Slashdot Mirror
Florian Mueller Outs Himself As Oracle Employee
eldavojohn writes "So you're commenting on your highly visible blog about patent case after patent case that deal with corporations battling over open source stuff, what does it matter if you're taking money from one and not the other? If you don't see any ethical problems with that, you might be Florian Mueller. Groklaw's PJ (who has been suspicious of Florian's ties to other giants like Microsoft for quite sometime) has noticed that Florian Mueller has decided to go full disclosure and admit that all his commentary on the Oracle v Google case might be tainted by his employment by Oracle. It seems he's got a bunch of consulting money coming his way from Oracle but I'm sure that won't undermine any of his assessments like Android licenses violate the GPL or that Oracle will win $6 billion from Google and Google was "at risk" of not settling despite the outcome that the charges later dropped to a small fraction of the $6 billion. Like so many other times, PJ's hunch was right."
Huh? Doesn't this news actually *confirm* what these 'paranoid FOSS fanatics' have been saying all along?
You're right, Florian is a paragon of unbiased reporting. He exemplifies everything a truly neutral journalist should be.
Agreed. They were off on the details (works for Oracle, not MS), but they were right that something smelled rotten.
His employment is paid for by Oracle... the net effect is the same. Money flows from Oracle to his pockets, so its in his interests that Oracle comes out on top.
"paid by" versus "employed by" is a pretty irrelevant semantic distinction in this case.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
What? I seem to read a summary/article that proves that FOSS fanatics have been vindicated in their paranoia in this case. How do you figure the opposite?
RTFA, he works for both MS & Oracle.
... and he is now analyzing FRAND issues for both Microsoft and Oracle.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
Actually, he's taking money from both. It was disclosed a while ago that he's taking money from M$.
All those people accusing half the internet of being paid shills have finally actually caught one. Even if it's a "stopped clock" moment, it fuels the fire.
Have you all so quickly forgotten when he got caught out in the bald-faced lies about secret requests to the EU competition commission to force Oracle to allow him & friends to take a fork of MySQL proprietary? He is not an honest person, and has demonstrated this clearly.
He would be fired and escorted out of the building right about now. Since he's a "consultant" he will probably survive although I suspect his value as a shill for oracle has plummeted. Im wondering if the Cigarette industry needs a new spokesman or maybe OJ simpson?
Along the same line of reasoning then, since the NSA is a customer of Oracle ...
Besides, the question is if Oracle paid him for consulting services, or for marketing services. A true professional should be able to distinguish 'best interests for the client' based on what he is paid for.
Everyone has biases, as long as we know what they are and why they are we're able to make informed decisions about the information they provide us. The problem comes when people don't disclose things like employment by somebody they're biased in favour of because then we lack the information we need to make our decisions.
Anyone can have an opinion. Muellers problem is he was getting paid for his opinions and didnt disclose that to his readers.
PJ might have her own agenda but it is not motivated by one side paying her. I've always questioned Florian's stance as well as his logic. Read his posts in lwn where he tried to frame it that Google violated the Linux GPL and copyright by using creating new header files in Android. When told repeatedly by others (including some who have code in Linux) that Google creating new headers does not violate anything because (1) the header files in question were created for compatibility which is allowed, (2) header files unless they contain some sort of unique logic (which they did not) are not copyrightable, and (3) for there to be violation, the Linus et al must object (which they did not).
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Mueller is _not_ an employee of Oracle. His post says "...Oracle has very recently become a consulting client of mine." He has many clients, of which Oracle is one. And saying that one consulting client amongst many is equivalent to employment is completely bogus.
I disagree with lots of the stuff he writes. But this headline is just intellectually dishonest slander. And for the record his writings are certainly no more slanted - or frankly bogus - than PJs.
Why is this news? Florian openly admits that he is a consultant on patent issues. I'm sure he'd consult for Ubuntu if they would pay him. As always, Slashdot considers earning money to be the equivalent of being evil.
Meanwhile, PJ is considered an unbiased source even though PJ is very, very clearly biased towards defending Linux and attacking certain companies. The double-standards abound at Slashdot. That's why year ago I stopped considering this site to be a place of intellectual discussion and instead realized that it was a place of mindless fanboyism.
I don't know why this surprises anybody. And that bias leaks into their news reports, even if the bias is as simple as not covering a candidate (showing images of Gingrich, Santorum, Romney, but not Ron Paul (who?)) or not covering an issue (repeal of right to trial under the NDAA if you are suspected terrorist*). FOX, NBC, CNN, radio news, online blogs... all have bias. It's just a matter of uncovering that bias. FOX=republican; NBC/CNN/CBS/ABC/PBS/NPR=democrat; talk radio=conservative; blogs reflect the views of the owner.
*
* suspected terrorist - As defined by the FBI is almost anyone. Pay with cash? Hide your phone from view when texting? Have a liberty/freedom-oriented bumper sticker? Own a gun, stunner, or can of mace? Et cetera.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
There really is not much difference in ethics or morals of McNealy, Ellison, Gates, Balmer, etc.. They are all scum.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
How do you now that when she doesn't disclose who she works for?
There's nothing wrong with commenting and working in the industry.
there's plenty wrong with 100% of your comments having a clear bias (as your does) and quoting misleading or incomplete information, while at the same time denying that you have any connection to them. This is like when the counter to "google doesn't lose in court" is mentioning a case where google only lost before an appeal happened in which case they consequently won. That is the same sort of misleading FUD that you among others are known for - aka lawyering around providing a false answer.
Which, again, you have done here. Why can't you just get the cancer you act like (not unlike Florian) and pass away?
Florian basically admitted he's on the payroll for microsoft and oracle, the two parties of which he magically has posted explicitly positive comments about and explicitly negative comments about their competitors. We've always known this.
There's an enormous difference between NSA being a customer of oracle's and looking the other way in regards to oracle.
The latter being what's been happening with Florian and is expected to happen with the NSA in such an example (as we know they're corrupt/abuse NSL's, etc).
FM has also been extremely vocal about vp8/webm. While I'm the format certainly has its problems, both technical and legal, I can't help but believe the slow advance of the project is at least partly because a supposed expert on open source spent a lot of his time ranting about it.
I am far from unbiased on the situation since the I feel an unencumbered video codec would make the world a better place. Even knowing my bias, I can't help but be really upset at this revelation. On the other hand all's fair in love & war, so Oracle has a right to hire a shill to promote their agenda.
Maybe the real culprit in this is the wider web's need to have an expert, even a self proclaimed one, tell people what to do so they don't have to do all the work to find the truth themselves.
It is a well known fact that reality has a lib^H^H^H^Hn anti-MS/Oracle bias.
Its not irrelevant. An example of this. Someone who works for Publix may be pro Publix but noone at Publix has asked for him write his stuff and hes not being paid to do so.
Rob Enderle, he may be a weenie but someone can be a weenie without being a shill. Enderle was never paid by SCO for his opinions he was given bogus information and based his flawed opinions on that infomation, and he admits that some of his opinions about open source were wrong. He actually likes BSD...who knew?
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-opinion/34004-sco-linux-and-rob-enderle-a-conclusion
I am constantly being accused of shilling for Microsoft on Slashdot just because I write that they do some good things. Seems like Mueller was accused for that too. Well, turns out that not true and these FOSS lunatics just make out some huge conspiracy theories how the whole world is against them. And by the way, who should comment on these issues then? Someone who doesn't work in the industry and doesn't know anything about it? Yeah right. But of course it's bad when the comments contain something you don't agree with. For the free speech and freedom, yeah right!
Does that mean that you are being paid by Microsoft in the same way that Mueller is being paid by Oracle, but you also think it is OK?
Publix is the FOSS advocate group equivalent in France?
I drank what? -- Socrates
You're right, Florian is a paragon of unbiased reporting. He exemplifies everything a truly neutral journalist should be.
Yes ... he is totally neutral about who pays him to publish their opinion ... Oracle, Microsoft, or anyone else with deep pockets
Publix is a grocery store.
The fact that he works for Oracle doesn't prove his arguments are wrong. Attacking the person, not the logic, is a well-known logical fallacy: argumentum ad hominem. All his employment provides us is some additional perspective on where he's coming from. We still need to listen to what he actually has to say.
And, by the way, EVERYBODY who works "gets paid", that doesn't make us all "biased".
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
It doesn't matter, if he says bad stuff about Oracle then likely Oracle won't keep paying him. It doesn't matter what they were paying him for. It could have been to walk the company dogs. You don't pay people who are hurting you unless you really need them.
In that same vein, you're more likely to get paid even more if you report favorably on Oracle even if you're not paid to do so.
All of this is basic human nature and companies are in the end run by humans.
So the very fact that Oracle was giving him money means he now has a monetary incentive to report favorably for Oracle.
There is some difference between a contractor and an employee. I don't think it makes any difference ethically, but it makes a bit of a difference in the quality of a slashdot story.
The disturbing thing is not this revelation itself, which would not surprise anyone who regularly reads his blog. It is the most logical thing that a paid consultant/analyst is being paid by the two companies he just happens to favour enormously in his posts.
The disturbing thing is how his comments are reproduced verbatim by the big shots of the tech-news industry like ZDNet, PC Magazine etc, but also mainstream sources which are normally known as the last bastions of real journalism like the BBC, LA Times, Reuters etc.
Thankfully now sites like Ars Technica and The Verge have stepped up their coverage of patent disputes, so he is not the only voice.
At first it may seem that Florian Mueller doesn't pretend to be a journalist or unbiased and it's everyone else's fault for assuming he is. However, not only does he make repeated claims of being unbiased and neutral in his writing, he routinely emails his blog articles to all news sources he can think of (which is why he is so widely quoted and Groklaw is not).
Don't believe me? Just search for Florian+Oracle or Florian+Google on Google News and see the who's who of journalism pop up with his quotes.
The biggest problem with Florian isn't that he's employed by someone, it's that his opinions are idiotic, and often demonstrably wrong. The fact that he's employed by Oracle is just icing on the cake, and should make you smile, because now you know why he's so dumb.
And hopefully it will get the press to stop listening to him, because they're a gullible lot.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
To be quite fair, no, its not the same. As an IT consultant, our company is paid by a number of firms. Over the years Ive done work for far right organizations, as well as for far-left groups. That doesnt mean my opinion on those matters is invalid necessarily; it would depend on the level of involvement with them.
But a consultant isnt necessarily the same as an employee, thats just overly broad and inaccurate; theres a reason they are two distinct terms.
How do I know you didn't rape and murder a young girl in 1990? I see that you're not denying it.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
It's not a question as to whether the opinion is invalid, just that it may be tainted and that should be disclosed. You could hate the company you work for or be truly objective, but Average Joe will avoid biting the hand that feeds him. The disclosure is necessary for readers to decide whether or not you're unbiased.
You're constantly being accused of shilling? You've only had an active account since yesterday. How many accusations can there be??
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
What I presume but cannot confirm, and no one speaks of, is attack campaigns run by similar groups, again, for anyone with enough money to pay them. We DO know that many of these corporations collect intelligence on critics.
I've ran into other people who have huge botnets set up to fake a mass apeal in order to get other people to buy products out of need for conformity.
Show me where it has been "exposed". Also show me where she BS'd you.
C|N>K
All consultants are employees by definition of employee [wiktionary.org]
The IRS would beg to differ, and a Wiktionary entry won't hold up too well in court against them.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
You're definitely not reading the right dictionary... Only in the most general possible sense does "employee" == "consultant". In the same way that the segway is a motorcycle because it has two wheels and a motor.
In the U.S. at least, the term "employee" is legally (and casually) reserved for someone on an organization's payroll at the non-executive level. Being on a payroll means that the organization pays you regularly and deducts taxes from your paycheck. Consultants (or their employers) must manage their own taxes. One may be both a consultant and an employee, but not generally of the same company.
Florian Mueller is not an employee of Oracle, he is a consultant. He is self-employed and is on the payroll of his own company.
Uh, she works for a divorce attorney, and has stated this several times over the ast 10 years, groklaw was her own side project.
C|N>K
I've just got to ask, are you mentally handicapped, because the article demonstrates that Mueller's pro-Oracle articles have an explanation. He's in their employ.
As to you, well, it's clear you're just a moron.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
By giving Mueller a free pass and attacking PJ instead. PJ's done a helluva lot of good, and what the fuck has Mueller ever done other than be an apologist for companies that should taken out back and beaten for their conduct.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
And generally where there is a conflict, a journalist should say so right from the outset. But we've seen this time and time again, mainly because guys like Mueller are not actually journalists at all. They're shills.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
By noticing that she has backed up her statements with proof 100% of the time, even if it took years to find out. And I don't mean "some website" proof, I mean legal filings proof.
C|N>K
And PJ has never hid her bias towards open source. That's why Groklaw was founded, for goodness sake. Sadly, she is also the favorite whipping boy (girl, sorry PJ) of every shill and astroturfer, particularly when they're outed. She's been honest from the beginning, but these guys, well, they're paid liars.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Bullshit, you liar. Time and time again this accusation has been made, but not once has anyone ever proven it.
Go back to using your SCO stock to wipe your ass, mouth, and anywhere else the excrement leaks out.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
And when you can prove that PJ is an IBM employee...
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Bias and having an undisclosed conflict of interest are not remotely the same thing. All journalists have bias; hell all people have bias on all subjects, it's simply unavoidable. Good journalists try to minimize the effect of their personal bias on their reporting, and I think most people would freely admit that PJ is often lacking in this area. Although you could also make the case that most Groklaw articles are mix of commentary and reporting, and that it's not that hard to distinguish one from the other. However, having a blatant conflict of interest and not disclosing it is a massive breach of journalistic ethics that frankly completely destroys all credibility of the journalist. Conflicts of interest happen, and they don't necessarily preclude one from reporting and commenting on a given issue, but failure to disclose sends the message that the conflict did in fact taint his view, and he was deliberately trying to hide it. It is literally one of the worst things a journalist can do.
Whoops! I think he logged in with the wrong sockpuppet account. He really should get a better persona management app.
He's just openly admitting what many have claimed all along, that these shill accounts are all run by the same small group of people.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
I'm pretty sure Florian is the only LWN user I've ever marked as "hidden by default", simply because any branch of a thread that starts with one of his comments almost invariably turns into a trainwreck. It becomes a game of Immovable Object vs. the Irresistible Force.
Program Intellivision!
The fact that Mueller is earning money is not the issue.
The fact that Mueller is taking money from Oracle is also not the issue. It's also not the sole reason he's being accused of bias. It's just the latest nail in the coffin.
The issue is that Mueller has been called on his "impartial analysis" several times already. Not by random people off the street, by his fellow techies. What started as suspicions was later proven right as the facts unfolded. And might just be shown once more as Oracle v Google progresses.
He's being called biased because he is, demonstrably. His front as an "impartial analyst" among techies is shot. I hope Oracle is getting their moneys worth peddling him to the non-techie crowd, because from this point on that's the best he's good for.
Ah look, another disgruntled SCO investor shooting the messenger.
I hope you realize you're basically proving his point.
#DeleteChrome
It's from the smear campaign that SCO used against PJ way back when, at the start of their 15 minutes of glory. AFAIK it's never been proven... but that doesn't stop some people from trying.
Back in 2004 Florian Muller was very active in protesting against the proposed EU directive to require all member states to recognize software patents. There are some people that gained a positive impression of him based on that, and continue to quote him despite the fact that his recent "patent analysis" is heavily biased and legally unfounded more often than not. As an example, Ryan Paul, the writer and editor of the Open Source section of Arstechnica, continues to cite of Muller, and refuses to accept arguments that he is now a shrill.
We shouldn't read Florian Mueller because he takes money from Oracle. OK. Does that mean that we shouldn't listen to the FSF and Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society because they take money from Google?
What do you mean, the big boys shell out a lot of bucks for astroturfing and posting under false premises? Tell me it ain't so!
Check your premises.
You don't know HarrySquatter isn't actually Glen Beck. You've never seen them together at the same time, right?
I contend, and I note that Glen Beck has never denied, that HarrySquatter is actually Glen Beck's slightly more psychopathic alter ego. Perhaps one of those cases of Multiple Personality Disorder. I leave it as an exercise to the reader whether Glen Beck is the shadow personality or the primary.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
I shop at Winn Dixie.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
The fact that Mueller has arguably wrong opinions is not a problem. Anyone who matters can dismiss those out of hand.
The problem is that (A) he has some credibility among those who don't know enough to dismiss his POV out of hand, and (B) he ceased to have personal opinions and instead has his corporate masters' opinions, without disclosing his financially-motivated interests.
Bias isn't a problem; bias is inevitable, and can be adjusted for. Undisclosed financial relationships and a hidden mercenary motivation is a problem, and a serious lapse of professional ethics in someone purporting to fulfill a journalistic and editorial role in the electronic Fourth Estate.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
You're right. "Employee" isn't the best literal world to describe this relationship, although de facto it is often appropriate. However, in this case, a "contractual consultant" role is more of a subcontractor.
And we know that a subcontractor always has the freedom to oppose his contracting customer's position on matters in which he's being paid to consult.
No, wait...what?
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Agreed. They were off on the details (works for Oracle, not MS), but they were right that something smelled rotten.
The possibility is not ruled out that he has also received money from Microsoft. Microsoft can be devious about how it channels money to its proxies.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
As an independent analyst, he is terrible. His explanations of legal proceedings are crap and his predictions are often very wrong. Yet, he'll keep beating the same drum and presenting fantasy as fact. Why? Having to reveal that he is paid by both Microsoft and Oracle explains it. His "opinions" are carefully crafted propaganda. He is a paid shill and likely has no personal attachment to the idiotic opinions he shares. Don't forget, his former career was a marketing consultant for large software companies; he may have changed his title but the work is the same.
Because he typically does not disclose his alignment when he provides interviews to the press.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Uh, she works for a divorce attorney, and has stated this several times over the ast 10 years, groklaw was her own side project.
A side project that has made a large mark in legal history, introducing the concept of "open source" law and demonstrating its effectiveness.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Ah look, another disgruntled SCO investor shooting the messenger.
Shooting at the messenger. Those SCO guys don't seem to have very good aim.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
It's not a question as to whether the opinion is invalid, just that it may be tainted and that should be disclosed.
In Florian's case, it is not a question of "may be tainted", but rather "is blatantly biased". And then there are the personal attacks on PJ, which are in a word, reprehensible. And of course, very much in line with the standard tactics of ethically challenged organizations like Microsoft and Oracle.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Confirmation makes the comments in this thread from January of last year a lot more entertaining.
I got to the truth and facts rather easily by reading beyond the headline and Slashdot's summary. I have a hard time taking you seriously if you suggest that "Oracle has hired him [Florian Mueller], for his analysis of FRAND issues" is only supposed to be a concern for what you label 'FOSS lunatics' when Mueller positions himself as some sort of patent expert supposedly giving objective analysis of the Oracle vs Google case, and isn't willing to be up-front about one of the parties *actually having hired him*. Also, I believe 'being hired by Oracle' means he does work for Oracle in return for pay. How does that make him being employed by Oracle an outright lie?
Indeed. It is common to say "hire a consultant" or "employ a consultant".
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
You can bank on it: anyone who uses rhetoric like "foss lunatic" has an paid agenda And tactic one from the Standard Shill Manual is "deny you are a shill".
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Everyone has biases, as long as we know what they are and why they are we're able to make informed decisions ...
Sorry but 'knowing' biases doesn't work like that. Biases aren't binary on-or-off, they're not well defined or all consuming. People are blind or misunderstand their own biases and and poorly communicate them even when trying to open and honest. Moreover, people are able to compensate for different biases in different situations better or worse.
Florian Mueller doesn't think his biases influenced his 'reporting' (em. mine):
My long-standing views on this matter are well-documented. As an independent analyst and blogger, I will express only my own opinions, which cannot be attributed to any one of my diversity of clients. I often say things none of them would agree with.
tomorrow who's gonna fuss
Groklaw's coverage of the case has been massively one-sided as well....
Oh yes indeed, Groklaw is very biased. Groklaw is in favor of freedom and decency, and against evil.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Even Mueller's sockpuppets can't get the basic facts right.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
This is way beyond the pot calling the kettle black here, this is the pot complaining that the kettle boils water.
Hi Florian.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
PJ's hunch about Mueller carried as much weight as SCO's hunch about PJ. Now that there's proof, it sounds a little less like smearing.
All you're doing is proving it's true.
The statement does nothing to change the fact that it's conflict of interest.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
All consultants are employees by definition of employee [wiktionary.org]
The IRS would beg to differ...
"Tax purposes".
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Please. I've been on slashdot since long before he has.
For the record, I have no conflict of interest here. My problem with PJ is that she holds those she disagrees with to a different standard than she holds herself or those she agrees with.
She frequently accuses those she disagrees with of the very same things her side of things does.
This is a prime example. If she wants to accuse others of conflicts of interest, she should start with herself and disclose any she has. She should also look closely at the folks she defends, who clearly have their own conflicts.
There's nothing wrong with having a conflict of interest, there is something wrong with accusing others of it while having your own that you refuse to acknowledge.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Me too. Because there isn't a Publix in my town.
There is a war going on for your mind.
Can't say as I have had that problem specifically, but... its definitely an odd issue. Some of us are damned if we do, and damned if we don't.
I tend to not say (or at least dance around saying) exactly who I work for because, well, I tend to say things that they might find offensive and I figure the least I can do is try to keep my online persona from reflecting on them.
That said... if you read many of my comments, you might be surprized at who I work for... I certainly don't shill.... but there is a fine line to walk between disclosure of interests and inviting problems.
If I say "Well i work for X" then... I have to be extra careful because I am not authorized to speak for them in public. In fact, I believe I would then be required to add disclaimers and then...it all just adds to the visibility and draws more attention on me... meaning...I can't comment as freely as I would like.
Sometimes its a hard balance to strike between speaking your mind, and inviting trouble, especially since I tend to complain rather than shill, and I do feel its a bit of a violation (not just to the explicit agreements but, even without them) to wantonly air dirty laundry even when I am a less than satisfied employee.
So I prefer to err on the side of speaking in general terms and leaving the who, what, and where specifics out. Though, thats easier when the specific topic is things like "boneheaded management" than when its about the actions of specific companies. In cases like this... I can see why it gets a lot murkier and credibility requires disclosure.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
There's nothing wrong with having a conflict of interest, there is something wrong with accusing others of it while having your own that you refuse to acknowledge.
What's yours?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
That makes about as much sense as saying you have an undisclosed conflict of interest with the local rock quarry owner, because they donated their unwanted rubble to be used to pave the parking lot of the park you like to sit in while you write blog posts on your laptop.
Seriously, take the tin foil hat off and let your brain get some air. I think it's smothering.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
You'd know if you read the thread, moron. Stop pretending you're smarter than anyone else.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
So then the only logical thing to do would be to have some FOSS organization pay him an equal amount to balance it out...
He probably meant to log in as "Dr. Bob,DC"
True indeed... but sometimes, the biggest things come from the least likely people.
After all, look at what some random student in Finland managed to do with a bit of code back in 1991...
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
You'd know if you read the thread, moron. Stop pretending you're smarter than anyone else.
I know two things: 1) you are rude and 2) you did not disclose your agenda.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Yeah, and we all wanna know if she's hot or not. Or is she on those "internet girls" (50-year old fat slob or FBI on pedo hunting)?
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
No. If she stated that she had no conflicts of interest in any of the things she reports on, that would be one thing. She doesn't do that. She doesn't disclose whether or NOT she has conflicts. That means she's hiding it one way or the other. So yes, she's hiding it. We just don't know whether she's hiding that she has no conflict or whether she does have conflicts.
Could IBM put pressure on UNC to dump Groklaw if she posts something they disapprove of? Yes, that could certainly happen. But, more importantly, she's *APPRECIATIVE* of the fact IBM has donated her hardware.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
You're rude as well, you just think you're smart by using inuendo. "What's yours?" is a subtle way of trying to claim i have conflicts of interest, yet i specifically stated in this thread what my conflict of intersts are. Yet, you lie here and say I have not.
I'm not rude, i'm just saying things as they are and not being passive aggressive.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
He already admitted to being paid by Microsoft.
You come across as conflicted, my friend. And I will leave it as completely apparent which one of us is rude.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Really, there is a difference between the two terms.
No, I come across as having a strong opinion. That opinion is based on hating hypocrites.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Unlike FM, Groklaw has always made it clear when they are giving an opinion, and where they are stating facts they give copious references to support these facts - usually direct court transcripts.
Yes, there is a bias there. It is towards truth and freedom. I rather like that.
I guess I was wrong then. I always defended Florian against accusations of being a shill, thinking that he was just an idiot and that no company would knowingly pay someone as stupid as him. It seems Microsoft and Oracle have lower standards than I though...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Common shorthand. Also descriptive.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
So, you're taking an imaginary situation and trying to compare it to a real one.
Shock and horror! Somebody used an analogy to explain something on Slashdot!
Show me an actual park where a rock quary donated rubble to the pavement of a park that someone writes blog posts praising rock quaries and condemning something that is against rock quaries.
Yeah, right.
Exactly "Yeah, right" It is an absurd situation and was meant as such. The point being, most people using a FREE SERVICE neither know, NOR CARE where the components that went into it came from. There are thousands of web sites and multimedia services hosted on ibiblio. Are we to assume that they are all sucking IBM's giant corporate cock?
We're talking about the fact that PJ public supports IBM in her blog posts, and it just so happens that IBM also donates the servers her site runs under.
IBM has not donated servers to GROKLAW. IBM donated servers to THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, who allows the public to use it's IT infrastructure for non-profit use. The servers donated by IBM are only part of that. She has the same amount of conflict of interest with IBM as she does with UNC's ISP, electric company, IT employees, and anybody who ever donated to the project, the university, or paid taxes in North Carolina. You could argue she has a conflict of interest with UNC, but she has disclosed this with a "hosted by ibiblio" on her page, and, after all this "oh IBM paid her off with teh serverz!" nonsense started up, she decided to put below it who donated the specific server that her site was hosted on, and guess what, IT WAS DONATED BY AMD. My bet is she had not have even known who donated the server she was using until she was accused of being influenced by it.
If she had a shred of decency, she would have moved her site to a server that was not associated with IBM. But she didn't.
Oh, the irony...
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Just google "SCO's not dead yet" and you'll see why, in spite of the fact that SCO is not a functioning company anymore, that doesn't stop its lawyers (with leftover Microsoft money) from still popping up and clogging the court system.
I figure the only way to truly end SCO is to bury it at a crossroads.
As for Florian, what was considered "FOSS trolling" turned out to be true. Yet, when the "screeching sycophants" are right, it's still about PJ. Go figure.
Full disclosure: I am anti software patent, anti corporation, and anti government. Am I still a shill?
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
Publix is the FOSS advocate group equivalent in France?
Publix is a grocery store.
They have grocery stores in France?
I think you're missing the point of conflict of interest. A conflict of interest is something that will keep you from being impartial, like a judge getting money from the RIAA ruling on the DeCSS case. Since PJ just puts up an editorial blog and shows the SCO case against Linux is bullshit, she is not influencing anything or tainting the impartiality of a proceeding by doing so. She is not involved in the case with Oracle v. Google. She was not involved in the SCO case either. The fact that the courts agreed SCO was full of shit had nothing to do with groklaw or PJ.
Now, if by some reasoning we can say "well PJ has bias because she gets her hosting from IBM"... okay, then that's fine and dandy, but unlike Florian who would argue the sky was orange if someone from FOSS said it was blue, PJ keeps her bias up front. Knowing this, her facts are correct. They are facts colored with the language of someone who hates SCO/Oracle, but they are facts nonetheless.
So in short, a conflict of interest would need to be disclosed if there was something to gain or lose by that interest from either party involved in the proceeding. Since PJ was just an observer, there was no conflict of interest. SCO didn't lose the case because of groklaw... it lost the case because it was full of shit and trolling. It got caught doing so and was spanked out of existence, in SPITE of cash from Microsoft...
Bias != conflict of interest. and Florian has only a bias because even though he's paid by Oracle and Microsoft, his comments on groklaw do not influence proceedings.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
You haven't been reading and studying GL since day one.
I have.
Your strongly held opinion is incorrect. Deal with it.
C|N>K
Wave your hands all you want, it doesn't change the facts. Any conflict of interest, no matter how "tiny" you claim it is, is still a conflict of interest. But IBM's involvement isn't really even that important to the point. The fact that they are involved is just evidence that such conflicts of interest exist, and the fact that PJ refuses to disclose whether or not there are any (and we know there's at least one) is the problem.
The fact she refuses to say one way or the other, then rails against others for conflicts of interest is called being a hypocrite.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
I couldn't care less about whether Florian Mueller is fornicating with goats, much less having a bias or conflict of interest.
I just don't care.
But, I do hate when people who obviously have their own biases accuse others of things they themselves are perpetrating.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
A true professional should be able to ...
Well, that certainly leaves out Florian Mueller then.
No, it doesn't. It says "Groklaw is not affiliated with IBM, Red Hat, Novell, Google, or any other party to the litigation it covers." which is vaguely worded, because they don't define what "affiliated" is. The most common usage would mean "officially associated", that doesn't mean they don't receive products, services, information, or anything else of value from those companies.
That's all that groklaw says on the matter.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Yes, your situation was absurd, and you admit it was meant as such. The difference is that your situation was fictional and absurd, while this situation is real and is in fact the case. Your argument that it was an "analogy" is pointless because you're trying to compare a real thing to a fictional absurd thing.
She is not commenting on UNC's ISP, electric company, or IT employees. Why do you not see why that's the issue?
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Stop misrepresenting what I said. I did not "backtrack", and I did not say "It doesn't matter how tiny IBM's involvement is." I said "It doesn't matter how tiny you claim IBM's involvement is"
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Well, if its any comfort... you need to remember that some organizations are about winning at all costs. Regardless of integrity. Since integrity doesn't have a dollar sign attached to in in the immediate future, it is meaningless to them. Hence the ability to be two-faced without so much as blinking.
C|N>K
Pamela Jones isn't her real name? Prove it.
She doesn't work for a divorce attorney? Prove it.
They already *have* gone after her (private investigators... turned up nothing) back during the SCO case.
STFU troll.
C|N>K
In the interest of full disclosure and not being a hypocrite, why not tell up all about yourself then? Show and lead by example, and all that...
BTW, I do this for free, and I don't even work in the IT industry. Never have. I've been blue-collar my whole life.
C|N>K
Nice FUD attempt there. You are trying to mislead people by omitting the fact that IBM doesn't really have anything to do with it. Groklaw is on servers run by someone else, not IBM. That they happen to be IBM computers is irrelevant because Groklaw is not involved in what kind of hardware the site is running on since it's being hosted by someone else (again, not IBM).
Clever signature text goes here.
That's not exactly PJ's bias. She sided with IBM when they used some of their arsenal of incredibly broad patents to sue a company providing commercial support for open-source software that competed with them, because being anti-Microsoft and pro-IBM comes before being pro-open source.
"Fourth Estate"
You mean we actually still have one in this corporatation-owned-media country.
you make the wrong point, but a valid argument.
I've been accused of shilling when I said something vaguely anti-GPL; or when I said something vaguely pro-MS. It's not true; but unfortunately folks like Mueller (who I've consistently maintained to be nothing more than a vocal blogger with no qualifications - never suspected he was a shill) fuel the thinking that gets me called a shill when I say something that folks don't want to hear.
Does anyone actually know what his training or education background is? I don't think there was never any doubt that he was paid to slander open source software, but I've always wondered if he was one person or an outfit of people, and why he was so often quoted as an "expert" and "consultant" in software patent disputes. Is he a licensed attorney or software engineer, or just a journalist with an interest in this stuff?
I don't care about biases at all. I do care about making informed decisions based on all the information provided by interested parties. Attempting to use bias as any kind of meaningful metric for evaluating the truthfulness of information is foolish at best, and the correct approach is to seek out as many information sources as possible when making a decision.
People may try to argue that ignoring bias yields a higher probability of operating on incomplete information, but that's also a fallacy. Everyone has biases, no matter how independent they may claim to be. The only sane solution is to start by understanding that, and work carefully toward evaluating as many data points as possible. Unfortunately, people seem to play the "bias card" at every possible turn in an attempt to invalidate an opponent's position, instead of actually addressing and refuting or reinforcing the available information.
Sadly, it's a tactic that tends to work well, as external observers frequently seem all too content to take the easy way out and simply nod their heads on logical fallacies based on observations of bias. It's much easier than taking the time to analyze things on their own, and thus the talking heads keep raking in the big bucks while their loyal followers feel content in their ignorance.
Write failed: Broken pipe
Maybe if people stop paying attention to him, he'll go away? LET'S FIND OUT!
Sadly other news outlets, such as the BBC, will still probably quote him.
If you're pj, please update the recent Groklaw story with a little note to the effect that comment 39738733 was authored by you. That should just take a few seconds. Thanks.
Write failed: Broken pipe
Thank you for the laugh, I needed one today.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Are you a journalist? If not, then you have no obligation to tell anyone who you work for. If you're just posting thoughts here or on a blog, you're writing your opinion. If you're being paid to write, then you'd better be up front about who is paying the bills. It doesn't make that opinion necessarily any less, but then everyone knows that you may have a financial bias (as opposed to just an ideological one).
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
I figure the only way to truly end SCO is to bury it at a crossroads.
Don't forget to drive a stake through the heart before you bury it :p
Can a person program a new solution to a problem? Why should anyone be able to stop such a thing? -Richard Stallman
Thank you Mr. AC for saving me a bunch of typing.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
the 4chan oldfags all came here, don't you know?
This discussion reeks of Oracle damage control.
Oh, I don't expect these organisations to act with integrity, I just thought that having someone with a reputation for being wrong 90% of the time and who talks such obvious nonsense on their side would be more of a liability. It would make as much sense as Obama paying for an endorsement form Kim Jong Il in the 2008 elections.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
As the other guy pointed out, how things are defined for tax purposes in a specific nation do not in any way whatsoever alter the actual definition of the term in English language.
It is a well known fact that reality has a lib^H^H^H^Hn anti-MS/Oracle bias.
I'm tempted to mod you up just for your typographically correct use of '^H'.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
Is he really? That explains why he suddenly disappeared from related threads! Perhaps I'll go unhide him just to see what he's been up to.
I want my Cowboyneal
Sadly, no. You saw what happened in the SCO case. Same thing here - they get some shill who has zero credibility on their own. But then the mainstream press starts quoting the shill as if authoritative. And without actually doing any research or investigative journalism of their own. Next thing you know, everybody is quoting everybody as if the word becomes gospel truth, when in fact its completely backwards. When the actors and companies involved lose their legal cases, you never hear a peep about it.
Its called FUD writ large.
C|N>K
You realize that my settings have nothing to do with yours. I'm not Jonathan Corbet or anyone else associated with the site. I'm just another LWN subscriber.
But, since LWN added the comment filtering feature (that's what it's called in "My Account", at least -- go check it out), I imagine I'm not the only person who added Florian to the "filtered" list. (And I double checked, Florian is the only person in my filter set.) Enough people add Florian, and *poof*! No more oxygen for the flames.
Filtering doesn't completely hide the person. It just "folds" the threads that start at the filtered user's comment, so that they don't take up all the screen. You can still click to expand, not too much differently than here on Slashdot.
Program Intellivision!
Sorry, I thought you were saying corbet had enabled a "hide by default, show only if the individual user chooses to" setting that applied to Florien's account. I see that I was mistaken.
I want my Cowboyneal
I hadn't considered that aspect, yes an excellent point.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Groklaw's coverage of the case has been massively one-sided as well....
Oh yes indeed, Groklaw is very biased. Groklaw is in favor of freedom and decency, and against evil.
...except when it is IBM attacking freedom, then Groklaw makes excuses for them.
And I've been on Slashdot one hell of a lot longer than you have, and it's the considered opinion of this Old One you're at least one (and possibly more) of: (a) ignorant of basic logic; (b) trolling; (c) brain-damaged.
Yes, PJ can be biased and is at times unreasonable as hell. (I've had posts removed by her because she apparently could not understand that I was *agreeing* with her, for crying out loud.) But she does NOT have any conflict of interest.
Personally, I think you're pretending not to understand what "conflict of interest" means, so that you can oh-so-cleverly shift its *apparent* definition until you trick people into agreeing with you that it applies to PJ. Whereas at least some of us *do* know what it means (and at one point I wrote ad copy for a living, so I know all about how your little game is played), and so you're being called out on it, as well you should be.
I just hope you're actually getting paid. It would really be tragic, otherwise.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
*highfive*
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.