Slashdot Mirror

shilling

Please note three things, especially the second and third:

1. Of course, an essential quality of the dirty dealmaking is a snowballing pattern. Note that Microsoft might use this, among previously stated things, to strengthen both claims of cooperation with the EU and its frantic attempts to hurt ODF adoption.
---------
2. For a primer on Microsoft astroturfing and shilling, see
http://www.inlumineconsulting.com:8080/website/msf t.shilling.html

One does not need to believe in any kind of conspiracy to see that the conditions are ripe for an unprecedented attack in the media on the free software community. Again, it's the conditions: various problems at Microsoft, an important license revision coming this month, etc. Scattered individuals of sufficiently warped ethics are highly motivated right now to make noise right now.

I am afraid most slashdotters and other forum participants really have no idea about the level of sophistication of Microsoft manipulative strategy and tactics. Consider it from merely an economic point of view. The pressure is higher than ever at Microsoft--growing threats in the server space and feeling the pinch of so much talent by the likes of Google. Of course, Microsoft has a ton of talented people, but many are quite likely the more "ethically flexible" types that are more comfortable with Microsoft's reputation and would not only have no problem harming the free software community but probably would treat it as an enjoyable game.

Consider, for example, the recent spate of Microsoft turfing and shilling that has been inflicted upon Slashdot. These fakes might take on the identity of any of several traditional mindsets that, say, oppose the GPL and the FSF. Whereas in the past, a fake might have indulged in apologist ravings over Microsoft that are easily dismissed, now it would not at be surprising for them to start faking more sympathetic attitudes, using all manner of reverse psychology, straw men, red herrings, etc. These fakes from the "Microsoft ecosystem" would include far more convincing versions of, say, these trivial caricatures:

"Going with the GPL3 is playing right into Microsoft's hands. MS is hoping for a divide and conquer, with forks everywhere..."

"Opposing the GPL does not imply love for Microsoft. I hate Microsoft, but I also hate people choosing a license just because it's popular."

"Bill Gates and Richard Stallman are both megalomaniacs. Therefore, I choose BSD."

"The GPL3 is punishing a company that has done more than anyone else for desktop Linux: Novell. As for Tivo, let the market decide. Let the GPL3 rot."

"I used to donate every year to the FSF, but they have gone insane with the GPL3. It's against everything they claimed they stood for over so many years."

What makes these particularly insidious is that they exploit people who have sincere concerns--on both sides.
----------
3. A natural objection to #2 as a concern is that it it does not matter. If a faker presents a good argument, then how can anyone lose? After all, it's just an opportunity to test one's own convictions and justifications.

I see two problems. First, it's just a given that Microsoft aims for the lowest common denominator, in this case people who simply are not that critically-minded. Second, it's like a "war of words of attrition." Money is speech, and "justice" sometimes goes to the highest bidder.

Forums are, on a casual level, the manufacture of a mild, tentative consensus about news items. However, a company of unprecedented power and strategic prowess has, in effect, very likely been intruding, indirectly via individuals, and driving up the cost (in time [=money]) of debunking nonsense that harms its opponents.

Yep. The problem with him dealing with people directly is that he's never had any real ability himself to hide what he is. The tremendous value inherent in the mouthpiece strategy...

Upton Sinclair long ago figured out how cash is converted into opinions:

"It is hard to make a man understand something, when his salary depends on him not understanding it."

In particular, the following explains the pro-Microsoft comments we are seeing on Slashdot: Microsoft Shilling and Astroturfing

Nice apologist tract. Let's deconstruct this, shall we?

> I appreciate that MS rushed production to get it out a year earlier than the other systems, as I was jonesing for a new system. I also appreciate that this rush is what produced the defective hardware.

So, in other words, Micro$oft is at it again: they rush a product through production, get it to market before it's ready, and -- what a surprise! -- it's got nasty bugs in it. Summary: M$ fucks things up some more.

> Although the delay in compensation for repairs denotes a greedy attitude on the part of MS, I am not surprised.

At this point, I'd be amazed if *anyone* was surprised.

> Corporations do not exist to serve the public good, and if you find this objectionable, then please avail yourself of a microeconomics textbook. You can't expect good intentions from corporations (and from people in general). You should be satisfied that they do the right thing, even if for the wrong reasons.

Translation: what the corporations offer the public is all they deserve, and if they don't like it they can go fuck themselves. Wonder if this 'primeval_badger' character is a Republican or a Libertarian -- what's his view on public oversight or government regulation of business? That should be good for a cheap laugh....

> Having worked for several years, I understand how difficult it is to design products, let alone systems.

Then you understand the importance of "defensive design" and "quality control", right? Because M$ apparently doesn't, seeing that they repeatedly and consistently release products that are Not Ready For Prime Time. Hell, it's no wonder my first software engineering professor got so pissed off at fuckheads like this, for creating sloppy design and shoddy quality, that it made him "want to get a baseball bat and start bashing in heads."

> Put another way, would you rather wait an extra year for a rock-solid 360, or get one a year earlier, which will probably work fine

-- unless the power supply unit undergoes a meltdown, explodes and sets fire to the carpet, which burns down the house and potentially nearby houses as well. Think I'm being over the top? Remember that little fuss a short while ago over laptop batteries? You know ...over some of them EXPLODING?

http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/22/another-thinkpa d-battery-explodes/

But hey, what's a few exploding laptops, right? I mean, the user escaped with only minor burns and a ruined LCD monitor (other than the laptop screen itself), plus the firefighters came in time, so he should count himself lucky! Hell, he's even got backups of his data, so he should be *satisfied* that things turned out the way they did!! /end sarcasm/

> MS is a decent corporation with decent products.

Ahem... You seem to have contradicted your earlier statement about the nature of corporate business. More importantly, it flies in the face of the public record:

http://www.microsuck.com/content/whatsbad.shtml

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=640

http://www.inlumineconsulting.com:8080/website/msf t.shilling.html

> Don't criticize a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes.

You forgot to add, "or unless you can outdo him."

Remember Bill Gates' infamous letter to the Homebrew Computer Club? The one in which he said to the club that "most of you steal your software"? What he neglected to mention in that letter was:

- Altair BASIC was released way behind schedule (dude, talk about foreshadowing!)
- Many Altair computer users had paid in advance for pre-ordered copies of Altair BASIC, yet had never received it
-

> Honest question - why do you, like so many others, assume that anyone who defends MS (or $otherHatedCompany) is a shill?

Uh... why did the villagers assume that the little shepherd boy was lying the third time he cried "wolf"?

Because by then he had lost credibility with them. It took only two times for that to happen. How many times has Micro$oft deceived the public? Let us count the ways....

http://www.inlumineconsulting.com:8080/website/msf t.shilling.html

More to the point, the author closes his article with an answer to your (rhetorical?) question:

> CONCLUSION
> The alert reader cannot believe any pro-Microsoft opinion presented in any forum.
>
> I remain morally certain that some people hold legitimate pro-Microsoft opinions, with better or worse justification. Microsoft, or its public relations company(s), have so muddied the water with all the shilling and astroturfing that a neutral observer cannot determine whether a paid shill produced an arbitrary pro-Microsoft opinion as propaganda, or a random person produced it as his or her own opinion.

The little shepherd boy lost his flock because of his dishonesty. The Micro$oft corporation lost its credibility with the tech-savvy because of its dishonesty. I have sympathy for neither.

http://www.inlumineconsulting.com:8080/website/nt. sekrits.html#consequences