Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/06/03/lyons-silicon-valley.html

I watched the most recent Silicon Valley episode last night.
I laughed at some parts (not as much as a usual episode) and then there was a
completely unbelievable tech-related plot twist — quite out of
character for that show. I was surprised.

When the credits played, my draw dropped when I saw the episode’s author
was Dan Lyons.
Lyons (whose work has been
promoted by the Linux Foundation) once compared me to
a communist
and a member of organized crime (in, Forbes, a prominent
publication for the wealthy) because of my work enforcing the GPL.

In the years since Lyons’ first anti-software freedom article (yes, there
were more), I’ve watched many who once helped me enforce the GPL change
positions and oppose GPL enforcement (including allies who once received
criticism alongside me). Many such allies went even further —
publicly denouncing my work and regularly undermining GPL enforcement politically.

Attacks by people like Dan Lyons — journalists well connected with
industry trade associations and companies — are one reason so many
people are too afraid to enforce the GPL. I’ve wondered for years why the
technology press has such a pro-corporate agenda, but it eventually became
obvious to me in early 2005 when listening to yet another David Pogue Apple
product review: nearly the entire tech press is bought and paid for by the very companies
on which they report! The cartoonish level of Orwellian fear across our
industry of GPL enforcement is but one example of many for-profit corporate
agendas that people like Lyons have helped promulgate through their
pro-company reporting.

Meanwhile, I had taken Silicon Valley (until this week) as
pretty good satire on the pathetic state of the technology industry today.
Perhaps Alec Berg and Mike Judge just liked Lyons’ script — not even
knowing that he is a small part of the problem they seek to criticize.
Regardless as to why his script was produced, the line between satirist and
the satirized is clearly thinner than I imagined; it seems just as thin as
the line between technology journalist and corporate PR employee.

I still hope that Berg and Judge seek, just as Judge did in Office
Space, to pierce the veil of for-profit corporate manipulation of
employees and users alike. However, for me, the luster of their achievement
fades when I realize at least some of their creative collaborators
participate in the central to the problem they criticize.

Shall we start a letter writing campaign to convince them to donate some
of Silicon Valley‘s proceeds to Free Software charities? Or, at
the very least, to convince Berg to write one of his usually excellent
episodes about how the technology press is completely corrupted by the
companies on which they report?

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/02/26/award-karen.html

I know this decision is tough, as all the candidates in the list deserve
an award. However, I hope that you’ll chose to vote for my friend and
colleague, Karen Sandler, for
the 2015 Red
Hat Women in Open Source Community Award. Admittedly, most of Karen’s
work has been for software freedom, not Open Source (i.e., her work has
been community and charity-oriented, not for-profit oriented). However,
giving her an “Open Source” award is a great way to spread the
message of software freedom to the for-profit corporate Open Source
world.

I realize that there are some amazingly good candidates, and I admit I’d
be posting a blog post to endorse someone else (No, I won’t say who 🙂 if
Karen wasn’t on the ballot for the Community Award. So, I wouldn’t say you
backed the wrong candidate you if you vote for someone else. And, I’m
imminently biased since Karen and I have worked together
on Conservancy since its
inception. But, if you can see your way through to it, I hope you’ll give
Karen your vote.

(BTW, I’m not endorsing a candidate in the Academic Award race. I am just
not familiar enough with the work of the candidates involved to make an
endorsement. I even abstained from voting in that race myself because I
didn’t want to make an uninformed vote.)

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/02/26/award-karen.html

I know this decision is tough, as all the candidates in the list deserve
an award. However, I hope that you’ll chose to vote for my friend and
colleague, Karen Sandler, for
the 2015 Red
Hat Women in Open Source Community Award. Admittedly, most of Karen’s
work has been for software freedom, not Open Source (i.e., her work has
been community and charity-oriented, not for-profit oriented). However,
giving her an “Open Source” award is a great way to spread the
message of software freedom to the for-profit corporate Open Source
world.

I realize that there are some amazingly good candidates, and I admit I’d
be posting a blog post to endorse someone else (No, I won’t say who 🙂 if
Karen wasn’t on the ballot for the Community Award. So, I wouldn’t say you
backed the wrong candidate you if you vote for someone else. And, I’m
imminently biased since Karen and I have worked together
on Conservancy since its
inception. But, if you can see your way through to it, I hope you’ll give
Karen your vote.

(BTW, I’m not endorsing a candidate in the Academic Award race. I am just
not familiar enough with the work of the candidates involved to make an
endorsement. I even abstained from voting in that race myself because I
didn’t want to make an uninformed vote.)

Post Syndicated from Bradley M. Kuhn original http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2015/02/26/award-karen.html

I know this decision is tough, as all the candidates in the list deserve
an award. However, I hope that you’ll chose to vote for my friend and
colleague, Karen Sandler, for
the 2015 Red
Hat Women in Open Source Community Award. Admittedly, most of Karen’s
work has been for software freedom, not Open Source (i.e., her work has
been community and charity-oriented, not for-profit oriented). However,
giving her an “Open Source” award is a great way to spread the
message of software freedom to the for-profit corporate Open Source
world.

I realize that there are some amazingly good candidates, and I admit I’d
be posting a blog post to endorse someone else (No, I won’t say who 🙂 if
Karen wasn’t on the ballot for the Community Award. So, I wouldn’t say you
backed the wrong candidate you if you vote for someone else. And, I’m
imminently biased since Karen and I have worked together
on Conservancy since its
inception. But, if you can see your way through to it, I hope you’ll give
Karen your vote.

(BTW, I’m not endorsing a candidate in the Academic Award race. I am just
not familiar enough with the work of the candidates involved to make an
endorsement. I even abstained from voting in that race myself because I
didn’t want to make an uninformed vote.)