The Linux Community: Wear Your Hearts On Your Sleeves
FUD and Astroturf Detection

Paul Ferris
Wednesday, August 30, 2000 12:59:06 PM
There is only one question to be asked when it comes to dealing with the
ailments of the traditional media and intentionally misleading feedback.
Ask the following question:
Is it true?
This is the only question that need be asked. Each of us has our specialty,
and, face it, we can be wrong at times. Often, the lie is obvious.
In cases of doubt, the lie usually takes on several personas.
The lie:
- It is in the personal attack, that started as a technical one.
- It is in the technical flaw that rings true only for the novice.
- It is in the destructive tone that seeks only to point to failure--without naming the best solution for the problem.
- It is in the hidden agenda of disruption.
Time and money are not our enemies--these things are. We have built as our
strength a way to get along with more than just software as a goal.
The methods employed, newsgroups, mailing lists, CVS and public feedback
forums--these are ultimately democratic, global, and decentralized in
origin. No one point to attack.
Competency, no matter how much FUD, Astroturf and bad press,
is still competency. The code continues to improve and the long term result
is that the lies aren't forgotten--they are refuted, one at a time.
No single corporation or mindless public relations firm can hold a candle
to the glaring light of the open source way. That's the ultimate truth. All
short-term gains not made using the methods of democratic software design
will fail in the long run, as people and corporations alike continue
to try and improve their lives with Open Source software.
That's where the Linux and Open Source movements hold the high ground.
In general, a lot of the media still doesn't understand the open source
development phenomena, although the situation is improving.
That isn't the case with a lot of corporations that have based their
business either as customers or vendors of Linux products. Whether or not
the media "gets" Linux or not, these people do--and they're the important
ones. The media will come along eventually. In the meantime, Linux grows,
regardless.
As an example of the above,
there have been pieces in the press that have gone to lengths to describe
the current delay
in the 2.4 release of the Linux kernel as
similar to the delays produced by corporations like Microsoft.
But does the Linux community throws rocks at corporate
America for things that it itself is guilty of, in similar respects?
No, the delays announced by major corporations were the result of many factors:
vaporware, ineptitude, and products whose feature lists changed with
the buzzwords of the day.
In the Linux world, there are no secret internal delays--whatever the problem is, is
worn on the sleeve of whatever community. In this case the kernel
development team. Attempts by myself to educate the person responsible for
this kind of misunderstanding were never answered. Bad press about
Linux, casting it in a corporate light, even stupidly casting the Linux
development team as a corporation--it still makes an interesting news story.
Linus Torvalds is still buying ads at the same rate as before, I'm sure.
None, that is. I'm sure that the tendency to talk about us like this, and
the fact that the "Open Source Corporation" doesn't purchase a lot of ads
are totally unrelated phenomena.
It made an interesting story regardless. The sad part of this little scene
is that I tend to like the writing of the author
who wrote it, but I stand disappointed along with everyone else who was
paying attention at the time. The Linux kernel may be delayed, but everyone
knows exactly why. There is no hidden agenda, or mass incompetence being
masked by a corporate PR firm.
The delays were not nefarious in origin, a side effect of a ridiculously
early product shipping date announced to stall a market change, for example.
The delays were literally that--delays. The kernel will
be done when it's right, and not a moment sooner.
No revenue streams are at stake, which could force an immature product launch
for an expectant shareholder audience.
Next: Mozilla--Not a Failure »