor, sweathouses, prostitution rings, hazardous workplaces…oops, I meant to say global “economy”.

I never fill out online subscription surveys honestly, as I choose to guard my personal information jealously…and don’t care how *responsible* and *respectable* the company appears, based on their legal contract. For one: I am not a wealthy person, not even middle class, financially speaking. Yet I get tossed at me, all sorts of enticing products that only remind me how low on the capitalist status rung I am. For example: automobiles, lavish vacations in faraway paradises, time-share condominiums, and cosmetic plastic surgery.

For another: I am homosexual. Yet I am inundated with titillating female erotica, in hopes of enticing me to purchase the intended product (viagra, anyone? propecia? dentucreme? salsa lessons?). Bad enough they presume I’m heterosexual, but they also make the crude assumption that I regard my fellow humans–females in particular–with vulgar wishes to violate their bodies. I don’t even regard males that way. (Of course I have my fantasies, but definitely without any violent overtones.)

Of course, if I reveal to them my homosexuality, they *might*, just *might* put a stop on sending me sexual material of a misogynistic nature…but I doubt it. When some promoters of erotica discover I’m gay, they may actually stop sending me vaginal/boob fantasies, and send something equally deplorable intended to titillate my *gay* proclivities. I do have standards you know…standards which are *not* valued in any real measure, by advertisement propagandists.

I find advertising the way we do it here in America, as a gross form of visual and mental pollution…and brainwashing, especially on the young. I sincerely question if those netizens who hold women in high regard (and who place great value in consuming as little as possible), will be sent via Google’s extensive filter logarithms, *only* such promotions that match these users’ ethics. And do they actually have surveys that *ask* its users what kind of products they *don’t* want advertised on their screen? In my case that would be (for examples): *any* sort of sexually-themed material (gay, straight or otherwise), *any* sort of automobile or products related to it, *any* kind of vacation offers, *any* edible product containing meat, poultry, seafood or food that is *not* ecologically sustainable, *any* ads that glorify our military prowess, or *any* religious dogma (especially from Christian nut-jobs).

Regarding our youth: advertising towards children is, IMO, disgusting. They are the most vulnerable to brainwashing than any other age group; and a society that is truly civil, would outright *ban* commercials targeted towards them. The very notion that a child should be made to feel worthless for lack of a pair of $150 sneakers, is more than absurd: it’s vile! And all those sugar laced cereals and candy bars only serve to undermine their health in a world already so stressful, that good health should be a top priority. Advertising by capitalist ventures rarely serves the betterment of humanity, as the profit motive obscures such lofty ideals. Instead, profit is the key motive, which cares not if its feverish grab for lucre destroys the lives of many good people, in the process.

But let’s move on to something other than the advertisement issue, such as privacy:

Google may indeed hold itself to high standards regarding privacy issues, towards its millions upon millions of advocates. Even so, there is the possibility of accidental data loss or theft…and the more their databases grow, the more unwieldy they become, and the more likely they can be compromised. We are all too familiar by now, with news reports of supervisors losing valuable and highly secretive data, by leaving their laptop behind somewhere, such as an airport lounge. Even the military has been guilty of this! So if even those agencies entrusted with the most valuable sort of security data, suffer such errors, why on earth should Google be excepted from considering such a possibility?

And what if Google goes under some day? Will data privacy be respected by whatever *new* agency acquires their resources? Some years back, I read about an online service that went bankrupt…and they also regarded the privacy of their user data with the highest protection. But the company that bought them up, did not. The data was therefore, seriously compromised, and the users who came to trust the former company, were up in arms, though ultimately, they could do nothing to secure their personal data. I do not recall the company in question at this time, but I’m sure it can be looked up with a little search-engine effort.

Either the advertising *or* the security issue ALONE, is reason enough to discredit whatever *good* companies like Google accomplish. I cannot embrace a system which requires extreme sacrifice of *some* in order to benefit *others*. And this is what our form of capitalism requires…one w/o a safety net, w/o universal health care, and w/o other socialized services that would allow capitalism to thrive, only minus the cruel sacrifice of so many innocent souls.

In the most general of ways, vulture capitalism–which *is* quite the American way–requires the sacrifice of hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of lives (by keeping them in dire poverty w/no hope for a decent life), in order to plunder their valued resources, that the first world may live in decadent prosperity. And Google is definitely *part* of that system, albeit a less virulent example than is typical. This in no way means that I do not consider that possibly, Google may become a big player in transitioning our nation into one that is more equitable to those poorer nations. In fact, they are far more likely to be, than our traditional, pre-Internet business.

Tell me: if Google offered you a free luxury condo in exchange for displaying neon advertisements on the moon (which could be clearly seen from earth), would you go for it?

For further and *extensive* information regarding criticism of Google, see: Criticism of Google

To whet your appetite, two brief excerpts:

–excerpt 1:

The policies and practices for which Google has been criticized include its use of others’ intellectual property, concerns that its compilation of data may violate people’s privacy, censorship of search results, and the energy consumption of its servers. Much of the criticism of Google pertains to issues that have not yet been addressed by cyber law.

–excerpt 2:

Privacy International has raised concerns regarding the dangers and privacy implications of having a centrally-located, widely popular data warehouse of millions of Internet users’ searches, and how under controversial existing U.S. law, Google can be forced to hand over all such information to the U.S. government.

In its 2007 Consultation Report, Privacy International ranked Google as “Hostile to Privacy”, its lowest rating on their report, making Google the only company in the list to receive that ranking.

–end of excerpts

I think Zeke’s comments that they are buggy is simply untrue

I have the advice of more than one techie who is expert in linux programming, that Google Gears is useless for speeding up one’s online applications (such as WordPress). I’ve concluded that I should turn *off* https mode (which WP’s own help page says definitely does slow things down)…it’s overkill, anyway…no one’s gonna try to sabotage my poor widdle blog!

I’ve played around with their online docs, iGoogle, and reader. I am not alone in my frustration:

–quote from [ Another buggy upgrade of google docs ]:

looks like they aer at it again, they seem to have releassed another buggy upgrade of google docs…

the scroll bars don’t work, in IE8 or Chrome

what happened to the save anc close option when you publish a document

why isn’t the tables pop-up automatically positioning itself so you can see all the options wihout having to constantly scroll up and down which you can’t do righ tnow with the scroll bars

what’s up with the giant header bars… they may look cool on a 24″ flat panel but when you are working on a
12-13 inch laptop it’s just a lot of dead/wasted space

what happened to open this link in a new window / tab option

and why are there so many formatting issues in IE8 or Chrome when it comes to text / tables being centered in a document.

–Quote from [ Complaints Pour in about iGoogle Home Page ]:

passions are running high among iGoogle users upset that their personal portal page to the Web has been altered in ways they don’t like and without any prior warning.

–Quote from [ Google Reader Seems Buggy as Heck/ ]:

Is it just me or is this new version of Google Reader buggy as heck? I’ve waited patiently for the bugs to subside, but it almost seems like they’re getting worst.

They mostly manifest as a ton of repaint issues. The list of feeds, for example, doesn’t show all of my feeds and frequently corrupts itself. I can see them all in “Manage My Subscriptions”, but the list is a mess. I’ve got 180 odd feeds, but I can’t imagine what it must be like for someone with a lot of feeds to try to use it like that. Worse, I can no longer create new folders because the drop down box showing the list of folders is also corrupted.

–end of quotes

But there *are* excellent alternatives, so I certainly am not lacking for useful and reliable cloud applications. For examples:

• 5 Great Alternatives to Google Docs You Should Consider
• You can use Google Watch‘s “scroogle.com” search engine, equivalent to Google, just minus the tracking and data gathering.
• You can easily set up your own free home page with widgets that do the same things iGoogle provides. There are countless free web hosts out there!
• And for a reader: well, you can use RSS on your browser, or plug them into that home page. For every application Google provides freely, there’s always at least one excellent alternative. For every *new* application they come up with, you can be certain that alternative non-Google solutions will be forthcoming.

Yes, Google is a company that tries to make money. If this is your reason for hating them; then there is nothing I can say that will likely change your mind.

I am not a hateful person; that term does not apply when someone questions the integrity of a system, or business, or policy. “Tries to make money” is too simple a copout for the matters at hand…which I’ve already described in this message. “Tries to make money” doesn’t take into account the vast sea of abuses so common with capitalistic ventures…if not directly, indirectly by virtue of the other resources required to build and maintain any corporation.

Just look at this most recent banking fiasco…was it simply a matter of “trying to make money”? How many people’s retirements and careers and stable home lives have been utterly destroyed by their just “trying to make money”!

capitalism does not necessary have to be at odds with freedom and openness

Of course not, but that’s how it started out, and it’s gotten *worse*, not better. We’ve just had the SCOTUS approve of corporations being able to spend unlimited monies for political causes. Let’s just see how *that* effects the next series of elections.

The very notion of a corporation being equal to an actual person, is morbid. Capitalism is essentially evil in its origin, and intent. And its advocates are seeking a return to the 19th century, where the average worker lived in poverty, and there were no laws against sweatshops, child labor, worker safety, intimidation, excessive work hours, ad infinitum.

Google *is* a corporation, and thus can potentially behave in all the worst ways allowed a corporation, if it so chooses…and still be perfectly *legal* within its defined framework. Because it does *some* good, does not mean that either corporations or capitalism is in essence, good.

The *only* way capitalism can work in a compassionate manner, is to soften it considerably with socialized programs. But capitalism itself is intrinsically evil; it can only be tamed like a beast. Unto itself, it does nothing *but* harm, and favors only the wealthiest elite…maybe less than 2% of the population.

I feel *no* mandate to maintain capitalism no matter what, even in a compassionate world. There are many other financial models that are perfectly fine *and* democratic, that we can apply w/o any sort of requirement to hold onto capitalism like a tobacco habit.

And I think that is precisely how things will go, as this world transitions out of old ways, and towards a world united, and dedicated to preserving all life, and fostering financial equality through COOPERATION, rather than competition. A good term for this system is “socialist democracy“.

So, in conclusion – Google creates/supports great open-source projects, promotes open standards across the web that enables innovation and provides really polished web tools that are a best of breed. I can hardly believe how limited phone calls and SMS messages were before I started using Google Voice.

True enough. I am not claiming that Google has not been a major innovator…I am only pointing out this “ga-ga for google” syndrome which tends to blind advocates from seeing both sides of an issue. Personally, I abhor cell phones…not for what they are, but how Americans use them. They constantly interrupt conversations, and intrude themselves often in the most irritating of ways. I cannot begin to tell you, how much it irks me, when I’m having a good conversation with someone, when suddenly their cell phone beeps…and they *expect* me to shut up immediately, and let their cell phone take center stage.

I understand that Europeans are far more respectful towards others, regarding their uses of cell phones. For one, they ignore their beeping cell phone, when engaged in conversation. For another, they keep them turned *off* when in a theater, at a symposium, or in other organized gatherings.

Cell phone companies have found a clever way to increase the cost of basic service at least fourfold! I do not make LD calls except occasionally (about 3x/mo.)…so I use a cheap service online, that charges me just 1 cent/min. anywhere in the USA. And international calls are also cheap, say 2 cents/min. to Great Britain, for example.

Otherwise, I use my land line for less than $10/month. Not many people call me, nor do I make many calls. But I have e-mail, chat, IM…all free, via cyberspace. So I don’t *really* need a telephone any more. In fact, I value my land line solely because it allows me dialup access to the ‘net! (Can’t afford high speed service.)

There should be lifeline cell phones for the low income and disabled…say, basic local unlimited service for $15/month. But the phone companies always beat down such proposals before they ever get off the ground. So I’m keeping my land line till pigs fly, and hell freezes over! Or to paraphrase:

“If you want my land line telephone, you’ll have to pry it from my dead, cold fingers!”

In sum: I have absolute confidence that innovative technology could go on perfectly fine with or w/o Google, or any other capitalist venture. After all, look how far the Linux/Freeware/OSS/et al communities have come so far, withOUT capitalism! Possibly *the* most successful venture born of the Free Speech Movement. Doing *so* much these days, to benefit the least fortunate among us, in a troubled world beaten, raped and terrorized by the beastly hands of Das Kapitalism.

My, was *that* a good rant; thanks for letting me vent!

Cheers everyone,

I can see Google sending you an e-coupon for Cheerios right now!

Open Source Can Do No Harm

Note: Acronyms “FOSS” and “OSS” scattered herein essentially mean the same thing: “[free &] open source software”. There’s also FLOSS: “free/libre open source software”. And OS by itself, means “operating system”. And finally: Each illustration conceals a link to additional info.

---

Quoting goosbears:

AAMOF, Rick Moen wrote a wildly relevant essay entitled ‘INOLJ-OOW2.0C (Is Not On LiveJournal Or Other Web 2.0 Cults)’. Have Zeke K, Grant B, Larry C, and/or others of you heard of Rick or actually met him?

Yes indeed, and thanks for the link to one of Rick’s most informative essays, with which I fully agree. When I founded BUUG (Berkeley Unix User Group) in January 2000, Rick was one of the earlier participants. I have also had a number of thought-provoking and enjoyable e-mail conversations with Rick, on and off over the years. His linuxmafia site includes a page with links to his plentiful and most fascinating articles…dare I call him a “Unix philosopher”?

I’m definitely old-school re. open source and Linux, hence anti-coporate and anti-capitalist. So, Linux users such as myself, cringe over corporate hegemony, and do not necessarily see the business model as something worthy of adulation, let alone seeing the inclusion of Linux in the business world as a “success”. We are a nation that worships the almighty dollar, hence seeks to translate *anything* of value into profit. I see capitalism as ultimately, a failure, and therefore seek to promote goals that benefit humanity’s lot in life, over and above any sort of profit incentive.

Of course, there is some overlap, when you have companies treating their employees with respect and financial responsibility, such as Google and Red Hat. Though unfortunately, they are far the exception than the rule…as so sadly realized in our current economic downturn, which threatens to become the next worldwide depression, worse than the previous one. Now, *that’s* scary!

Do you Yahoo?

For me, Linux is one main answer to the computer jigsaw puzzle, in fostering a more peaceful, and less violent world…violence of which the greed for wealth is a formidable instigator. I do admire Mark Shuttleworth‘s lofty goal to provide a powerful operating system to even the poorest on this planet. For the same reason, I admire the OLPC project (One Laptop Per Child), originating out of an M.I.T. think tank. Amusingly, before I even heard of OLPC, I wrote a sci-fi fantasy piece about an uber-wealthy male who decides to give a laptop to every destitute child in the world. As it turns out, I wrote my piece several months after the OLPC project was announced to the public:

Parable of the Laptop Billionaire

(And I think that *most* Linux advocates would agree with me, it’s a real shame that OLPC eventually felt compelled to install Windoze alongside its own OSS version of Linux.)

Obviously, open source and Linux have matured tremendously in the last decade or so…and no longer can I simply assume that because they sprang from progressive and anti-capitalist ideals, they will always remain so. Now, we have a wide array of contributors, advocates, and even abusers. Republicans, Libertarians, Nazis and racists all use open source to achieve their ends (their web sites are everywhere; and I’m sure they use open source applications to enhance their pages with message boards, forums, chat rooms, surveys and the like), as do Democrats, Socialists, Green Partiers and the NAACP. And all shades between.

Therefore, if one is of a progressive or left-wing bent, one can no longer blindly support everything and anything that is open source. One must carefully discern each case in use, especially when speaking about corporations, government, organized religion, and the military (for examples). As for the philosophy of open source and free software, may I refer you to Richard Stallman’s “Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software“…and make it clear to my readers that I stand firmly in line with the free software advocates, as opposed to open source. Here’s an excerpt:

The main initial motivation of those who split off the open source camp from the free software movement was that the ethical ideas of “free software” made some people uneasy. That’s true: raising ethical issues such as freedom, talking about responsibilities as well as convenience, is asking people to think about things they might prefer to ignore, such as whether their conduct is ethical. This can trigger discomfort, and some people may simply close their minds to it. It does not follow that we ought to stop talking about these issues.

That is, however, what the leaders of open source decided to do. They figured that by keeping quiet about ethics and freedom, and talking only about the immediate practical benefits of certain free software, they might be able to “sell” the software more effectively to certain users, especially business….

As the advocates of open source draw new users into our community, we free software activists must shoulder the task of bringing the issue of freedom to their attention.

I am certain there is now a growing body of open source specifically geared towards the sabotage of a minority’s civil rights, for example; or towards the ruthless elimination of creative small businesses perceived as competition (another example, thinking here in the history-of-Microsoft mode).

Open Source Marines?

Ergo, I make my official stand through this article, of my support *for* Linux and all open source that is used to assist, promote, and improve the human condition…and *against* its use to aid and abet financial greed and destructive ideologies.

Of which I include Libertarianism BTW, and which I see as a rapidly increasing threat to all humanity — global fascism if you will. Please read:

Ayn Rand, Hugely Popular Author and Inspiration to Right-Wing Leaders, Was a Big Admirer of Serial Killer

In fact, there were a number of Libertarians who helped me found BUUG..much to my dismay. (A main reason for my starting this group, was I felt lonely among a growing population of right-wing zealots, so assumed that forming a Linux group would attract liberal types. Times have sure changed! I predict that some day soon, we’ll see bumper stickers with slogan: “I hack for Jesus”. Maybe they’re already out there; I’ve never owned a car, so I don’t know.)

Discouraged by this, I quietly discontinued my participation after a year or so (with the feigned excuse of “family obligations”). Glad to say that I am back, and BUUG is more balanced ideologically, that is: with a good number of soundly progressive Linux and Unix advocates.

Berkeley Linux User Group is still a very young organization, and will take some years to expand and, hopefully, increase in diversity. But if I find that the membership is largely influenced by Libertarian advocates, I will be compelled to drop out, as the last thing I want is to support such cold-hearted dogma.

There also seems to be a cult-like tendency of some open source advocates, to never say anything bad about OSS, or its application. Else you will be labeled as “traitor” (or “counterproductive” or “spreading FUD” in my case). This ideology that open source can do no harm, is indeed a cultish attitude. Because all that open source is, is software whose code is free to view and alter, and often widely distributed at no cost. There is no rule of OSS that prohibits fascists, Nazis, or racists (for examples) from creating their own free programs. (Godwin’s Law be damned, I say!) Here’s your quote of the decade (by yours truly of course):

No longer can one blindly dive into the open source pool and assume with unquestioned confidence, that no sharks are about.

FLOSS my teeth please?

So, open source advocates such as Berkeley-LUG can choose to become a cabal of Libertarian zealots (as seems to be the tendency of all OSS gatherings, these days), or expand into a diversity of members who share the common interest of open source, and advocate its use as a tool of compassion, rather than profit as their god. I specifically say “Libertarian” in lieu of other nihilistic credos, precisely because this is the main threat looming over the open source community. That is: the worship of corporate entities, rather than simply including them as but one slice of the OSS pie.

Regarding Larry C., the “Free Software Guy“:

“Preaching the gospel of free software” exclaims his home page, at top. Now, I know his blurb was writ in good humor…nonetheless, there is a sort of zealotry sprouting from certain members of open source which attempts to unfairly censor others in that same community. This is mainly the ideology of Libertarianism, which habitually mocks and suppresses viewpoints from the old-school camp of liberals and progressives (who have these ridiculous notions of universal health care, living wage for all, and job protection…Ford have mercy!).

I have to cite Mr. C. as a living example of one who makes snap judgments against whistle blowers within the OSS community, precisely because he has found a personally rewarding (and dare I say, “profitable”) niche, and therefore great incentive to espouse the “open source can do no harm” ideology. This is not to say he is absolutely a hardcore Libertarian or Vulture Capitalist, but that he is likely influenced by such persuasions, as implied by his kneejerk attempt to squelch my particular voice, despite my strong record as an advocate of free and open software, especially Linux.

For the record, besides founding the Berkeley Unix User Group (a very social gathering BTW, per my intent), I’d like to point my readers to my two most recent online contributions towards open source and freeware:

Best PC security…at $0.00

That blog entry BTW, was my last contribution to the Windoze community, before I shut the door completely on Micro$oft products. In that essay, I show 100% free solutions to highly effective security and safety of one’s computer…for those who use a Windoze operating system. Originally posted February 2, 2009, it remains a solid piece of support.

My Letter to Ray Taliaferro

Posted Septermber 22, 2009, it is an e-mail supporting Mr. Taliaferro’s outrage against the expense and constant annoyances of Windoze seurity products, such as Norton. (Taliaferro is one of the most popular liberal radio talk show hosts in the country, been around for years.) I encouraged him to consider using a Linux OS, Ubuntu, and even invited him to our meetings at BUUG or Berkeley-LUG. Amazingly, he actually read my letter in full, on his next show…unfortunately, I didn’t stay up late to listen that night, and missed it. A neighbor called me the following morn, to relate the good news.

I have contributed numerous useful ideas and essays on behalf of free software and Internet democracy, since I first began BBS’ing way way back in 1984…including an original approach towards protecting your system from viruses and most other malware…in preparation for when this problem would take off. I was extensively quoted in 1988 by a technical journal called “Micro Cornuopia” now long defunct:

gay-bible.org/truetales/micro-cornucopia.htm

I have also created what is probably the first (and still only) full-blown ANSI animation story, “SallyJones”. Download it here, about the first truly intelligent, free-willed robot, in the image of a little, multi-racial girl:

gay-bible.org/flotsam/sally_j.zip

(You need to run it in a DOS box or window.)

In case anyone would be interested in learning more about my viewpoints (political, social, etc.), I’ve kept an extensive record of my Usenet participation from 1997 to 2009:

Spilling My Guts All Over Cyberspace

Out of respect for Jack D., founder of Berkeley Linux User Group, I’ve posted my reply in the form of a blog entry, instead of the usual mailing list. This is because he prefers to keep politics, for the most part, out of his Linux advocacy group. But people are political animals, and Linux is right in the bullseye of the culture war between progressive and right-wing ideologues…thus it is inevitable that from time to time, strongly political issues will arise. And that’s not a bad thing; it is in large part, philisophical pondering about the influences of open source, and forming a new consensus about which direction(s) it should take.

No GNU ideas.

And since any number of Berkeley-LUG participants frequently makes (what I perceive as) naive or simplistic statements with the assumption that no one differs in their viewpoints, I feel compelled to toss in the FLOSS ring, my own two cents. For example, this statement:

I have nothing to hide, so I don’t care if Google gathers information about my online activities.

That statement is so naive and without a moment’s introspection, I don’t know where to begin. (Wait a minute, yes I do: I began with the first line of this essay!) I found the video in question “The Cost of Free” provides an excellent analysis of why one *should* care about Google’s user database, as but one example of many companies’ accumulation and potential misuse or abuse of this information. Where even a harmless error or glitch in such databases can wreak devastating harm on a most personal and intimate level. What you don’t think you have to hide, may work against your best interests somewhere down the line, such as health status, or political opinion that may wind up destroying your career, or prevent you from getting employment, health care, or admission into the school of your choice. In a nutshell:

If you really don’t care what personal data is being gathered about you, and by whom, then why don’t you live in a glass house or, at least, keep the drapes swept aside, that all may view you 24/7?

Now, Google’s slogan “Do no harm” I find rather alarming. (Sorry to pick on Google so much, I know some are happily employed there, with excellent benefits and salary, but they are a big player in open source, and thus smack dab on the radar. No doubt there will soon be a Godwin’s Law against citing Google, like we have for any mention of Nazis…oops there I go again.) I become immediately suspicious of any corporation that uses slogan’s like “Do no harm“…it’s like saying “We are perfect, we can never do any wrong.” Such an attitude is hubris, and smacks of ideological pandering, similar to a *cult*. (Reminds me of the Hippocratic Oath: comforting are the words, but how many doctors or clinics genuinely *practice* this ideal, that is: forego obscene profit in order to heal the poor?)

“Actions speak louder than words,” goes the old saw, and I’d say that, in Google’s case, this doubly applies. What is Google’s record in this matter of doing no harm? Not very good, I conclude. The following site, Google Watch, serves as Google whistleblower, and will inform you of their dark side. They include topics such as “Google’s book grab,” “Big Brother is well-connected,” “Mozilla evades taxes,” “Is Google God?” and “Creepy Gmail”.

But Google is just one among countless examples of the corporatization of open source. I for one, refuse to toe the corporate shtick, as it wants to be adulated as your real family, replacing true communities with Libertarian schemes where the almighty dollar reigns over all other considerations. There are some good things about Google of course, such as excellent employee packages…but should this excuse them from abuses which are widespread and destructive to our personal lives, and what remains of true community? Does any of the good they do outweigh the bad (such as their cooperation with China’s draconic censorship laws)? I leave it to each of you, to reach your own conclusion. Good luck!

Yours most truly,

Ezekiel (I couldn’t hack my way out of a virtual paper bag ) J. Krahlin

Addendum March 14 2010: Liz at today’s Berkeley-LUG meeting kindly corrected me re. Google’s motto. It’s “Don’t be evil”, not “Do Know Harm”. But I believe my point’s still valid, regardless of this minor faux pas. Cheers!