11.12.21
Posted in Antitrust, Microsoft, OLPC, Windows at 10:58 pm by Guest Editorial Team
Guest post by Ryan, reprinted with permission from the original
Microsoft would need a lot of corrupt public officials to go along with Windows 11 SE, for schools, since all it adds is $100 per student laptop.
This has all happened before, but it won’t happen again.
Last time, Microsoft stormed the beaches to kill a low cost laptop for education was when they dumped shit-ass Windows XP onto the OLPC XO laptop. It didn’t work.
Well, it did work, but Word took 43 seconds to load and ran the device out of memory.
So there’s that.
“…Word took 43 seconds to load and ran the device out of memory.”I mean, the laptops were meant to be powered by a hand crank, if necessary, and to do that you need an efficient operating system like GNU/Linux. They even pared GNU/Linux down with a special desktop called Sugar.
But the point wasn’t for it to work well.
The point was to get sleazy corrupt public officials onboard, and to corrupt the One Laptop Per Child project, and it worked, and nobody ever heard about them again.
Microsoft set back computing in education a decade and especially hurt economically disadvantaged countries without good infrastructure.
This time they’re dealing with Chromebooks, from Google, which have virtually the entire market and a well established reputation, supply chain, and support infrastructure.
So, Microsoft, I mean, good luck with that, when you’re only adding $100 per student and the world’s crummiest operating system to the mix. I’m sure that will go well for you!
“Nobody under 40 wants to use Windows, and so Microsoft has a big problem on their hands.”Especially now that schools, students, and administrators love their Chromebooks and, you know, realize that times are tough and budgets are not unlimited.
But you’ll figure that out….Have fun with an entire warehouse full of these stupid things, like Windows Phone (years of dumping/selling below cost, followed by an $8 billion write-down) and Zune (which never made sense and entered the market halfway into the life-cycle of the iPod).
But going back to the sudden panic about the education market, I think it has less to do with the actual Chromebooks themselves (although that’s certainly a market), and more to do with panicking that school children may activate “Linux” and learn how to use Debian, and then put that on their other computers.
The next generation will be the one where Microsoft finally goes to die. Nobody under 40 wants to use Windows, and so Microsoft has a big problem on their hands.
Like the Republican Party in the United States, their voters are getting long in the tooth with “nothing in the pipeline” to replace them.
Even before Windows XP went out, Microsoft was developing a theme that pretty much cloned Mac Aqua, from the then-new OS X. They can’t come up with anything original, so they just steal.
They think that a new theme in “Windows 11” that makes it look like a Chromebook is the answer.
Microsoft just doesn’t get what the real problem here is.
It’s that people despise them for having spent so many years dealing with crashes and viruses and lost data and manipulative behavior, and want them gone.
“Debian in a container lets their users run real applications, and it removes one argument against buying a Chromebook.”Then on top of that, they get to deal with incompetent bureaucracies at work who make them deal with it all day long and don’t want to come home to it as well. Now there are ways to realistically escape, even if you don’t know much about computers.
Many of those ways aren’t going to gain you everything, but most of them at least gain you a computer that isn’t breaking down all the time.
And, I think what Debian in a lightweight container on Chromebooks shows is that there are at least some geeks at Google.
It has a legitimate use case. Many users will absolutely reject a system that can’t run local applications. Debian in a container lets their users run real applications, and it removes one argument against buying a Chromebook.
“Google Docs works in Offline Mode, or you could just use Apt or Flatpak on Debian to install LibreOffice.”Microsoft still thinks this is 2013 and you can’t edit a document offline with a Chromebook.
Google Docs works in Offline Mode, or you could just use Apt or Flatpak on Debian to install LibreOffice.
Chromebooks have actually grown beyond a joke. Windows 11 hasn’t. The joke just keeps getting bigger.
Oddly, at the same time they tout offline document editing (which we had in the 1980s in DOS, even), Microsoft wants you to pay them for not being able to edit a document unless you’re online, or if the server goes down again and again.
On the Microsoft-side, WSL2 is a joke that has no plausible use.
Also, Windows having five terminals that don’t work very well does not a Linux make, but I veer further off-topic. Windows Terminal…..Windows is terminal.
I just can’t see Windows 11 SE going anywhere, unless it’s Chicago.
I mean, RedFlex figured out who to bribe to get all of those traffic cameras that actually increase car accidents. Like Windows, these suck as public policy, but money talks.
So, maybe Microsoft will sell these to someone. But it won’t be enough.
Nevertheless, Microsoft already has their army of paid trolls banging away on their keyboards to write glowing reviews of Windows 11 SE, but don’t believe it. It’s more gaslighting.
PCWorld has the winner for the headline, however. “Windows 11 SE is Microsoft’s latest Chromebook-killer.”. Oh really? What happened to their others? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.02.21
Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, OLPC at 4:36 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Video download link
Summary: Still failing to heed the warning or the cautionary tale of OLPC, Raspberry Pi walks its way into another scandal/blunder that is assured to alienate (as it already does) some of its biggest and most passionate longtime fans
EARLIER this year we wrote a lot about the Raspberry Pi. We’ve since then hoped that they abandoned any ambitions of becoming Microsoft tools/boosters, but we were likely wrong. It just keeps happening again and again (this is the third time already).
“From now on, Microsoft should be assumed to be lurking in the shadows inside the Raspberry Pi ‘Foundation’. They don’t seem to even understand what’s wrong with that.”Staff of the Raspberry Pi are once again associating themselves with criminals from Microsoft. Well, if this is their business choice, then fine… I can reach my own conclusions. I’m already heartbroken enough, seeing what they did to millions of their customers earlier this year (behind their backs, without their consent) and now the same people are marketing Microsoft. As an associate of ours put it this morning, “two companies shooting themselves in their own foot by associating with Microsoft. Their days are numbered now, regardless of how popular either happens to be at the moment. What makes the leaders of either think that somehow theirs will be the first company in history to survive “collaboration” with Microsoft?”
Another person, in IRC, said “they could have grown organically but by associating with Microsoft they expect to grow faster [...] in that case I would say bring on Raspberry Pi 5 with official Vista 11 support and see the entire hardware world being unhappy as you don’t need more than a €100 machine to run the latest version of their malware…”
I’ve decided to do a video about it; that’s my first reading of it. Very disappointing. From now on, Microsoft should be assumed to be lurking in the shadows inside the Raspberry Pi ‘Foundation’. They don’t seem to even understand what’s wrong with that. They even conflate critics of crime with “haters”. █
Update: Looks like we have a new arrival?
![Simon [Peyton Jones] is Principal Researcher for Microsoft UK and Chair of Computing at Schools (CAS).](http://techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/raspi-management.png)
Permalink
Send this to a friend
06.23.20
Posted in Bill Gates, OLPC at 9:34 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
We’ve slowed down lately due to urgent research into newly-acquired material
Summary: A little update on the “GatesGate” series; due to some work on a book, as well as material coming (at long last) from Seattle’s Police Department, we’re putting this series on pause for a while; we’ll likely resume this series later this summer
IN part one, part two, part three, and part four we covered a bunch of stuff that had happened years earlier (than the time of reporting). We only became aware of what really happened a very long time later. It deals with the Gates Foundation being extremely hypocritical about Africa (see videos), claiming to be helping Africans whilst in fact harming them for profit.
“So we’re going to shuffle and reprioritise some things (changing projected times of publication), based on what’s more time-sensitive a topic.”We duly apologise for this series taking so long to complete. Not only were we sent about 200 pages of police material; the correspondent with whom I research this was busy covering the protests in Pittsburgh. So we’re going to shuffle and reprioritise some things (changing projected times of publication), based on what’s more time-sensitive a topic. “Things have gotten really crazy here,” he told me hours ago, as “I have a deadline for a book manuscript in about 6 weeks and it’s been my main focus. Time flies when you’re insanely busy, as I’m sure you know.”
Expect a long delay; “No hurry really,” I’ve told him, as “we’re dealing with an old scandal here.”
There are separate issues at hand and they’re loosely rather than closely connected. “My OLPC reporting really didn’t turn up all that much,” he said, “unless you want to do a story about a small, mismanaged company that probably shouldn’t be in the laptop business.”
Some of the ‘smoking guns’ were in Wikileaks (diplomatic cables). To many this is ‘old news’ (covered to some extent at the time), so for the time being we’ll press on with newer topics. The correspondent explores “the inherently corrupt practice of using a “philanthropy” to do your bidding.”
This is the same “philanthropy” which apparently ousted him from a major publisher, soon to be ‘replaced’ with Gates himself as the editor (see prior parts of this series).
“So,” he said, “here I am five years later and I’m looking into the Gates Foundation for my podcast, Failed State Update. I’d love to interview you about some of your recent Techrights stories on Gates, specifically regarding Covid-19, Jeffrey Epstein, and the shady ethical ground the foundation is on in general.”
If there’s an episode about it, that won’t happen any time soon. Part of the issue is privacy; I instructed him to set up PGP encryption. Previously it was not used. Based on his recent track record, which is partly listed here, he wrote for Counterpunch not too long ago (Counterpunch is a site we typically agree with). We should note upfront that the connection, if any, was limited to this past interview and IRC chats.
Part VI will likely come some time this summer. Until then, however, it seems safer to put things back in the ice bucket. I personally hoped to be done with this series by now, wanting to find out remnants of the article about OLPC that we can piece back together… namely how Bill Gates — through his fake ‘charity’ — attacked the charity because it did not use Microsoft Windows.
I wish to clarify with utmost sincerity that we’re not pausing due to a mistake or a lack of material; it’s just that I’m drowning in more shocking material at the moment, linking the person who was questioned and later arrested (while working at the home of Bill Gates) to some other companies, including one that works for Microsoft. We’ve sent some E-mail inquiries, giving the party which might be complicit in harm to children a chance to respond. They’re stonewalling on the face of it; we’ll persist to ensure they get every chance to properly reply. When we say “harm to children” we mean physical harm, not merely access to child pornography. We’ll leave readers with the video below. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
06.12.20
Posted in Bill Gates, Deception, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, OLPC at 11:06 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Cash-strapped libraries that accept the millions Gates is waving at them may find themselves acting out the Microsoft billionaire’s dim vision of our electronic future. … Before they take anything from the chief executive, they’d better examine the gift very carefully for strings. After all, what sort of public libraries can we expect from a man who calls people ‘users’ and to whom War and Peace and Gilligan’s Island are both ‘content?’”
–Margie Wylie, CNET
Summary: The effort to reconstruct the spiked piece about Bill Gates attacking charities is underway; there’s meanwhile new pushback against Gates for trying to control the narrative for profit and for fame
THE subject of this article is better understood after reading what we’ve outlined in part one, part two, part three and some preliminary ‘teaser’ parts. If you did not read at least some of those, then we suggest doing so now. We’ll cut right to the chase, in order to avoid repetition, which can in turn cause boredom.
As some people are aware, later today there will be some protests against Bill Gates, in various locations worldwide. It has been planned for a while and readers keep telling us about these protests. Those are partly connected to this video, which is part of a series.
“As some people are aware, later today there will be some protests against Bill Gates, in various locations worldwide.”We’re meanwhile trying to piece back together the spiked article which caused a journalist to be fired, shortly before the publisher put Bill Gates in charge (as editor). The role I played in it was a long (very long) interview more than half a decade ago. “Do you still have a recording of our prior chat,” I asked the journalist. “I might do,” I noted, but “do you have the spiked article?”
As we said in prior parts, the publisher denied the journalist access to his very own notes! Before firing him and making Bill Gates the editor rather than subject of shame. Prior to the interview I was told that the editor (Patel) was very interested in thrashing Gates, so why the sudden change? How much did Gates pay The Verge or what else was promised? Clearly something happened…
“I would like to collaborate on bringing the above to light,” I added later, as “I think these types of things aren’t just supported by evidence but are also pretty damning.”
“As we said in prior parts, the publisher denied the journalist access to his very own notes!”“I don’t have my Verge article,” the journalist said, “because it was never completed — but I do have the recording of our conversation.”
We think we need to carefully plan and coordinate coverage of these matters, compare notes etc. This may take some time as the journalist is currently very busy covering the protests in the US. In the meantime readers might want to read about Gates paying my employer all of a sudden (I can only guess it may be an effort to compel me to be silent). Just remember that there’s an effort to discredit Gates critics for anything they say that cannot be easily proven. But we have the facts, we just need to be careful in how we present them. Sometimes, and as recently as hours ago, people ask us for information. But some of them have an agenda like opposing vaccination. Not all, but some…
“I was wondering if there was any update,” one person told us in IRC, “as I am trying to place a request for the 2851 page report from Seattle police… Writing a book.”
“The length to which he goes, sometimes with his fake ‘charity’ as a vehicle of influence, ought to be widely recognised and broadly understood.”For this particular issue — like the Gates Foundation interfering with OLPC (in effect battling a charity in Africa) — I’d suggest a multi-part series, which feeds in the feedback from prior parts. That worked well for prior matters. There are two strands of stories here: 1. the OLPC thing (or bad intent in Africa) and 2. the attempt to muzzle the media. Those two are naturally connected. We thought we’d be able to finish the series by now, but it’s taking longer because of the protests in the US. We’ll pass around some notes we currently have regarding OLPC being targeted by the Gates Foundation even if those are of draft quality. Techrights does reach millions of people, so we can do justice to that story, over time… the top priority is ensuring we have evidence to support every statement made. That takes time.
Gates has long attempted to delete ‘uncomfortable’ history or rewrite it using misleading puff pieces. The length to which he goes, sometimes with his fake ‘charity’ as a vehicle of influence, ought to be widely recognised and broadly understood. “Charitable grants” are often a mask for bribes. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
06.05.20
Posted in Bill Gates, OLPC at 10:23 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Where are we on this Jihad?”
–Bill Gates
Summary: One might not expect this from a so-called ‘charity’; the Gates Foundation’s critics are often met with unprecedented aggression, threats and retribution, which make one wonder if it’s really a charity or a greedy cult of personalities (Bill and Melinda)
THIS series is an ongoing discussion, based on evidence, of how Bill Gates controls the media and punishes/ousts his critics. Some new evidence was presented in part one and in part two. We don’t want to repeat what was said then; it’s not needed.
“Why would Gates suddenly offer money? And why at that particular point in time? As a reminder, Microsoft had already phoned my boss to complain about me. This is how those thugs operate.”About a month ago I noted/journaled my personal experience, noting that a month or so after I did an important series about Gates (starting Sept. 2019, onwards to present) Gates started paying my boss at work, even though we in theory competed against Microsoft. But I’m sure that’s all a coincidence…
Why would Gates suddenly offer money? And why at that particular point in time? As a reminder, Microsoft had already phoned my boss to complain about me. This is how those thugs operate. He only told me about it years later, as a little tidbit, casually… if I recall correctly as we all waited to board a ride at a theme park (Alton Towers). It wasn’t even something that he was planning to tell. As for the Gates money, it was mentioned as an aside months later in a conference call, taking note that I had been critical of Gates. Believe it or not, the payment was done with/under an NDA. Like the so-called ‘charity’ is a matter of national security or something…
“The story being worked on never showed up; instead he was fired and denied access to his very own notes/story before he was told about the firing. Then Gates ‘took over’ The Verge, at least temporarily…”The NDA part is rather bizarre. I was never asked to sign an NDA (and did not sign any).
Going back to the story of The Verge (journalist fired after working on a story about Gates), Microsoft could know what was coming as he was using Skype (not my choice) to communicate. There’s ample evidence that Microsoft spies on people’s personal communications for Microsoft’s business reasons (e.g. snuffing out critics/whistleblowers). The media wrote about in the past. Microsoft even got people arrested for doing things Microsoft disliked.
The story being worked on never showed up; instead he was fired and denied access to his very own notes/story before he was told about the firing. Then Gates ‘took over’ The Verge, at least temporarily…
“When things like these happen you know you’re on the right track,” I told him, but “I have a few more stories to tell that are related to this.”
I need to be granted permission to tell those other stories. I’ve spoken to other people who were met with incredible attacks (if not through employers then through platforms) after they had written about Gates and sought records about him. Investigation of these matters comes at a great price.
Over the years I saw and reported on similar incidents. For instance, right after Lancet blasted Gates’ influence Gates paid the Lancet, which then became his mouthpiece for a while.
“To Mr. Gates African children are more like risk-free (of litigation) “clinical trials” than anything worth truly helping. If he wanted to help African children, he’d give them food. Millions die of starvation. Monsanto (now Bayer) wants to feed them patents, not food.”This is very wrong; corruption of scholarly scientific journals (with one’s money) is a lot more severe an ethical breach than bribery of media/publishers.
At this moment of time we’re still working to recover what’s left of the spiked story; the publisher denied the journalist access to his very own notes, so this is not easy. As if the goal was also to ensure the same piece cannot be published elsewhere.
The gist of the story is, the Gates Foundation is not a charity but an entity that attacks charities (e.g. OLPC) and works against African children. Evidence of this is overwhelming. To Mr. Gates African children are more like risk-free (of litigation) “clinical trials” than anything worth truly helping. If he wanted to help African children, he’d give them food. Millions die of starvation. Monsanto (now Bayer) wants to feed them patents, not food. Suffice to say, Gates is a prominent investor in Monsanto. It’s all about profit. It’s also about monopoly.
In part 4, delayed somewhat because of the protests in the US (which this journalist now covers), we’re hoping to start sharing some details about the spiked story. Better late than never, right? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
06.03.20
Posted in Bill Gates, Microsoft, OLPC at 1:14 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Bullying charities, bullying media
Summary: The sociopaths from the fake ‘charity’ of Bill Gates would go to great lengths to squash criticism and also to eliminate critics; this series tells the story of some of those personally affected
TODAY we officially start a series we’ve long wanted to commence. We’ve been patiently gathering pertinent facts from affected parties and we are still making inquiries for more.
“As readers are aware, Wikileaks released some damning information not only about Microsoft but also the Gates Foundation.”The length of this series is unknown at this point; it will depend on the nature and volume of input we receive. There have been cover-up attempts, not only efforts to crush journalism but also to cover up the crushing of journalism. We’re hoping that by the time this series is finished readers will have a better grasp about how Microsoft — and the Gates Foundation specifically — not only games the media but also bullies the media. We should note, at least as a side note, that the Epstein documentary everyone has been speaking about this past week or fortnight deliberately downplays the role of Gates. Hardly surprising considering who made and distributed the film…
Without further ado, here’s the gist of the story we’ll be covering. It concerns me personally.
As readers are aware, Wikileaks released some damning information not only about Microsoft but also the Gates Foundation. That was a decade ago. Some of it dealt with efforts to undermine OLPC — a subject I had written about since around 2006 (even at my capacity as a journalist/columnist in news sites back then). The way Microsoft strong-armed OLPC and MIT (where OLPC came from) is well documented, albeit lots of revisionism served to obscure the ruinous contribution of Microsoft (Intel is the other guilty party; OLPC did not use Intel chipsets).
“…I interviewed you for an article I was doing about the Gates Foundation a few years ago for The Verge.”
–The Verge JournalistThe series concerns investigative journalism regarding the OLPC affair, but it extends beyond it. It is also part of a familiar pattern.
“I don’t know if you remember,” a journalist told me the other week, “but I interviewed you for an article I was doing about the Gates Foundation a few years ago for The Verge.”
I do remember and I mentioned it several times since. The article was never published and there was an awkward silence.
“Believe it or not,” I’m now told, “the story was killed, and I lost my job — shortly thereafter, it was announced that Bill Gates would be the site’s “guest editor” for the month of February, 2015. But I’m sure that’s all a coincidence…’
We took note of this before, but we did not know for sure if or why the story got killed. Moreover, we didn’t know he was fired.
“Believe it or not, the story was killed, and I lost my job — shortly thereafter, it was announced that Bill Gates would be the site’s “guest editor” for the month of February, 2015.”
–The Verge JournalistApparently, once Mr. Gates steps in, articles critical of his sheer abuses (even against charities) won’t be tolerated.
The pattern described above is familiar to me; I saw several things similar to it recently. In the next part we’ll be dealing with some of these things. Eventually, to the degree possible, we’d like to shed light on what the spiked story was all about.
Mr. Gates likes to portray himself as a charitable character; in reality, however, not only does he crush legitimate charities that actually help African kids (not using them for clinical trials and imposing Monsanto’s GMO on them) but he also crushes journalism that ‘dares’ to mention that.
Some “philanthropist”, eh? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
11.07.12
Posted in Hardware, Microsoft, OLPC at 5:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Fat operating systems spend most of their energy supporting their own fat.”
–Nicholas Negroponte, MIT Media Lab, rediff.com, Apr 2006
Summary: Wintel is conspiring to take over kids’ future, this time battling to eliminate Linux and ARM, not Linux and AMD
It is hard to forget how OLPC got sabotaged after Wintel had conspired to shoot it down. We saw hard evidence of this. Now that Apple considers leaving Intel, the very abusive firm, and Android gives a boost to ARM, we are not shocked to see another conspiracy, this time countering Linux and ARM, not Linux and AMD. To quote this one report:
Clearly spooked by the success of the low-cost Linux-based Raspberry Pi, Microsoft and Intel have teamed up with RM to launch the Shape the Future UK programme.
Here is more:
Microsoft, Intel and RM Education have announced the Shape the Future UK programme through which they aim to promote UK computing education.
Announced today, the programme sees the three companies partner up to provide hardware and software at a hefty discount – over 30 per cent, it’s claimed – to all government-funded schools across the UK. Those signing up to the scheme will provide one-to-one access to computing resources for their pupils – meaning everybody gets a tablet or laptop of their very own.
As long as kids depend on monopolistic, closed-source resource hogs, the Wintel collusion approves. UK education should deny Wintel for reasons we’ve covered for years. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
04.11.12
Posted in FUD, GNU/Linux, OLPC at 11:44 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Fat operating systems spend most of their energy supporting their own fat.”
–Nicholas Negroponte, MIT Media Lab, rediff.com, Apr 2006
Picture from Wikipedia
Summary: Another news item that describes a seemingly successful project as a “failure”
THERE is something quite rotten at The Economist and it’s not just fallacies-filled GNU/Linux-hostile articles (we mostly ignore them so as to not feed the provocatuers).
The OLPC, which runs Fedora, has been under continuous attacks, being the trailblazer that — just like Munich — Microsoft and its comrades must mock.
In The Economist, OLPC Is being called a “failure” in Peru — under the assumption that part of the problem is that students learn faster than many of their teachers. Here is a person from Fedora addressing the article:
OLPC a “failure” in Peru
According to the Economist. Ah, but here’s the rub. From the article:
Part of the problem is that students learn faster than many of their teachers, according to Lily Miranda, who runs a computer lab at a state school in San Borja, a middle-class area of Lima. Sandro Marcone, who is in charge of educational technologies at the ministry, agrees. “If teachers are telling kids to turn on computers and copy what is being written on the blackboard, then we have invested in expensive notebooks,” he said. It certainly looks like that.
Here is another rebuttal, this one from HP.com:
So, instead of a “disappointing return,” or “not accomplish[ing] anything in particular,” IDB did actually find a measurable benefit.
Could it be that the disparity between test scores and actual measured achievement means that it’s the tests that are lacking, rather than the laptops? It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that academic testing was shown to be seriously wanting.
And is it too much to ask for The Economist’s journalists and fact-checkers to actually get as far as the sixth sentence in the report’s abstract, before writing the story? I know that many of today’s workers exhibit short attention-spans, but really!
There seems to be a reporting failure, not an OLPC failure. If they start with the premise that everything is failing, then they can collect claims that support the hypothesis and disregard the rest. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA