Slashdot Mirror
Daniel Lyons of Forbes Admits Being Snowed by SCO
certain death writes "Daniel Lyons of Forbes Magazine has admitted to being snowed by SCO, regarding their lawsuit over Linux and SCO code. He specifically mentions Groklaw's role in the case, and regrets his early articles giving the company the benefit of the doubt. 'I still thought it would be foolish to predict how this lawsuit (or any lawsuit) would play out. I even wrote an article called "Revenge of the Nerds," which poked fun at the pack of amateur sleuths who were following the case on a Web site called Groklaw and who claimed to know for sure that SCO was going to lose. Turns out those amateur sleuths were right. Now some of them are writing to me asking how I'd like my crow cooked, and where I'd like it delivered. Others in that highly partisan crowd have suggested that I wanted SCO to win, and even that I was paid off by SCO or Microsoft. Of course that's not true. I've told these folks it's not true. Hasn't stopped them. The truth, as is often the case, is far less exciting than the conspiracy theorists would like to believe. It is simply this: I got it wrong. The nerds got it right.'"
...welcome our new amateur sleuth overlords!
It's nice to see at least some journalists out there in this day and age are willing to publicly admit when they are wrong.
He's only a journo who got it wrong.
I wonder about the investors who will now lose pretty well everything they banked on the crapshoot.
Then there's also the poor employees who will undoubtably suffer as they seek employment elsewhere. I'm quite certain most of them don't say a lot of bad things about Darl publicly with their names attached, but they have some real feeling of betrayal all the same.
So a journo got it wrong, not like he's Dan Rather being lead down the garden path and left there by CBS researchers and management.
of course he doesn't have a crapshoot for $70 million either...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I like this guy, he is willing to admit he made a mistake, furthermore, he made it in print. Albeit online print.
If we only had more journalists willing to do this about other things... Like Iraq, WMD etc. It takes courage to admit you were taken in, I applaud this.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Daniel Lyons thought that SCO had a case at first... or at least had enough nuisance potential that someone would eventually blink and pay them off.
So he thought wrong. So did the people who thought the CueCat would be a tool found on every household computer.
As far as I see it, he's taken his lumps, and he's ready to go on with life.
Works for me... so am I.
Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
I hope everybody shows class and doesn't rub his nose in it. It was probably a very hard admission to make. You didn't see Maureen O'Gara admitting she screwed up, incredibly she is still holding a candle for SCO. Rob Enderle just claimed he hadn't been following the case in a long time.
My rights don't need management.
Its one thing to admit your wrong. This may redeam character but not credibility. With a history of being wrong and smearing those with a different view, he sets a precedent as being an unreliable news source and despite whatever appologies are given - a liability to Forbes as a trustworthy news source. He would have to work to regain credibility with people checking the facts against what he said. It would be easier to just move to another source of information. If this is merely an attempt to regain face in the journalist world, it will fall flat with any critical thinker
One step further, for someone writing on the technology field - it doesn't serve his purpose to put out condescending statements like "the nerds got it right".
When all else fails, try.
'fessing up to being wrong? but how much of that is just to save your reputation, and how much is true 'oh, man, I messed up...' sentiment?
Forgiveness? Heh. Please. Any fool with two neurons would've figured out that SCO was shoveling manure a long, long time ago... and wouldn't have waited until their buddy was on the gallows platform before shouting long and loud about how he'd deceived you.
You've made your bed, Mr. Lyons. Now lie in it. /P
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Apology accepted, Daniel.
Laura DiDio, it's your turn.
On the 0th day, God created C
just so you know
"I'm a Genius!"*
*Not an actual Genius
Sorry Dan. Too little too late. The most you can hope for is the SEC overlooks your pumping of this stock.
but i'm glad i wasn't aware it started. seriously, unless u had already known about this article is 0% interesting. "the nerds were right"? of-fucking-course they were, didn't he goto highschool?
Some writers dwell on words they've written. Some don't care and are already on to something else.
Where I went to college was a small college paper. Someone I knew wrote for it and as there's a thing as "lead time" -- that amount of time between when a writer turns something in and it is published, during which anything can (and often does) happen. She wrote something scathing, including mispelling the college president's name. Before the issue came out it was revealed the president had nothing to do with it and for the most part there really was no scandal. When the paper came out and I asked her how she felt about it she was "meh, whatever." Maybe it did bug her she listened to the wrong source or didn't bother to quiz the president directly, but she didn't appear to lament it one bit.
This bloke is doing his mea culpa, so he's of a different cut of cloth. There's all kinds, just like there's all kinds of people who run a business, from Warren Buffet to Darl McBride.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
If he felt this way from the beginning, he should have been clearer. He should have made it clear that he thought SCO was little more than a sophisticated shakedown artist--the Jesse Jackson of software companies if you will. I remember there being a distinct gloating tone to the articles when I read them back then. He seemed happy that OSS developers were going to possibly get their comeuppance. He struck me as one of those stereotype dumb businessmen who cannot tell the difference between the professionals who make real OSS work like the people behind the Apache projects, and the rabid zealots, most of whom are inconsequential morons.
No one except SCO should have been rooting for SCO, or even saying nice things about them. They are a parasite on capitalism. Regardless of his feelings about OSS development, he should have been honest about SCO, and admitted that they were just trying to extort their way into profitability.
I know it's pretty common to skip reading the fine article, but in this case, don't miss it.
He explains why he was fooled by SCO; for example, how Caldera won a settlement against Microsoft, which led him to believe that the SCO Group (successor of Caldera) might actually win. But he doesn't try to dodge the blame; he takes on the blame due him and apologizes.
With only about seven posts up so far on Slashdot I've already seen a couple that snipe at him for IMHO unfair reasons. He's a reporter, not a computer expert, and he was fooled by some slick con artists. Don't hold him to an unreasonable standard, unless you have never ever been wrong about anything yourself.
He apologizes very nicely and pokes fun at himself (the article is very entertaingly written). So, read it and enjoy. And please, reserve your vitriol for the actual villains of the piece, the SCO Group itself.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Does anyone else read " It is simply this: I got it wrong. The nerds got it right" like a high-school jock saying "damn nerd beat me again"?
Mr. Lyons, let's rephrase it to say "I fucked up big time; and everyone else with half a brain COULD see the facts but I couldn't".
Also, downplaying the fact that the journalist made a huge mistake by saying "I got it wrong, big deal", is in itself a tremendous blunder; as someone whose most valuable skill is his reliability, knowing that he fucked up big time in something so obvious should ring sirens for anyone currently paying this guy money to write.
I bet you work for CMP! LOL!
I seem to remember SCO released all its technical employees several years ago. Towards the end, they consisted of a handful of people who just handled the books and the lawyers.
Really, there has been no SCO for a long time.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Not entirely sure I buy the bit about it being a mistake, but perhaps he could have avoided the whole deal if he wasn't so eager to paint F/OSS advocates as amateurs. As a journalist, commentator, analyst, or whatever he's supposed to be, he lives on his reputation. Maybe next time, he might value his reputation (i.e., paycheck) enough to check BOTH SIDES of the argument in an unbiased manner. Maybe spend some time with a psychologist, examining why he has an innate desire to see the little guy lose, a community of volunteers destroyed by a failing corporate interest, and puppies being tortured.
Either way, he'd like it all to go away? After insulting millions of F/OSS users? I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon Daniel, sorry. The apology is a nice start, the roman catholic rosary is another option, and a whole lot of honest stories about how this community has built itself up from what many have said was a shaky foundation, to become a force even mighty MS has found itself bending to. Maybe some NICE ARTICLES about the people who have worked so hard to make sure that the code is clean, and so on.
You wanna win your respect back? The apology is a pleasant change, now get to work earning respect!
Microsoft has just released their much anticipated hands-free cordless mouse. Warning, it may hurt a little at first.
Funny, I don't see an apology. Just complaining about the pile of....feedback he is receiving from the community.
...I thought this turkey could fly.
He made up his mind that SCO was right ... and then he actively opposed any facts contradicting him.
... until they filed for bankruptcy and received a delisting letter.
He belittled Groklaw and PJ (and he is still doing so) for digging up the real facts while he kept repeating the "smoking gun" claim of SCO as a "fact".
I could have accepted that INITIALLY, but as Groklaw collected more and more facts from the EXPERTS (the people who WROTE *nix) there is no way anyone who didn't have an agenda could have still believed that SCO had a case.
Yet he kept right on supporting SCO
If I've learned anything from recent Presidential elections, changing your opinions due to new information is a sign of weakness. One must make a choice and ride it all the way down.
Blar.
Congratulations!
Indeed when his buddy was standing upon the gallows, only then did he cry (and loudly) about how evil his buddy had been for deceiving him and abusing his naive trust.
It shows his true character.
If Microsoft ever files a patent suit against Linux, do you believe that Lyons will not be the first and one of the loudest proclaiming the righteousness of Microsoft's claim?
when the subject matter is Nerdy...listen to the Nerds, NOT the businessman's PR representatives who took you out to lunch to give you the "scoop".
"Just Smile and Nod." --Huck
Naw. Lots of professions have ethical standards for their professionals.
Being a "professional" doesn't mean that you just do it for money. Although it can be used that way.
Being a "professional" also means that you follow the ethical standards of your profession. Otherwise your behaviour is "unprofessional".
The word you're thinking of is "whore" or "prostitute". One who sells one's abilities, talent, or name for an unworthy purpose.
I got it wrong. The nerds got it right.
So...business as usual?
...and labels in general.
Calling someone a "nerd" because he knows *nix.
Calling someone a "gearhead" because he knows how replace a clutch.
Calling someone a "health nut" because he goes jogging and takes a multivitamin.
All of these labels have something in common, they describe a single aspect of someones life (something you "do") and a judgment is made of that person as a whole. It's stupid and tiresome. Let's start making labels for people based on what they *DON'T* do.
For example, when someone puts zero effort into staying healthy and strong he's an "idiot".
Someone who depends on an automobile to live but cannot change his own brakes is an "idiot".
Someone who spends years of his life in front of computers, depends on them, and yet cannot make some time to learn what's happening behind the wizards, is an "idiot".
Anyway, not to respond to the parent specifically since I don't really know his perspective, but in general, I'm tired of people being too lazy to learn anything and deriding actual human beings that strive to understand their own environment and the tools needed to interact with that environment.
Once when I was a young deckhand on a tug boat the skipper told me to go down in the galley and cook a meal. I said, "I don't know how to cook though," and he said "Bullshit, how can you be a man and not fucking know how to cook food?". He was right about that, and I'm right when I say "How the fuck can you spend all day sending and receiving emails and yet not know how to configure an imap client?"
Etc.
Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
Since a lot of people who criticised him came from a site which bills itself as "News for nerds, stuff that matters", I hardly think it's out of line for him to refer to them as nerds. :)
On the other hand, this seems like a fairly weak apology overall, considering the amount of vitriol he's heaped upon Linux developers, advocates, supporters and fans in the past. I think he owes a few people (especially PJ) a more personal apology. On the gripping hand, this move clearly shows that he's a hell of a lot more classy than O'Gara (whose career would be over if there were any justice) or Didio.
Sleuth? WTF? Any idiot could see scox was lying. All the events below happend in 2003:
* Remember scoforum 2003? That is when scox did the great unvailing of the infringing code. It was proven bogus within one hour.
* Why did scox require journalists to sign an NDA to see the code?
* Scox claimed they could, and would, stop IBM from selling AIX - an outright lie.
* Scox claimed they would audit all AIX customers, they didn't.
* Scox told the court -twice- that scox would provide evidence of UNIX being dumped into Linux. We're still waiting.
* Scox claimed to own UNIX, even though the trademark was clearly owned by the open group.
* What about the odd funding? Remember the halloween memo?
There is probably a lot of stuff I'm forgetting, but those shameless stunts were just in 2003. Scox was proven a liar over, and over, and over. It didn't take any sluething.
I caught the reference, if no one else did. Arthur Carlson (WKRP in Cincinnati): "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!" Said after dumping scores of turkeys from a small plane. or was it a chopper. Hilarious.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
It's not like fans of Enderle and O'Gara frequent Slashdot, never mind reply to comments. A flame, yes, but not flamebait.
Oh, for goodness sakes Daniel .. you are making it sound like it was a wild 50:50 guestimate of who was going to win the next Melbourne Cup or something. You make it sound like this time (by pure good luck) the nerds got it right for once.
.. but then again blind freddy got it right as well. Every man and his dog actually got it right. Every man and his dog that is, except for yourself and a small handful of (surprise surprise) 'Professional Tech Journalists'.
Sure, you got it wrong and the nerds got it right
You didnt just 'get it wrong', you got ALL of the facts completely and blatantly ass up. Lets not pretend it was just an unlucky guess on your part - like putting a dollar on the wrong horse. What you did is akin to turning up in court to provide a character reference for Al Capone, and lavishing the most extreme praise upon most honest self when you barely know the guy.
OF COURSE anyone with half a brain knows why you did it. Nobody thinks you are incompetant or stupid - we just think you are greedy and unethical.
I'm sorry, but Lyons' portrayal of himself as an ordinary Joe who made a reasonable evaluation of the case which just happened to be wrong because SCO was keeping its deception so well-hidden is just plain wrong. There was at least one red flag which Lyons has no excuse for not catching.
That red flag was when SCO presented their excuse for not showing anyone (except under draconian NDAs) what the alleged copyright infringement actually consisted of. They didn't want that information getting to the Linux crew, they said, because that would allow them to remove the offending code.
That there is all you need to know to call "BS". It is your obligation to notify someone you suspect of infringing your copyright of just how you think they are infringing your copyright so that they can remedy the wrong. You cannot say "I would rather let them continue to infringe my copyright so I can soak them for more damages"; despite what SCO might have you believe, that is not the purpose of copyright law. As for the idea that the offending code would be scrubbed from the record in order to hide the evidence of past infringement, again, that's BS. If there was copied code in the kernel, as SCO assured us there was, SCO could have downloaded copies of the kernel twice a day to have a historical record of the violation.
Lyons still refers to "amateur sleuths" as though he's some kind of professional. What sort of "professional" doesn't investigate the most glaring contradiction between what someone claims they want and what they're actually trying to arrange?
If people are to respect the law, perhaps the law should begin by respecting the people.
Have you ever heard the slogan News for nerds - stuff that matters? If he is speaking of the slashdot crowd, "nerd" is not an insult.