Slashdot Mirror
DARPA Grant Cancelled for OpenBSD and U-Penn?
Starrider writes "It seems the DARPA grant for OpenBSD and for University of Pennsylvania has been cancelled (?) immediately and without warning. See the full story in Theo's email and on deadly.org." Theo is left to only speculate why funding was suddenly pulled. One also has to wonder what this means for the University of Pennsylvania, since they were also in for a piece of the pie.
Too many acronyms!
My head hurts!
An online Starcraft RPG? Only at
Online Starcraft RPG? At
Dietary fiber is like asynchronous IO-- Non-blocking!
...maybe, "DARPA Confirms it"?
Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
Is because they read Slashdot and saw the *BSD is dying.
...they discovered Canada harbors french talking people.
OpenBSD is his project. If DARPA wants to retract their funding, so be it. Good riddance. Theo's intrepid and unwavering ethical beliefs are the reason I trust him to write this OS.
Theo's anti-war comments in The Globe and Mail can be found here. Theo wasn't told why funding was pulled but he suspects his comments there did it.
I don't think it was Theo's comments to ZDNet on "security through beer drinking" which can be found here.
The "oil grab" comment does strike me as a bit uninformed and polemic, but I'll leave that debate for another time. As an OpenBSD user, I'm sad to see the funding pulled and not happy that someone in the U.S. gov't is being petty. (Or perhaps they're just paranoid?)
--LP
I was suprised to see DARPA (which is more independent of this sort of thing in general) giving money of such magnitude to an open product, but I'm not suprised now to see them renig without explanation.
Read the whole thread; not everyone thinks it was because of the peace comments. (Not that it would be surprising to this particular slashdotter.)
Something else that ought to be looked at is the Microsoft angle -- in the past they've put pressure on public institutions to avoid supporting open source projects and instead invest in the "free" market. in this particular climate, of jingoism and nationalism, how hard would it be for them to target OpenBSD as a Canadian, anti-capitalist movement, and then to shove a couple hundred copies of IIS under DARPA's nose?
But, then again, maybe I'm misunderstanding the nature of the grant. It is quite possible that DARPA was funding it specifically because of the non-proprietary nature of the software.
My guess? We'll never know the whole story. (But, I've been wrong before. I used to think Enterprise had promise.)
* Corporate lobby (hey, it's a sale-point)
* TIA would be seriously hampered if everyone is very secure
* fear of technology leak into other countries
* other acts of "head-in-ass"
My life in the land of the rising sun.
It's less likely that the grant got pulled for comments Theo made in a Canadian newspaper than for the fact that the government which has assiduously spent the last 18 months dismantling our country's(*) claim to being the Land of the Free finally realized that their vastly-expanding surveillance capabilities would be hampered by increased computing security. Plug pulled, time for Clipper 2.
(*) For values of "our country" == "the USA".
Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
the idea, as i understood it, was that the grant would help to facilitate development, but the government would not be able to direct the flow of that development. the openbsd people would continue to do the same thing they had been doing, but would be able to bring on more full time programmers.
additionally, openbsd's drive isn't to make an OS with tons of ports (as they, arguably, do much to hurt security of the local machine), but rather a mature, stable, and secure operating system. I use FreeBSD on both my server and gateway, but am going to switch my server back to OpenBSD with the release of 3.3, simply because of the features OpenBSD offers. However, I would never move my workstation over from FreeBSD, as the ports make it much a very nice match for those looking for a workstation.
So yeah this might hit closer to home to some of you now. The DARP grant was to the U. of Penn. and a chunk went to OpenBSD with another smaller chunk to OpenSSL.
-- schubert
The US government has spent HOW MANY billions of dollars on the Iraq war? They're going to be cancelling as many contracts and grants, etcetc, as possible to recoup some of those costs.
For all Theo has done for the OpenBSD, and open-source movements, I think his 'speculation' is treating his words in the paper a little more seriously than it deserves.
If true, this would most definitely NOT be the first time DARPA ever cancelled a grant...nor would it be the first time they cancelled a worthwhile grant.
Is there a place to make donations, say a paypal account. I wouldn't mind sending a little money to help support.
that Theo's article may have been the excuse, I suspect that there are a number of others. Kind of like when NSA backed off on doing security for Linux. I would not be surprised to see that more of the USA's funding of OSS will only occur if the license is not GPL. Of course, we can fund expensive tunnelling on MS with a closed license.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
There are still individuals, as well as companies, that utilize OpenBSD. It has prooven to be quite stable and secure for many. From firewalls to webservers, vpns to ids, personal workstations to x servers. Comments that "BSD is dead" and "noone uses OpenBSD" are purely not true. It maybe a specialized BSD designed for a small niche of uses, but it does what it does and it does it well.
-Cyberhide
- Signature, Not Today.
This sucks.
I happen to be an OpenBSD user, having converted most of my systems over to it because of it's tight code base, progressive deployment of features that are stable, and performance on any hardware.
I "came home" to BSD after taking the trip through some commerical UNIX'es and not liking what the InterNet era did to bloat Linux distributions.
OpenBSD, NetBSD, and FreeBSD regularly share code amongst themselves, giving it huge depth in the experiences of talented coders worldwide.
I was happy when OBSD was US-government funded because I thought it was smart for the US to do, adding up what I know about OBSD's security, the talent of the programmers on the whole OBSD team, how tight they work together, and it showed the government took a smart stance on OS security. I had hopes whatever came out of the project would trickle out to the rest of government.
I don't know if we'll ever know why the program was cancelled, but someone should ask @ an official level. It's not about Linux vs. BSD, it's about our tax dollars as US citizens being used in a way we approved of in a project we cared for, and then being yanked.
We deserve and should demand to know why this decision was made and ensure there's no corporate malfeasance in that decision making process.
Contact your CongressFolk today, US citizens, and help show that Slashdotters are a powerful and informed bunch of people.
Who's biting the hand that feeds them? Not Theo. Theo has class. Theo lost some bucks. That sucks. But here's the thing: DARPA gets a lot more out of Theo then Theo ever hoped to get from DARPA. This is just another example of idiocy run rampant at the defense department. This is the same department, remember, that ascertained the necessity of protecting the Iraq Oil Ministry whilst the relics of civilation's birth were plundered. What's so important about the Oil Ministry? What have they got there? A bunch of loan guarantees with the French, vs. the cradle of civilazation? DOD fuckwit shitwits. These people are so stupid that they will put their own interests at risk in order to spite someone (a very intelligent someone) who doesn't tow their fucked up party line.
Theo will prevail. The current administration of the US DOD will go down in history as infamous self-important crusading intolerant assholes responsible for great world instability and economic chaos.
--Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
Actually, you do have the right to speak freely in the US, just as I suspect you do in Canada. After all, you & your loved ones are not dead/imprisoned/being tortured for what you said.
However...
You did just shoot your mouth off about your employer in a negative way! Not too wise to do that anywhere public, and pretty much just plain dumb to do it VERY publicly in print.
And, lo and behold, they didn't agree with what you had to say (shock, amazement) and they pulled funding.
I hate that you lost your grant money (especially since I like your project and the work you do), but you have no one to blame but yourself.
So no whining.
Refer to the subject of this message if you have any further questions.
It seems the DARPA grant for OpenBSD and for University of Pennsylvania has been cancelled (?) immediately and without warning.
Does that mean DARPR may be thinking giving a grant to someone who start the "Open Linux"project ?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Theo's message follows:
- - - -
FYI,
It has come to my attention that DARPA has cancelled the POSSE program with UPENN, (sub OpenBSD & a bit for OpenSSL) for undisclosed reasons, effective today, without any warning.
My suspicion is this happened because I made anti-war statements in a Canadian newspaper article in the Globe & Mail, but I am not an American citizen so I cannot claim to have free speech there (even made "quote of the day").
In a phone call a few days ago it was expressed to me that there were people inside DARPA and UPENN who were very uncomfortable with the article, but I was not told specifically what upset them.
We have 60 developers flying in from around the world (they bought their own tickets, non-refundable) for a Hackathon May 8 - 20, where we do a major part of our development; since DARPA is now forcing UPENN to cancel those Hotel accomodations, I would be very grateful if anyone can find a way to help us. I'm going to need to pay for it myself, since these people are going to come.
Thanks.
- - - -
The anti-war statements that were made can be found here
--
Full steam ahead, stoke the boiler with more kittens! -- Bluey, Dragon Tails
I'm always astounded how people think they have the right to express their opinions and then act surprised when there are repercussions.
If you want to discuss politics, religion, etc., you have to realize that you are going to piss some people off. If you're ok with that then you won't have a problem dealing with things like this.
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
And the Pope might be Catholic.
Forget for a moment that the funding source was the US gov't. Just imagine that the money came from a grant from some generic source with no political or social implications whatsoever. A portion of the money was spent, and many of the goals were already reached. The project lead continued to spend the money, in some cases for purposes that were at best dubious and at worst clearly opposed to the wishes of the grant source. And then he gave interviews where he badmouthed them. Do you think that any group, anywhere, would continue to give money to the project?
This isn't a Big Mean US Gov't story - after all, they had been funding the project with pretty lenient restrictions until now - this is yet another case of a great programmer and leader who has let his mouth get in the way of his work. Theo isn't yet up to the level of RMS, but he is trying Really Hard. DARPA brought the gear, the ball, provided a nice field to play on, and gave the OpenBSD team a chance to show what they could do. After a great start, they decided to hang out with friends, do their own thing, and drink beer out of their helmets. And then they threw dung at the guys in the suits paying for the party. Brilliant. Why should anyone at all be shocked that DARPA took their ball and went home?
I like OpenBSD, and use it on my firewall box. Partly because of the security, and in part because as an also-ran in the OS popularity contests, none of the script kiddies even bother trying to get in. I'll upgrade to 3.3, and maybe even buy the disks to give some money back to the team. But I still think that personally, Theo is a prick, and this time it bit him.
Coders and testers can give back to the Open Source community through pretty obvious ways. Same with tech writers helping with the docs, and lawyers keeping an eye on the licenses and handling privacy and security issues. Any PR or other personal contact specialist folks out there looking for a way to help out? There really needs to be some project full of helpful folks to handle the interface between the socially-deficient techies and the prickly and sensitive people in the outside world, from investors to possible users. I know I need the help when dealing with clients, and clearly I'm not the only one. How about it?
You're just jealous 'cuz the voices talk to *me*
Anyone who has worked in the defense research biz can tell you that it is not uncommon for funding to be pulled. No big conspiracy is required. Generally, the funding agency has funding diverted from them to pay some other government bill. The price of something else, with a higher priority, went up. The funding agency then has to come up with the money. So they grab money from lower priority projects.
Just goes to show all this talk about freedom and free software is great when you're arguing with ComandrKeen69 on /. but free speech hits you in the pocket book when you port it to meatspace...
Ah well. Who cares if some cracker kill a bunch of US soldiers. We sure showed Theo. Why does he think he has the right to free speach anyway?
It could very well have been as simple as someone from Darpa decided to peruse the mailing list/IRC forums one day and asked a n00b question and didn't like the response (unlikely, but not nearly as unlikely as getting shitcanned for an anti-war comment).
I agree, Theo is blatantly stretching.
[using my karma bonus as I feel this needs to be heard and discussed.]
--relevant quote from down the list:
:-)"
....well, that word you can't use in usenet. I've seen enough with what passes for the law and legalities with this junta, they are the rulers, everyone else is a subject. They've been hacking down websites, now they are starting with the ultra violence on anyone who dares to have an opinion against them. Losing cash is nothing in the long run. Screw em, make your OS, and keep your opinions.
"I am not sorry for having said my anti-war stuff, in fact if anything,
this comes to something I said to Ty a few nights ago at the bar: "If
they take the money away, then it was blood money, and I don't want it".
I actually feel redeemed
--good for you theo. It was blood money. The US government has been hijacked and is run by
And quite frankly, the government doesn't want "the people" to have a secure OS, they want "total informational awareness". Can't do that with secure software to the people, can you?
We're seeing it now, assaults on security researchers and developers, assaults on encryption, etc.
I've never run your OS but I can see what's happening, so you must be on the right track. Just lately they've taken down irwin schiff and his tax research, and also the publishers of cracking the code, the expose of the UCC in the US. so it's just not specifically IT. Politics as usual like you would see in any banana republic, just so happens this is turning into a LARGE banana republic, or should I say a "regime"..
1) There is no evidence the reason the funding was pulled because of Theo's comments.
2) I think people are missing the point. It was the Department of Defense, not just the US Government that was funding the research. Now, why the hell would you shoot your mouth in a negative way about somebody that is giving you funding--AND then complain about it.
If you care about something strongly enough that you are willing to stand up for it and take the consequences... good for you. But why does he act surprised and start whining when the consequences actually arrive!
In a surprising turn of events, BSD was found lying dead on the side of the road in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. I'm sure that we all have enjoyed using BSD-derived code at some point. BSD will be missed. Truly an American icon.
That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
since the DARPA chief has too much money invested in the secret metal gear projects to invest in a simple OS
While I don't think theo is particularly "rad", I can certainly see why some would. He certainly does nothing half-ass..it's whole ass or nothing!
I use FreeBSD on both my server and gateway, but am going to switch my server back to OpenBSD with the release of 3.3, simply because of the features OpenBSD offers. However, I would never move my workstation over from FreeBSD, as the ports make it much a very nice match for those looking for a workstation.
My suggestion, as an OpenBSD afficianado, is to keep your server and workstation running FreeBSD and to shift your gateway/firewall to OpenBSD.
Gateways, firewalls, NATs - these are the things Open excels at. The firewall it offers is quite honestly second to none as of this point in time. As of 3.4, Open will have quite a lead in this realm. FreeBSD kicks the unholy shnikey out of Open on the performance and user front, however, and there's no denial nor excuse otherwise from the team nor the hardcore following of Open.
Just a suggestion, though. Alternatively, you might consider doing what I what I do . . . Open on the gateway and 'insecure/screw-around' server, Free on the heavy traffic webserver for performance, and Gentoo Linux on the workstation. This is just my personal approach, however.
Of course, the fact that you're using BSD on multiple machines suggests you're wise enough to make your own decisions, heh.
--Ryv
It works both ways, baby.
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
"Wait a minute on this... I'm a linux guy, never even touched BSD in my life. And now *I'm* saying "Huh?"
I'm a Windows guy. I'm saying "huh?" too!
"Derp de derp."
I'm a student at the University of Pennsylvania, and Jonathan Smith teaches CSE350 every semester (our software engineering course). Last year we wrote a kernel-level firewall for OpenBSD. It was a great course, and he's pretty much the only professor here with any idea what software engineering means.
:)
It's a shame that this grant was cancelled. He could do a lot for the gov's computers.
Now I know why we used OpenBSD in the course and not Linux.
Unless mankind redesigns itself
I was under a mistaken impression on the development.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Registrant: X.com Corporation (X880-DOM) 1840 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 US Domain Name: X.COM Administrative Contact, Technical Contact: PayPal, Inc. Hostmaster (PI2724-ORG) hostmaster@PAYPAL.COM PayPal, Inc. Palo Alto, CA 94303 Palo Alto, CA 94303 US 650.251.1100 Fax- 650.251.1101 Record expires on 20-Oct-2009. Record created on 20-Oct-1999. Database last updated on 17-Apr-2003 21:30:06 EDT. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.NIX.PAYPAL.COM 65.206.228.70 NS2.NIX.PAYPAL.COM 65.206.228.71 NS1.SC5.PAYPAL.COM 216.136.155.4 NS2.SC5.PAYPAL.COM 216.136.155.5
The more likely reason is that some of the DARPA funding was going to non-US Citizens, and not because of some twit's half-baked "armchair politician" commentary.
DARPA has *every* right to pull funding for *any* projects that they fund, especially when the funding is not directly benefiting the USA - which is what happens when the money leaves the USA and goes to a "foreign national" or a citizen of another nation.
ScottKin
I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
Meanwhile, in some other part of the country, some contractor for DARPA is placing an order for $5 million worth of Microsoft Office because the damn thing keeps saying it's not activated. Our government really needs to get its head out of its politicians' asses.
What makes me angry is that, as an American citizen, DARPA's money is MY money, and they are using it as a bludgeon to silence anyone against the current war in Iraq.
I for one am going to donate money to the project via PayPal. I urge you to do the same.
If you want to help but can't afford to donate, at least send him an email telling him that you support him. It's a lonely road and he could probably use the support.
I advise those DARPA people to pull off their patriotic clothes and gadgets. They should wash their mouth, their ears, their feet, their hands and take a days leave. When they come back, and are not being hindered by patriotic absurdity, they should think again.
Nothing is so narrow minded for your brain, as only doing , thinking and wearing patriotic stuff.
Robert
"I spent _six_ months waiting for a visa when I was invited as a researcher for the Air Force" (snip) "So fuck DARPA, and fuck the USA nationalists" Looks like the INS made the right choice. The day my Government gives asshats like you my cash is the day I vote for the other party.
You're doing it wrong--http://youredoingitwrong.mee.nu
*sigh* Now I need to find another contract. :(
If it was an oil grab, an 'informed person' would have to articulate:
why the US would spend $100+ billion to control Iraqi oil revenues that are a twentieth of that annually... surely one could get a higher return elsewhere?
what evidence there is that the U.S. will actually *take* (grab) the oil, rather than leave it for the Iraqis to own and control
explain why the US would rather take oil than just buy it on the open market
under related but alternate theories, acknowledge (or explain why not) why one should be suspicious that US is doing this for oil company contracts, but why that same logic would not apply to French and Russian rationales for opposing the war
explain why the US would act in such an insecure or greedy way when only 10-15% of its current energy usage comes from persian gulf oil (~50% energy usage is oil, 25% of US oil comes from persian gulf)
An 'informed' and fair person would also be willing to acknowledge he was wrong if, 5 years (or whatever) out, the Iraqi's had a functioning democracy and controlled their own oil. Right?
I don't claim to be 'informed'. I don't *know* why the war happened, but the stated reason is pretty decent: old theories of 'containment' don't work when a nuclear-capable state can just slip a nuke to a terrorist and get away with killing millions of people, destroying economies, etc. with a decent chance of not-getting-caught and counter-nuked. With 9/11, it became crystal clear that existing terrorists have the will and the doctrine to do participate in such actions. Nation-states clearly have the will and doctrine to develop nukes. Whether they have the will to pass such material on to terrorists is unclear, but in Iraq's case, the history of invading neighbors, using weapons of mass destruction on Iranian enemies and local Kurds, and a reasonably successful history of deceiving the UN, suggested that the will to proliferate might also be there. That possibility must be stopped.
--LP
If you like OpenBSD, chip in a few bucks. If it went down the way it did, then that's a shame. I'm a Canadian, FWIW, and it's really too bad this went down like it did. I also run a OpenBSD 3.2 firewall that I love. I can't say that it suprises me though, and it certainly is dissapointing.
If you're an American and don't like this, then write your elected representative of choice. I'll be writing mine, but only because I'd rather see them throw money at these guys than a $1.077 Billion dollar gun registry boondacle. OpenBSD sells boxed sets, and I certainly imagine they'll take cash, too.
I didn't see in the article anywhere you could send a donation to. OpenBSD.org has their own donations page and a orders page for their propaganda and cds and section for donations as well.
If nothing else, OpenBSD will profit greatly from the exposure and free publicity this will generate in the Globe and Mail tomorrow.
..don't panic
Shock and outrage! Theo opens his mouth to bite the hand that feeds him, and so gets no bone? Who would have thought it would happen to such a sweet and affable fellow?
Bah.
Theo's legendary lack of tact and people-skills has sunk him... again. He can fork NetBSD and come out on top, he can fork OpenSSH and win the trademark dispute, he can fork IPfilter after alienating Darren Reed... I don't think he can fork the US Government. (Tho it would be a lot more stable and secure if he did... )
~Soop
DARPA is not a welfare program. If they get the results/research they seek, it shouldn't matter where the work gets done.
Theo- Regardless of the reason behind the dropped funding, I'm proud that you stood up for what you believe in. If it makes me less of an American for believing in free speech, then so be it.
Theo has a problem because DARPA went back on its promise. He'd have been a lot better off if DARPA hadn't approached him about the grant in the first place. Are you saying that breaking promises this way is a valid form of "repercussions" from the government?
Hey, I've been in on DARPA funded grants before, and I'll tell you, there are a TON of reasons that funding could have been pulled...
....cut!
1) The contact at DARPA changed. This happens all the freaking time. The guy who used to be your bonus baby might have been asked to move aside (or moved up, as the case may be), and the new guy just didn't "get" the project.
2) They expected milestones, or at least reports of the sort that backed up what was being done on the project. If someone was slacking in getting these reports written,
3) Questions weren't being answered in a way they wanted to see. I've seen this too. It's pretty damn embarrasing to watch the funding agency ask legit questions, and then get the runaround on answers. THEY HATE THIS.
I could go on, but you get the idea.
Also, usually the main contact with the DARPA folks are NOT the guys implementing the project. It's the guy who's responsible for the grant. They don't give two rats cheeks about who's on the project, as long as the work gets done.
I seriously doubt they had any idea who Theo was, no matter how "famous" he is within his community. Putting too much stock in anyone's profile besides the guy who wrote the original grant is just grandstanding (grant-standing? heh).
It could have happened for any of the above reasons, or more. When I first hear about this a few hours ago, I looked for it on Slash.... Glad to see the submitter had a level head in posted what he/she did, since until the guy who wrote the grant speaks out, there are no facts here, just guesses.
The only connection between the anti-war statements and the cancellation is in Theo's mind. There is more evidence of a UFO landing at Roswell.
Did Theo see any black helicopters flying over U of Penn that confirmed any of this speculation?
The man in charge of DARPA infosec is Dr. Douglas Maughan DARPA/ITO. Write an email to dmaughan@darpa.mil and ask him politely why he decided to drop funding for this project. The timing of the announcement suggests that it is related to the pro-peace comments made by one of the project's members.
And I am talking from experience. My significant other just found out today that her funding was pulled. She doesn't know why either. (And she didn't make any anti-war statements.)
Afghanistan is free?
Bye!
But, um, not uneasy enough to return the $2 million BEFORE they took it away? What kind of backbone is that?
----- LoboSoft specializes in Digital Language Lab
Nevertheless, the "oil grab" mentality is at least a bit better-reasoned than you've portrayed:
First, you have to realize that it's not the US Government that directly benefits. It's the energy industry that reaps the benefits. Cheap oil benefits refineries and power plants.
President Bush is heavily financed and heavily influenced by the energy industry. The links are well known, well documented, and date back to his first run for governor of Texas. I'm not saying that Big Oil snaps and the Prez. comes running. But when it comes to complex matters of public policy, a bit of access goes a long way.
Nobody thinks the U.S. is being that brazen. We could never storm in, take full ownership of Iraq's oilfields, and still maintain any more credibility than Saddam did when he "liberated" Kuwait. The UN would go nuts. American voters would go nuts. It simply could not happen.
But imagine playing it out another way. Go in, depose a ruthless dictator whom everybody detests, and set up an interim government. Set up a few service contracts for American companies to improve Iraq's infrastructure. This includes providing some technology critical to developing oil fields. Once the native government takes over, they're likely to continue those contracts out of obligation, need, or just plain inertia.
Sure, I make it sound all smarmy. The kicker is, even under my scenario, Iraq is still better off.
Now, regarding your "return on investment" question: It gets way more complicated when you start looking at the OPM (other people's money) problem. For example, Bush can't help himself to a campaign contribution from the US Treasury. But he can ask Congress to spend Treasury funds in ways that benefit his supporters, which leads to contributions he'll need for 2004. Similarly, if a private company thinks that it will get $1 billion from the fallout of a war, it doesn't care that the US will spend $100 billion. Remember the fool who damaged Berkeley's fiber optic link while trying to steal a copper wire for salvage? Even though the damage done was ten thousand times the value of the copper, for him it would have been money in the bank.
As I said earlier, it would be politically impossible. But the US does benefit from the cheap oil prices caused by an addition of a new supplier to the energy market.
I'm not sure I understand the question.
First, stop thinking of the US as a homogenous blob with clear and unconflicted interests. Don't even think of the government that way. Instead, see that this war does benefit certain interest groups, and that
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
I wouldn't know where to look to back this up, but it's actually true. I don't suppose C-Span keeps searchable transcripts...
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Also covered at news.com http://news.com.com/2100-1016-997393.html
These paragraphs sum it up pretty well:
"A University of Pennsylvania computer science professor, Jonathan Smith, had originally applied for the grant under the title, "Portable Open-Source Security Enhancements," or POSSE. About $500,000 of the money went to several U.K. researchers to do a vulnerability analysis on OpenSSL, a widely used program for encrypting communications, especially to and from Web sites. A handful of flaws were found, de Raadt said.
Smith refused to comment on the funding, citing the sensitivity of the issue. An email to the POSSE project's DARPA representative wasn't answered.
Earlier this week, de Raadt said he was told that officials from DARPA were concerned about statements appearing in press reports that indicated most of the grant was being funneled to foreign researchers, an apparent no-no for government-funded projects. Moreover, de Raadt believed that the U.S. government took exception to comments he made indicating that the money spent on his project meant that fewer cruise missiles were being built."
anytime something gets posted to slashdot it finds its way to some senator or president and someone pulls funding for it....
This time it was probably some Republican reader who didn't like it that he was getting cheated by the US grant system.
Damn this DARPA! They only fund stupid projects, and the rare cool project that gets through, gets the can! I mean, look at what they did to the Internet! Ohhh, wait ...
Cyde Weys Musings - Scrutinizing the inscrutable
you do have the right to speek freely ... However... You did just shoot your mouth off about your employer in a negative way...
This is problematic on several fronts. First, this was an acedemic institution project which had its funding withdrawn... if it was done for political reasons, i.e., beacuse of what one of the researchers said, then it is definately, clearly, a violation of free speech. If he was awarded the grant based on the acedemic merits, and the money was canceled due to his political opinions, then this is quiet ugly.
Second, DARPA is not a private enterprise. It is an agent of the government, and an instrument of the people. While a private enterprise may be free to act anyway they want (subject to lots of restrictions _if_ they are publicly owned), the government isn't. It's bound by the constituion.
Thirdly, this is especially important for acedemic researchers, since they are in a trusted position. If publicly funded researchers have to watch what they say or their funding will dissappear... then you have effectively silenced a great majority of them. It is very much a violation of free speech.
Free speech means not only that the government won't throw you in jail, it means that it won't treat you differently from others based on your political viewpoints.
What does this have to do with a grand for OpenBSD?
Politics.
Don't piss off the guy with the money.
Its bad business.
All this talk about the money being cancelled because of the war? That's a bit rediculous... it sounds like a kid in soccer explaining a loss by saying "the refs sucked... we shoulda had something called our way".... I dunno, seems like the government could be cuttin corners since there's a huge tax cut on the horizon. I think I saw a post saying "the government doesn't want us to have a secure OS." wow... not much I can say to refute that... its idiotic
I think my principles are reachin' an all time low
We still have Serbia, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, and a whole slew of others (France) to go through before the Bush Administration is happy. And don't look to Congress for help, they signed away their voice about a year ago.
Basically it combines their jetpack with a motorcyle.
All you do is picture the jetpack's turbines as the motorcyle wheel.
Rotate the seat 90 degrees.
Then you have a motorcyle/jetpack. Guaranteed these will be made some day.
God spoke to me
Oh yeah, those $25,000 checks to suicide bombers have nothing to do with terrorism. Especially when they are increased depending on the number of people killed. The guy hanging around Bagdhad who helped arrange the hijacking of a cruise liner where an elderly American was shot and dumped off of the boat in his wheelchair had nothing to do with terrorism either. Iraq had very little to do with Al Queda, that does not mean they had nothing to do with terrorism.
Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
In one or five years, you'll have the opportunity to vote some liberal wank into the white house.
Funny that the peace protestors stayed home when we rolled over Serbia and installed a new government in Haiti.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
That After reading Theo's email I got the distinct impression that he felt he fucked up and the blood money comment was just covering up.
He shot his mouth off and *they* shot back. The shock is that Theo, for once, had to suck it up.
Sigs are dangerous coy things
Here are a couple of dumb ideas for dealing with a president that ends up with a budget deficit:
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
What, specifically are you referring to?
not 3 months ago they just up and canceled a project a good friend of mine was working on without warning. This was right after he gave a presentation on his latest successful efforts that seemed to impress the sponsors.
Needless to say, he was pissed as all get out.
Apparently this happens a lot... especially in research for information technology.
Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
What, specifically are you referring to?1 6bushres.htm
http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/10
Is one firewall really that different from another? If you have a machine that acts *only* as a firewall, with no other services running, does it make a big difference what OS it runs? Unless you really, really like pf and won't use anything else, I'd guess that a bare bones FreeBSD system will make just as good a firewall as OpenBSD. I actually like OpenBSD for a DNS server. It runs chrooted by default, it's very easy to set up, and I like BIND 4 configuration syntax better than 8/9.
You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".
Theo DeRaadt statement crimethink. Unproceed grantwise.
Cthulhu loves you.
Goddamn. If I had mod points you would have got them. That is 100 times funnier than most of the "funny" shit on slashdot.
Your article, "Spy Suspect Led an Active, Prominent Life", was rather interesting. This Chinese was very persistent and spent nearly 20 years in helping Beijing to spy in the USA. With such persistence, it is imperative that organizations like the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) pull funding from groups employing foreigners of suspect loyalty.
If Theo was really concerned about DARPA's motives, he should have expressed his opinion by not accepting the money, not by taking it then using the fact that he had taken it as a vehicle for his political opinions.
I am saddened that a silly mistake could have denied the public good the benefit of this funding, but this is the real world - and in the real world - you don't take money from someone then openly question their motives for giving it to you.
If Theo was really concerned about DARPA's motives, he should have expressed his opinion by not accepting the money, not by taking it then using the fact that he had taken it as a vehicle for his political opinions.
I am saddened that a silly mistake could have denied the public good the benefit of this funding, but this is the real world - and in the real world - you don't take money from someone then openly question their motives for giving it to you.
last time i checked, others were involved in obsd development besides theo. same goes for linus/linux. why is this important? when theo acts in the capacity of the project lead, he represents the *whole* body of the project's participants. they have indeed granted him an implicit 'license', if you will, to speak on their behalf regarding certain topics, such as technical issues etc. however, i highly doubt they have given him a proxy to broadcast his private views as if they were representative of other developers' views. although not an obsd developer, i always hated it when people attempted to speak for me without my consent, no matter whether i actually agreed with what was being said. the comments may not have had any effect on the grant, but the fact of their existence should be highly offensive to all those who contribute their time and effort to the project. the man who defines megalomania strikes again. paul
1. I strongly disagree with Theo's actions: he shouldn't have taken the money in the first place.
Yes, I know what you're thinking: it is stupid not to take money.
Ever heard about a guy called Fausto?
(the one who sold his soul to Bill G...oops sorry, the Devil).
Don't ever work with or funded by an organization with whom you have major ethical differences. I'm not talking about minor stuff, I'm talking about big differences. In this case there were obviously huge disagreements.
Make a stand for what you believe in.
2. Dude: about your comment, it is obvious that you don't really believe in freedom of speech. Government repression is not the only repression it is just one in an array (java.util.ArrayList, not String[n]) of repression techniques. We have seen a lot of that lately.
The law is not the only parameter. What is happening with the restrain of freedom of speech is plain wrong, it is simply shameful.
Do you really believe in freedom of speech or not?. As a value I mean, not as a law. I'm talking about right and wrong here, not about legal or illegal.
Remember about right and wrong? they came to the world long before law.
Shame on all of you who believe in lynching socially, politically and/or economically those who dissent with the war and then go blah blah blah about the "freedom" that dissenters have because they don't go to jail for their thoughts.
Actually, Saddam is in a Dacha on the Black Sea,
Iraq is a smoldering heap of burnt childrens
bodies, descending into the kind of murderous
anarchy you see in Mad Max movies, Afghanistan is
a rats nest of corrupt warlords, with a puppet
dictator installed by a foreign power that has to
supply his bodyguards because any Afghan on the
staff would be sure to frag him, and Al Qaeda is
spreading like SARS.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
Well, they did give your money to Theo, so...
I expect to see you vote Libertarian next autumn.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
I think Theo has been right about any technical and licencing issues (i.e. ipf) but cheerist, shut your yaphole when people are giving you badly needed funding with no strings attatched. The war has NOTHING to do with OpenBSD and if the KKK/Hitler/Child Pornographers of America trust fund wants to donate vast sums, take it and run. If someone asks how you feel about getting the money from them repeat after me: "The organisations that have donated money to the project have absoutley no control over it's direction so my personal feelings are irrelevant."
Oh well too late. Loose lips sink ships.
peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
"This isn't a Big Mean US Gov't story [...] this is yet another case of a great programmer and leader who has let his mouth get in the way of his work."
How did his comments degrade the code in OpenBSD? The only thing these comments got in the way of was politics, not his work.
Yours and other comments in this thread suggest that if funding was yanked because of his politics, so what of it? Don't be surprized if your political views result in government grants being awarded or denied you, whether you have the best solution or not, right? This attitude is becoming disturbingly common with the present administration & political climate. "Sure, we have vested politicized interests, and we'll use those as a basis for what's the best use of taxpayer's money, so what?" What's next, Environmental Protection Agency grants being awarded or denied on the basis of what your company thinks about the War? NASA contracts going to worse bids because the bidders have agreeable views on opening up the Arctic Wildlife Refuge for oil exploration?
There is a reason "political viewpoint" is not a criteria for who gets tax-funded contracts; it's not only to stop the abuse of power but also to make sure taxpayers are getting the best value for their money.
that Bush is the reincarnation of McCarthy.
This is just sooooo typical Theo. His ego gets in the way of common sense and he blows opportunities. This is just the latest example.
There is also a reason why people often lump TDR together with DJB and (sometimes) RMS.
I can only wonder what would happen when you get three persons - each an ego the massivenes of a neutron star - in the same room at the same time.
it's secure, and wietse isn't an arrogant asshole. hes quite pleasant actually.
how exactly does darpa's money silence anyone? it didn't silence theo.
Perhaps you should become a CMS
sorryOS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
Secondly, oil companies already could get cheap oil from iraq under the oil for food thing.
Third, if GWB had offered to drop sanctions in exchange for exclusive contracts for american companies I'm sure Saddam would have jumped.
Fourth, installing a democratic iraqi government does little to ensure long term contracts with american companies.
Fifth, if the russians or french had chosen to participate (which we asked them to do), they would probably find the newly-freed iraqi people quite willing to give them oil contracts after a war. However, the only dead russians and french in the country (if there were any) were there providing military support to Saddam's regime. I doubt the french and russians have many big fans in iraq right now.
Finally, the greed motive doesn't work out too well as US support for the war goes. But, it does work as a reason that the french and russians opposed the war (their oil companies were making a killing under saddam and oil-for-food).
Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone
While understanding what you mean and where you are coming from... you are suggesting Theo change his ways. I have been subscribed to misc@openbsd.org for over a year now and I firmly believe that Theo knows what he is doing even if he lost this money. He stats in a later thread on the misc mailing list that this is actually for the better in the long run (could have happened at a slightly better time like 1-2 months in the future for the purpose of the hotel/hackathon)...
ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE! Just brushing up for my next big invention: Ethernet over Voice (EoV)
But I keep hearing it will help oil companies or Bush's oil buddies. This couldn't be further from the truth since it will actually lower their profits if oil is cheap.
There is not just oil industry in the USA. Look at GM, Cadillac et al. macho toys from the last Detroit Motor Show. They are about to hit the market later this year. Why produce overcapacitated fuel-burning monsters which make battle tanks look underpowered in comparision?
It ain't WMD, 'terrorist links' and 'liberation' BS. It is oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, and more cheap oil that is already in corporate business plans.
Lisp is the Tengwar of programming languages.
...being unbiased.
Such phrases as "propaganda tape" and various unsupported allegations does not discredit things at all.
Look at it this way:
If we wanted Iraq's oil and oil contracts we could have gotten them so much easier than waging war. How? Simple, back room deals for lifting the UN sanctions. Of course there was the minor point that the "principled" countries of France and Russia were already trying this route and had billions of dollars in contracts lined up with Iraq if the sanctions were removed. (Not to mention all the money that Iraq owes Russia for military equipment.)
If you want to run around shouting about how money taints the whole picture then you need to look at how money was already tainting the picture.
(Oh yeah, don't forget that illegal pipeline running black market oil out of Iraq into Syria. Didn't you ever wonder where Iraq got the money to rebuild banned weapons systems and buy/build a new rocket [the Al-Samoud II] if they were under tight economic sanctions and only allowed to sell oil for food?)
I suppose those are just awkward little facts that should be ignored to make the conspiracy picture look better.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
From the article:
Because DARPA does not directly fund projects outside the United States, it is Mr. Smith's computer science department that received the grant, although most of the money -- $2.3-million -- flows through to Mr. de Raadt's project.
So, in this case, Mr. de Raadt was, at best, a subcontractor for the project and not the direct recipient or spokesperson for any of the money. In fact, the problem may be whether or not it was allowed to spend DARPA money in this fashion.
I suppose it sounds great to think that it's a whole "the current US government is evil beyond words" conspiracy that is yanking this project. In fact, it could be simply a contract procedures screw-up on the part of Mr. Smith.
At the very least, I guess we should try to find out a little more details about the whole thing before flying off on the whole conspiracy angle.
On second thought, where's the fun in that?
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Still, it sure sounds like Theo screwed this up. You'd think he could keep his mouth shut until he cashed the cheque...
It depends on your world view. If money is the only thing that matters to you, you might call it a screw-up. However, for someone whose integrity and reputation, and perhaps place in history, are more important, you could call it a masterful stroke. In my eyes, Theo's stature has increased enormously.
Anyway, you can be sure that Darpa will continue to ride on Theo's work, whether it contributes or not.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Government bodies do pull money on projects in order to make ends meet, and its a US government which has dropped many schools, a complete health program and a lot more in equivalent value on Iraq. The OpenBSD funding may just have been converted into a couple of missiles instead.
Theo can still have the last laugh, I dread to think how many holes in common government used software the OpenBSD audit team could find in one hackathon.
The phrase "Saddam gassed his own people" are getting tiresome. Saddam gassed the seperatist kurds in northern Iraq.
I suspect it is repeated over and over again to somehow draw attention away from the fact that NATO member Turkey are responsible for several massacres in the same area. At least they're not killing "their own people", right?
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
You should never slap the hand that feeds you. Open mouth and spout off ==> means "no funding for you!"
Theo would have been far more impressive if he refused the money from the begining. Now he just sounds like a greedy, money-grubbing tosser with no clue, tact or integrity. Theo knew who the money was comming from BEFORE he mouthed off.
... it doesn't matter in the long run as long as you enjoy what you do and do what you enjoy.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
it kind of sucks because the funding was really badly needed
it kind of doesn't suck though because who wants DoD's blood-soaked money anyway unless it's going to be funneled into something righteous
Not that OpenBSD isn't righteous but DoD uses it indirectly in the business of killing people so it doesn't count
OpenBSD is amoral, not necessarily righteous or evil
OpenBSDs advances to security are generally propagated into other BSDs and sometimes even other OSes.
:-(
Can we say openSSH (how many installed copies? millions?) and OpenSSL (heeelllloo? Where would E-commerce be without it? still in the land of "fax your order here" me thinks
The US gov need to understand that if they want tighter IT security in the US (so BinLaden doesnt "Start->Shutdown" Wall Street) they need to fund grass-roots development, the kind that the big companies like IBM, Sun and Dell then take up and propagate to the masses.
Three cheers for Theo - Hip! Hip!
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. - Theodore Roosevelt(1918)
--I know I didn't. I was running a newsletter then and quite clearly wrote against it. I also wrote about the evidence that the KLA whom we supported in their invasion of yugoslavia were muslim extremists who had narco terrorist ties, which has since been proven. they were joint CIA/ al queda "assets".
Background. Albania was going through a civil war, in three years time so many refugees from albania had invaded a province of yugoslavia-kosovo-that they constituted a clear threat to yugoslavia. what happened then was a dirty war obviously, with both sides engaging in some serious *not* nice behavior. there was also some serious high level drug and arms and slave trading gang warfare going on in that region, the players included russian gangs, turkish gangs, serbian gangs, albanian gangs, with various spook agencies involved from various nations. The opium grown in afghanistan got mostly smuggled through the balkans on the way to europaen refinement factories. It is worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year. That doesn't include the arms and slaves. There is also an angle with the mines there, the largest in europe. It's more complex that just one side over another.
As to domestic politics, near as I can see there is little practical difference between the democratic mafia and the republican mafia, and most of the time they actually co-operate with each other to stay "in power" and to keep the mass scams and frauds running.
I stay independent, vote independent, and I still vote even though I know it's entirely corrupt. It's an hour or so to go down and vote, no big deal to me, at least I DO vote, unlike the 50% of the drunk flag waving fools out there right now.. Basically I'm a constitutionalist, and a strong second amendment "born-with" rights proponent. I won't be voting for anyone with a D or R next to their names, and haven't for years, got no use for liars, crooks, thieves or murderers to be "the regime". On small local levels you can make a difference, and there are still a lot of good concerned people in politics there, above that level, nope, the fix is in and it's too corrupt to fix without getting rid of those two parties completely, they've gone too long now into corruption, IMO. Clinton and his regime were corrupt, the Bush crime family is corrupt, and etc. It goes way back, took me many years to get the full ramifications of how deep it gets and is. A lot of it comes from private personal anecdotal revelations, so I really can't talk about it much other than there's NO way I could support either of those two parties.
YM obviously MV My observations and opinions come from working politics heavy since 1964, and paying attention to what actually happens in the short, medium and long runs as opposed to what is said by various politicians and their "party" supporters.
--sure, it's bad, and until you have become a victim of the government it will remain theoretical to you. I was made a victim, twice, took me many years to deal with it, a lot of time and angst. How far do you want to take it, death threats from government workers in an offical capacity? Been there. Know about high level crimes and try to get them remedied? Been there. Seen high level crimes including murder and arson for profit including manslaughter done by and covered up by governmental workers, and then them get away with it? Been there. It's not theory and cute academic exercise to me, and I'm interested in cleaning up my own nation, any other nations deal is not as important to me and has little relevance to what I meant, and I frankly have never had much desire to go live anyplace else, NOR do I want this nation to keep sliding further into the "dark side" like it obviously is now.
Now tell me again why that position is so wrong?
Well let's face it. This was a military grant.
So... can you blame DARPA? I can't. As far as I
am concerened they did the right thing.
And... If he felt this way he should not have accepted the grant. Instead he was a hypocrate according to his own convictions.
What was going on was _illegal_ and the article stated as much. Routing money around congressional restrictions (such as hiring foreign workers on internal security project) is not what DARPA should have done. If there was a issue with DARPA, I garuntee, it was that some congressman or staff noticed it and came down like a ton of bricks over DARPA's trying to flit the rules.
And theo was stupid enough to actually quote it. Gotta love it.
However, there are inherent security concerns when funding programs run by people who are not subject to your security laws. That's a major reason why security-related programs tend to be run inside the nation actually funding them.
Then there's the problem that the Canadian Government appears to be backing the Axis of Weasels (despite the fact that the majority of Canadians support the US).
And there's the inherent problem with Theo's personality. It's quite possible he did something to incredibly annoy DARPA (Why not? He's pissed off everybody else on the planet it seems).
"You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
Just wondering, how is this going to affect the development of OpenBSD? The mailinglist messages state there aren't sleeping places for the developers attending the hackathon (yet), but besides these problems, do you think there will be major development problems? OpenBSD started without funds, and now it has to continue the way it began, is this really such a Bad Thing?
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?
Okay, I have connection problems to Slashdot, and apparantly, the body of my reply got lost. Let me try to re-post it:
Just wondering, how is this going to affect the development of OpenBSD? The mailinglist messages state there aren't sleeping places for the developers attending the hackathon (yet), but besides these problems, do you think there will be major development problems? OpenBSD started without funds, and now it has to continue the way it began, is this really such a Bad Thing?
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?
I've got connection problems to Slashdot.org all morning now. When I submit a reply it /. only receives the subject, not the body. My apologies for the empty messages :-/
Original message:
Just wondering, how is this going to affect the development of OpenBSD? The mailinglist messages state there aren't sleeping places for the developers attending the hackathon (yet), but besides these problems, do you think there will be major development problems? OpenBSD started without funds, and now it has to continue the way it began, is this really such a Bad Thing?
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?
--there's two points of view that are both correct. Victims of governmental abuse feel the government is much worse than people think, from personal experience. the converse is true, people who only have a theoretical notion of abuse tend to think it's not all that bad. From my point of view, I can state it's worse than most people think. this is correct. From someone else's pov, someone who has never had a serious run in with abuse, they probably won't feel the same, which from their perspective is *more* accurate than mine. People who do a lot more research are easily able to uncover more examples of abuse, so their perspective changes to a view that the government is more "dark side".
That's just how it is, and to ME, I think a comparison with any other government is irrelevant, because I *live here* not over there someplace, and have a good fundamental grasp of what my born-with rights are supposed to be, as opposed to how government mandates them to be and especially to the false advertising they use in mass psyops programming of the population.
It's extremely difficult to become aware of the depth of brainwashing that anyone "you" might be laboring under, especially for people with higher IQs, just a fact of life that people don't like to admit they have been scammed, or that their belief structure is incorrect, even with data to show that it is. It took me quite a few years , even after getting hip to some fairly big lies, to realise how deep the indoctrination goes, and in how many directions. I feel it's a life long learning experience, and try to not get "stuck" in any particular belief, and especially into thinking one "party" is so much better than another, or that the US is always the "good guys", when they clearly are not. and none of that is in any way related to some other nation, again, I live HERE, not THERE, two completely different subjects.
My gestalt is if I hear some redneck tell me if I don't like it here that I should move over there some place, I can point at someone still under mass brainwashing. I think not being able to see your own nation's faults is like ignoring the oil pressure gauge on your car when it's reading abnormally low, ya, it'll keep moving for awhile, but better to stop, turn key off, see what the problem is before proceeding. I'd feel lame to just think "walll, I drive me a belchfire, they the besterst cars in the world, I can ignore that gauge". That's car jingoism. It'slame. but lately we are being almost ordered to ignore the political oil gauge. I think we've been ignoring the gauge far too long, and that political car is going to self destruct, then it WILL be excactly like one of those other nations we point to and laugh about and say they have a one party dictatorship. If it ain't fixed now while it's easy, it won't be fixcable, that's the two choices we have, and so far after 'voting" and watching politics for almost 4 decades, it's much worse now then it was back then. Not even close, orders of magnitudes worse, and we have the same tired "solutions" being offered by the same tired bozos.
The light side is a constitutional government, where the people run the government. The dark side international big business and a professional bribed politician class,both of whom are chronic serial liars and conmen, and them masquerading as two alleged "different" political parties. The dark side is voting in the crips and bloods every election, in whatever proportion happens,that apparently really never matters, and thinking that you'll get anything but a criminal gang running things. and then every two and four years the same guys just insisting that if just one more time you "vote" for them that things will automagically change for the better.
It's just nuts. I don't believe in the dark sides promises any more. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me 6987 times, shame on me and maybe I should go back to working towards the good side and call the dark side for what they are, conmen. It's a junta we have now, and imminently into an
If you have a look at the files in Microsoft's Interix product (part of Windows Services for UNIX) you'll find that a goodly part of the userland code is derived from OpenBSD... and the compiler shipped with it is GCC.
Not only is OpenBSD a resource for Microsoft, but it has a very small market share, and I'm sure Microsoft sees it more as a Nader-like "spoiler vote" in the open source community than a threat.
No, I don't think you need to look towards Redmond for this. There is an enormous amount of pressure on people expressing anti-war sentiments in the US today, particularly in big companies. You see people dance around the topic, teasing out their co-worker's opinions and making sure it's safe to say what they feel.
This is just more of the same.
The Danish constitution also protects free speach, but here it only means that the government cannot stop you from publishing your opinions. There are no constitunional guarentee that they will not put you in jail afterwards. And in fact they will, if your opinions are racist or against groups of specific ethnic, religious or sexual orientations.
For you Americans out there who plan to talk with their Senators & Representative (or staffers thereof), it'll probably be a good idea to tell them the problem is with
and would they please get you an answer as to why money is being kept from this worthy cause. Maybe even mention that it's in aid of cyberspace security. (If you need a pointer, see the House of Representatives and the Senate websites; they'll point you to the people you want to get in touch with.)After the phone calls (or instead of, for The Majority Of The World), send money to the OpenBSD donation site (It's the third ``purchase'' from the top). You can even buy yourself a goodie or two while you're there.
My money's on the way already. I wonder how much of the grant we can replace. Now for those phone calls...
I refuse to believe corporations are people until Texas executes one. -- desert rain on http://www.dailykos.com/user/
Larry Cohen over at Cryptonomicon.Net has published this story questioning the commonly accepted belief that Theo de Raadt had his DARPA funding pulled because of Anti-War comments. The story makes the interesting point that SELinux and TrustedBSD are home-grown projects, while OpenBSD (and de Raadt himself) are more international. Mr. Cohen also mentions that FreeBSD is "more mainstream," which I guess means that it has more mainstream users. I guess it's a good point that we haven't hear comment from DARPA or from Jonathan Smith at the University of Pennsylvania. This leads to the question, is all this anti-war / free-speech hubbub just sour grapes?
Yet you don't point out what they were.
I'm saying that the US government's evaluation of what is and is not important is skewed by corporate interests.
What interests are skewing the evaluations? What evaluations are wrong? Be specific. General statements just don't cut it.
Primarily because it is a false dichotomy. Those were not the only two choices. We could have just stopped the sanctions a long time ago.
First, I believe I offerred more than two choices. Second, what would have happened if we simply stopped the sanctions? The sanctions were in place to punish an aggressive nation. You may recall that Iraq invaded Kuwait and caused massive amounts of damage to the country as they were being driven out. So, do we just say: 'don't do that again' and hope for the best? Also, dropping the sanctions wouldn't have removed the "issue" that Bin Laden was playing on. The only way to do that would have been to remove all US military presence in the area. So were we supposed to simply recall all of our troops and wait for Iraq to invade another country?
Now you go an flip-flop about who's running the show and talk about the American "Regime" instead of Corporate America (who's in charge?):
that kind of statement combined with his current penchant for locking up Americans accused of being terrorists, without even a trial is incredibly chilling of criticism
So far there have been a few cases of US citizens being detained as "material witnesses" not as accused terrorists. They are getting tons of publicity (like the Mike Hawash story) so while this is something to be concerned about I doubt we're days away from the secret police making people disappear (like they do in Iraq).
Let's see, I'm being accused of being selective in my reading and you point to the CNN/Time poll. Let's read that a little deeper:
Another poll released in February asked, "Was Saddam Hussein personally involved in the September 11 attacks?" Although it is a claim the Bush administration has never made and for which there is no evidence, 72 percent said it was either very or somewhat likely. (emphasis added)
So, how can the "NeoCon's" be guilty of this when they weren't running around making the charge? If you read further into the article you can see that a lot of the criticism is being directed at the very news people who created the poll and report the news.
And on to the "pre-emptive" baloney:
But, the long term results for the US of that operation are highly suspect. We've now given the imprimatur of legitimacy to an international policy of pre-emptive strikes.
This is such a load of horse hockey it's not even funny. Iraq was in violation of more than a dozen UN Resolutions and their cease-fire agreement. They were given 12 years to try to get their act straight including a final UNANIMOUS resolution stating that Iraq was in "material breach" of all resolutions and saying that they faced "serious consequences" if they remained in breach. Everyone agreed (including Dr. Blix) that Iraq's weapons declaration was incomplete and this was listed as one of the criteria they had to meet to avoid being in breach. The US went out of its way to gather internation support for the actions. The fact that they couldn't get it was more a result of the hypocritical actions of the other nations (which you simply try to ignore except when it comes to the lack of their approval) rather than any "Corporate NeoCon conspiracy" in the US.
So, do yourself a favor. Drop the NeoCons/Corporate Conspiracy bluster. Go to the facts and work from there. The facts are pretty straight forward.
1) 9/11 changed the whole calculus as far as national defense goes. It also showed that the threats to the US no longer came solely from nation states.
2) Some of the actions of the US government in reaction to this (the Patriot Act in particular) have been horrible over reactions. These acts were passed by all the members of the House
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.