Iñaki Arenaza iarenaza@identi.ca

Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain

FLOSS advocate, digital liberties advocate, free culture and knowledge advocate, EFF and FSF member, IT and Education passionate.

  • User at 2016-09-09T07:42:12Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Renewable energy now supplies almost a quarter of the world's power needs

    http://http//www.sciencealert.com/renewable-energy-now-supplies-almost-a-quarter-of-the-world-s-power-needs

    Juan Antonio Añel likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza shared this.

    \o/


    And it could be much more if we got rid of certain mafias... *sigh*

    JanKusanagi at 2016-09-08T18:05:16Z

  • Petición al gobierno vasco para que adopte software libre en las instituciones

    victorhck at 2016-09-08T17:44:50Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Únete a la petición para que el gobierno vasco adopte y fomente medidas de software libre en las instituciones y en su relación con las ciudadanas y los ciudadanos.


    https://victorhckinthefreeworld.wordpress.com/2016/09/08/peticion-al-gobierno-vasco-para-que-adopte-software-libre-en-las-instituciones-slnahidugu/ 


    eomer, PuppetMast3r, Malvin likes this.

    Colegota, PuppetMast3r, PuppetMast3r, Iñaki Arenaza and 1 others shared this.

  • Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-09-01T22:00:43Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Thinking about adding a localhost-only HTTP API or line-based protocol to your project? Probably not a good idea, because you can use DNS rebinding to get at/mutate that data, or whatever execution stuff is possible, through the developer's own browser.

    James Dearing 🐲 likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza, Iñaki Arenaza shared this.

    Show all 6 replies

    (I'll bet that TAILS uses Diane's unbound suggestion to solve this, right? But unless the tor browser bundle includes its own dns resolver, I think it probably doesn't.)

    joeyh at 2016-09-01T21:17:49Z

    It feels to me like using named pipes in the cases where you might use an unauthenticated port over localhost would be pretty frequently much, much better.

    Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-09-01T21:38:21Z

    https://tails.boum.org/contribute/design/Tor_enforcement/DNS/

    Looks like they run a local resolver, and they do block some of the private IPs. Its unclear if it blocks 127.0.0.0/8 though.

    Diane Trout at 2016-09-01T21:42:34Z

    I soooooooo agree! And the current “do everything in the browser” thing need to go out the window too.

    Freemor at 2016-09-02T00:32:41Z

  • Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-09-01T22:00:38Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Thinking about adding a localhost-only HTTP API or line-based protocol to your project? Probably not a good idea, because you can use DNS rebinding to get at/mutate that data, or whatever execution stuff is possible, through the developer's own browser.

    James Dearing 🐲 likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza, Iñaki Arenaza shared this.

    Show all 6 replies

    (I'll bet that TAILS uses Diane's unbound suggestion to solve this, right? But unless the tor browser bundle includes its own dns resolver, I think it probably doesn't.)

    joeyh at 2016-09-01T21:17:49Z

    It feels to me like using named pipes in the cases where you might use an unauthenticated port over localhost would be pretty frequently much, much better.

    Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-09-01T21:38:21Z

    https://tails.boum.org/contribute/design/Tor_enforcement/DNS/

    Looks like they run a local resolver, and they do block some of the private IPs. Its unclear if it blocks 127.0.0.0/8 though.

    Diane Trout at 2016-09-01T21:42:34Z

    I soooooooo agree! And the current “do everything in the browser” thing need to go out the window too.

    Freemor at 2016-09-02T00:32:41Z

  • Pump.io 1.0.0 is now available!

    Pump.io Community at 2016-08-27T16:40:19Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Greetings, pumpers!

    Pump.io 1.0.0 is now available! You can get it from npm or GitHub.

    Note that this release does contain security improvements. Admins are strongly encouraged to upgrade.

    Curious to find out more? Check out the release announcement!

    ostfriesenmärz, archaeme, Marcos, Sotitrox and 31 others likes this.

    ostfriesenmärz, archaeme, Marcos, Jose Carlos Jimenez and 18 others shared this.

    Show all 6 replies

    >> JanKusanagi:

    "Why would it not be? =)”

    I was watching Alex's talk about the Pump.io network the other day, and he mentioned that Identi.ca is a super special snowflake because it's been modified to read from the old Status.net data store as well as the new Pump.io one, so I figured it might not be a supported configuration.

    Screwtape at 2016-08-28T01:55:36Z

    It's already Pump.io just like the other nodes, there's no reason not to upgrade it.


    It has extra data from the StatusNet import, but that was converted loooong ago.

    JanKusanagi at 2016-08-28T01:57:51Z

    Alex Jordan, Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Screwtape likes this.

    @Screwtape unfortunately my answer to that particular question was misinformed. Jan is correct - identi.ca is a special snowflake, but that's just because of the sheer size of the database, not because of any custom code. (Maybe I should add a note to the video...)

    In any case, identi.ca will, in fact, probably get 1.0.0 at some point :)

    Alex Jordan at 2016-08-29T00:14:34Z

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Screwtape likes this.

  • Pump.io 1.0.0 is now available!

    Pump.io Community at 2016-08-27T16:40:16Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Greetings, pumpers!

    Pump.io 1.0.0 is now available! You can get it from npm or GitHub.

    Note that this release does contain security improvements. Admins are strongly encouraged to upgrade.

    Curious to find out more? Check out the release announcement!

    ostfriesenmärz, archaeme, Marcos, Sotitrox and 31 others likes this.

    ostfriesenmärz, archaeme, Marcos, Jose Carlos Jimenez and 18 others shared this.

    Show all 6 replies

    >> JanKusanagi:

    "Why would it not be? =)”

    I was watching Alex's talk about the Pump.io network the other day, and he mentioned that Identi.ca is a super special snowflake because it's been modified to read from the old Status.net data store as well as the new Pump.io one, so I figured it might not be a supported configuration.

    Screwtape at 2016-08-28T01:55:36Z

    It's already Pump.io just like the other nodes, there's no reason not to upgrade it.


    It has extra data from the StatusNet import, but that was converted loooong ago.

    JanKusanagi at 2016-08-28T01:57:51Z

    Alex Jordan, Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Screwtape likes this.

    @Screwtape unfortunately my answer to that particular question was misinformed. Jan is correct - identi.ca is a special snowflake, but that's just because of the sheer size of the database, not because of any custom code. (Maybe I should add a note to the video...)

    In any case, identi.ca will, in fact, probably get 1.0.0 at some point :)

    Alex Jordan at 2016-08-29T00:14:34Z

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Screwtape likes this.

  • "Maintaining Permissive-Licensed Files in a GPL-Licensed Project: Guidelines for Developers"

    Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-08-27T13:58:46Z via AndStatus To: Public

    This is an old article, but occasionally I bump into free software projects that do the wrong thing here. Many lax licenses require that you preserve the notice, so if you're incporating that code into a stronger copyleft codebase, it's good to know what you should do.

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Timo Kankare, Alex Jordan, Jason Self likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza, Olivier Mehani, Olivier Mehani, Olivier Mehani and 3 others shared this.

  • Building Problem Solvers released as a gratis PDF

    Christopher Allan Webber at 2016-08-27T13:56:11Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Building Problem Solvers, a great book on a number of AI concepts including Truth Maintenance Systems and etc (I understand it's the best book on that particular subject) is released as a gratis PDF. You can get it here!

    mnd, Andrew E, James Dearing 🐲, sirgazil and 1 others likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza shared this.

  • Diane Trout at 2016-08-25T21:43:50Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Well whatsapp users are about to experience being monetized. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/25/whatsapp-to-give-users-phone-number-facebook-for-targeted-ads

    bthall, Kraka, Christopher Allan Webber likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza shared this.

  • New stuff in Pump.io

    Pump.io Community at 2016-08-20T21:45:08Z via AndStatus To: Public

    As just mentioned in a shared post, pump.io is getting a t-shirt (which you can give feedback on) and some major software upgrades (which you can help test)! More details in Pump.io: call for testers, call for feedback.

    However, that's not all that's going on! If you want to read about our Conservancy application, new documentation, a conference talk, code work, and more, you can find all the details in New stuff in pump.io.

    Thanks for keeping up with the pump.io project!

    Michele Montagna, eomer, der.hans, Fabián Gómez and 7 others likes this.

    Michele Montagna, der.hans, Doug Whitfield Sports Account, Face and 7 others shared this.

    here is my take on the shirt: http://imgur.com/a/JPhqG

    mray at 2016-08-20T10:38:42Z

    Bd Sn likes this.

  • Software Freedom Doesn't Kill People, Your Security Through Obscurity Kills People

    Bradley M. Kuhn at 2016-08-14T08:12:54Z via AndStatus To: Public

    URL: http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2016/08/13/does-not-kill.html


    The time has come that I must speak out against the inappropriate rhetoric used by those who (ostensibly) advocate for FLOSS usage in automotive applications.

    There was a catalyst that convinced me to finally speak up. I heard a talk today from a company representative of a software supplier for the automotive industry. He said during his talk: "putting GPLv3 software in cars will kill people" and "opening up the source code to cars will cause more harm than good". These statements are completely disingenuous. Most importantly, it ignores the fact that proprietary software in cars is at least equally, if not more, dangerous. At least one person has already been killed in a crash while using a proprietary software auto-control system. Volkswagen decided to take a different route; they decided to kill us all slowly (rather than quickly) by using proprietary software to lie about their emissions and illegally polluting our air.

    Meanwhile, there has been not a single example yet about use of GPLv3 software that has harmed anyone. If you have such an example, email it to me and I promise to add it right here to this blog post.

    So, to the auto industry folks and vendors who market to/for them: until you can prove that proprietary software assures safety in a way that FLOSS cannot, I will continue to tell you this: in the long and sad tradition of the Therac 25, your proprietary software has killed people, both quickly and slowly, and your attacks on GPLv3 and software freedom are not only unwarranted, they are clearly part of a political strategy to divert attention from your own industry's bad behavior and graft unfair blame onto FLOSS.

    As a side note, during the talk's Q&A session, I asked this company's representatives how they assure compliance with the GPLv2 — particularly their compliance with provision of scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable, which are so often missing for many products, including vehicles. The official answer was: Oh, I don't know. Not only does this company publicly claim security through obscurity is a viable solution, accuse copyleft advocates of endangering the public safety, they also seem to have not fully learned the lessons of making FLOSS license compliance a clear part of their workflow.

    This is, unfortunately, my general impression of the status of the automotive industry.

    gnubrunswick, Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), roy, Dan Scott and 14 others likes this.

    der.hans, Benjamin Cook, Benjamin Cook, Douglas Perkins and 13 others shared this.

    Show all 13 replies

    @MikeLinksvayer, I do think license politics matter. I can't get past the fact that the bifrication of "non-copyleft good", 'copyleft bad" has won and been a great part of the cooption by Open Source of software freedom. But you and I should talk more about how I can modify advocacy to avoid it better so as to succeed in reaching those who are annoyed by such -- I suspect there is a way that I just don't see yet. I've been meaning to call anyway so I will after my current trip. :)


    @Richard Fontana, I decided not to call out the specific name of the person who gave the talk. The statements were typical of those made by many different automotive industry representatives and their providers over a period of years. The fact that this particular individual wasn't any better or worse than others I've heard, so there was no reason to single him out. The problem is the general auto-industry rhetoric and talking points, not one person's version of it.

    Bradley M. Kuhn at 2016-08-16T10:32:10Z

    @bkuhn While I agree with most of your post, I don't know if it's fair to say that the Tesla crash was due to proprietary software.

    The Tesla self-driving system, I'm almost certain, relies on machine learning and a neural network. I suspect that even if their algorithms were free software, accidents would occur at the same rate, at least in the short term. The way I understand it, the source code isn't all that important, it's the training data gathered during all the millions of miles driven on the road. Without the data, you're not able to run the program yourself in any useful way other than what you already do by just driving the car. Even if you had access to the data, the volume is so gigantic that you probably wouldn't be able to train the program without expensive infrastructure. Neither would you be able to study the program in a meaningful way, since the neural network isn't "source code" comprehensible to a human.

    I do think self-driving cars would eventually be safer if their training data were open; the more training data, the better, and self-driving car manufacturers would be able to make self-driving cars safer for everyone if they would make their accumulated training data interoperable, so we would benefit in the long term. But for this particular accident I don't believe the blame rests with proprietary software.

    I'm curious what you think. I tend to think that many machine learning applications don't fit within the traditional separation between free versus proprietary software, because even if they are open, they don't afford a user the four freedoms. This is something I've been musing about recently, which is why I reacted to that particular portion of your post, but I don't know the answer.

    Philip Chimento at 2016-09-02T03:49:32Z

    Sarah Elkins, Bd Sn, Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) likes this.

    The Tesla system would make the world even better if it were Free Software, but according to the data that Tesla themselves have gathered (duly noted), their system has killed fewer people, proportionally, than humans driving cars have.

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) at 2016-09-06T17:49:27Z

    @bkuhn the key word in my comment is 'retreat'. Apparently this person said "putting GPLv3 software in cars will kill people". Instead of extracting the substance from the license politics and making the case that safety is compatible with (or even requires) that car owners be able to install modified versions of software running on computers in cars, you took the license politics hook line and sinker, making facile claims about GPLv3 software never harming people (for what definition of harm? but nevermind, uninteresting) worthy of a TV soundbite but unworthy of any other form of discourse.

    Mike Linksvayer at 2016-09-07T01:43:44Z

  • Free Software Foundation at 2016-08-11T20:15:30Z via AndStatus To: Public

    #SecureBoot leak reveals a backdoor in a wall that shouldn't exist in the first place. If the user can't disable SB, it's *Restricted* Boot.

    lnxwalt@microca.st, RiveraValdez likes this.

    Stephen Michael Kellat, Iñaki Arenaza, Iñaki Arenaza shared this.

  • Free Software Foundation at 2016-08-11T20:15:22Z via AndStatus To: Public

    #SecureBoot leak reveals a backdoor in a wall that shouldn't exist in the first place. If the user can't disable SB, it's *Restricted* Boot.

    lnxwalt@microca.st, RiveraValdez likes this.

    Stephen Michael Kellat, Iñaki Arenaza, Iñaki Arenaza shared this.

  • at 2016-08-10T21:06:08Z via AndStatus To: Public

    Alberto Moshpirit, Icaro Perseo, RiveraValdez, Víctor Salmerón and 11 others likes this.

    Icaro Perseo, Luis A. Guzman, Michael, RiveraValdez and 31 others shared this.

    The folks promoting DRM aren't playing games. Over the years I've read too many news articles where individuals have been arrested and sent to jail for DRM related offenses.

    jrobertson at 2016-08-11T13:25:45Z

  • Defective by Design at 2016-08-09T06:41:00Z via AndStatus To: Public

    25 years ago Saturday, Tim Berners-Lee published the first Web page. Now he's considering some reverse innovation: #DRM in Web standards. https://u.fsf.org/1u-

    James Dearing 🐲 likes this.

    Scorpio20, Scorpio20, kesara, kesara and 5 others shared this.

    I doubt Tim Berners-Lee is too bothered what you and I think when it comes to DRM.  Besides if he goes upsetting his peers who are proponents of DRM then he may lose credibility, quite a few friends, and funding or opportunities for future projects.
    I don't want DRM and neither should Tim Beners-Lee, if he can't deal with it maybe we should be looking for new W3C leadership.

    jrobertson at 2016-08-08T18:36:49Z

    Jason Self likes this.

    Hear, hear. New leadership if they can't stand up to Big Media.

    Jason Self at 2016-08-08T19:20:02Z

    lnxwalt@microca.st likes this.

  • ContractPatch, step 1: Everything Is Negotiable.

    Software Freedom Conservancy at 2016-08-06T22:30:00Z via AndStatus To: Public

    URL: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/aug/04/everything-is-negotiable/

    August 4, 2016 by Fred Jennings

    ContractPatch, step 1: Everything Is Negotiable.

    About a year ago, I got talking with some friends in the tech industry about contracts. And it began to sound like something was very, very wrong.

    Working informally through personal networks of engineers, project managers, freelance designers, and many more, I ended up with a small horde of employment contracts, offer letters, work agreements, and all manner of other documents that fall under that umbrella term, “contracts.”

    And almost all of the contracts were bad.

    Not badly written, though some were. Not legally unenforceable, though some were.

    They were bad for the people who signed them.

    They waived important legal rights, gave the employer ownership of ideas and projects it had no reason to take, or imposed serious limits on future work.

    And people often didn’t realize how bad these were, the risks they’d agreed to, or what rights they’d given up.

    Among the few who did, most didn’t realize they could negotiate these terms. Others did, but weren’t sure how to start. Several assumed their employer wouldn’t enforce the more onerous terms.

    Nobody should bet their future on that assumption. Doing so is to build one’s career on a house of cards.

    But that won’t change until enough people speak up and push back, and have the tools to do so.

    That’s where this project began for me.

    About a month ago, I sat down over lunch with friends from Software Freedom Conservancy, and learned they’d embarked on a similar project at around the same time. In fact, Karen Sandler recently spoke on the subject as OSCON 2016.

    We’re calling it ContractPatch. The idea is to provide strategy and legal knowledge to workers, along with some sample language for better contract terms.

    But let’s start with the first step:

    Everything is negotiable. Keep repeating that until it sticks.

    Merely knowing that is an edge. Companies know it, but often don’t want their employees or potential hires to realize it. Some employers even structure their hiring, renewal, and termination processes to discourage negotiation. This can halt inexperienced negotiators, especially those from historically underrepresented groups who face widespread employer prejudice that can undermine their perceived ability to negotiate. Everyone will enter a negotiation with different leverage, different goals, and unique needs and strengths.

    There are no magic words, but anyone can learn the techniques and strategies to approach contract negotiations. Like any other skill, it may not be easy at first. Also like any other skill, it can be broken down into steps, practiced, and will become easier over time.

    And we’re here to teach.

    In the coming months, we’ll write about legal and strategic points in contract negotiation strategies, pre-negotiation prep and practice, methods for negotiating, and we’ll provide information on your legal rights around contracts.

    Down the road, we’ll look at specific contract provisions — especially those that impact tech workers the most, such as non-compete agreements and intellectual property assignment clauses. This will go hand-in-hand with a Github repository with forkable sample language for key contract provisions, such as payment terms, benefits, non-competition and non-solicitation agreements, and intellectual property assignment clauses.

    But let’s walk before we run. The first step is knowing you can negotiate. Next, we’ll discuss the balance of power in hiring agreement negotiations, and how to self-evaluate your position before a negotiation begins. After that, we’ll cover timing and strategies around contract renewals, raises, and other opportune moments to renegotiate.

    Whether it’s an employment offer, a mid-project contract renewal, or a termination agreement, its terms can be pushed on. Often, they can be changed. And getting there gracefully is an art, more dance than declaration.

    And we want you to know as much as you can before your next dance starts.

    Posted by Fred Jennings on August 4, 2016. Please email any comments on this entry to info@sfconservancy.org.

    uıɐɾ ʞ ʇɐɯɐs, Tyng-Ruey Chuang, Sam Black, Christopher Allan Webber and 7 others likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza, Iñaki Arenaza, Sam Black, Christopher Allan Webber and 6 others shared this.

    Show all 5 replies
    @brashley46 ... and Monster, CareerBuilder, Dice, Indeed, and every other job-search site (including the California Employment Development Department's CalJobs site).

    lnxwalt@microca.st at 2016-08-05T21:55:44Z

    Stephen Michael Kellat likes this.

    Contract with Swedish employer/client: "[You work here. This is the salary/fee.]".

    Contract with US client: "Here's our 40-page standard contract."

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) at 2016-08-07T08:08:33Z

    Douglas Perkins likes this.

    My Swedish job contract is literally a 1-sheet form with fields for address, name, etc, and a 3-row box "special terms" for things like above-standard pension, above-standard vacation, subsidized lunch coupons, commission and the like.

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) at 2016-08-07T08:11:14Z

    Douglas Perkins likes this.

    My first client contract ever, with my former employer: "Oh right, we should get around to writing a contract at some point".

    We didn't. :-)

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) at 2016-08-07T18:05:31Z

  • ContractPatch, step 1: Everything Is Negotiable.

    Software Freedom Conservancy at 2016-08-06T22:29:59Z via AndStatus To: Public

    URL: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/aug/04/everything-is-negotiable/

    August 4, 2016 by Fred Jennings

    ContractPatch, step 1: Everything Is Negotiable.

    About a year ago, I got talking with some friends in the tech industry about contracts. And it began to sound like something was very, very wrong.

    Working informally through personal networks of engineers, project managers, freelance designers, and many more, I ended up with a small horde of employment contracts, offer letters, work agreements, and all manner of other documents that fall under that umbrella term, “contracts.”

    And almost all of the contracts were bad.

    Not badly written, though some were. Not legally unenforceable, though some were.

    They were bad for the people who signed them.

    They waived important legal rights, gave the employer ownership of ideas and projects it had no reason to take, or imposed serious limits on future work.

    And people often didn’t realize how bad these were, the risks they’d agreed to, or what rights they’d given up.

    Among the few who did, most didn’t realize they could negotiate these terms. Others did, but weren’t sure how to start. Several assumed their employer wouldn’t enforce the more onerous terms.

    Nobody should bet their future on that assumption. Doing so is to build one’s career on a house of cards.

    But that won’t change until enough people speak up and push back, and have the tools to do so.

    That’s where this project began for me.

    About a month ago, I sat down over lunch with friends from Software Freedom Conservancy, and learned they’d embarked on a similar project at around the same time. In fact, Karen Sandler recently spoke on the subject as OSCON 2016.

    We’re calling it ContractPatch. The idea is to provide strategy and legal knowledge to workers, along with some sample language for better contract terms.

    But let’s start with the first step:

    Everything is negotiable. Keep repeating that until it sticks.

    Merely knowing that is an edge. Companies know it, but often don’t want their employees or potential hires to realize it. Some employers even structure their hiring, renewal, and termination processes to discourage negotiation. This can halt inexperienced negotiators, especially those from historically underrepresented groups who face widespread employer prejudice that can undermine their perceived ability to negotiate. Everyone will enter a negotiation with different leverage, different goals, and unique needs and strengths.

    There are no magic words, but anyone can learn the techniques and strategies to approach contract negotiations. Like any other skill, it may not be easy at first. Also like any other skill, it can be broken down into steps, practiced, and will become easier over time.

    And we’re here to teach.

    In the coming months, we’ll write about legal and strategic points in contract negotiation strategies, pre-negotiation prep and practice, methods for negotiating, and we’ll provide information on your legal rights around contracts.

    Down the road, we’ll look at specific contract provisions — especially those that impact tech workers the most, such as non-compete agreements and intellectual property assignment clauses. This will go hand-in-hand with a Github repository with forkable sample language for key contract provisions, such as payment terms, benefits, non-competition and non-solicitation agreements, and intellectual property assignment clauses.

    But let’s walk before we run. The first step is knowing you can negotiate. Next, we’ll discuss the balance of power in hiring agreement negotiations, and how to self-evaluate your position before a negotiation begins. After that, we’ll cover timing and strategies around contract renewals, raises, and other opportune moments to renegotiate.

    Whether it’s an employment offer, a mid-project contract renewal, or a termination agreement, its terms can be pushed on. Often, they can be changed. And getting there gracefully is an art, more dance than declaration.

    And we want you to know as much as you can before your next dance starts.

    Posted by Fred Jennings on August 4, 2016. Please email any comments on this entry to info@sfconservancy.org.

    uıɐɾ ʞ ʇɐɯɐs, Tyng-Ruey Chuang, Sam Black, Christopher Allan Webber and 7 others likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza, Iñaki Arenaza, Sam Black, Christopher Allan Webber and 6 others shared this.

    Show all 5 replies
    @brashley46 ... and Monster, CareerBuilder, Dice, Indeed, and every other job-search site (including the California Employment Development Department's CalJobs site).

    lnxwalt@microca.st at 2016-08-05T21:55:44Z

    Stephen Michael Kellat likes this.

    Contract with Swedish employer/client: "[You work here. This is the salary/fee.]".

    Contract with US client: "Here's our 40-page standard contract."

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) at 2016-08-07T08:08:33Z

    Douglas Perkins likes this.

    My Swedish job contract is literally a 1-sheet form with fields for address, name, etc, and a 3-row box "special terms" for things like above-standard pension, above-standard vacation, subsidized lunch coupons, commission and the like.

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) at 2016-08-07T08:11:14Z

    Douglas Perkins likes this.

    My first client contract ever, with my former employer: "Oh right, we should get around to writing a contract at some point".

    We didn't. :-)

    Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) at 2016-08-07T18:05:31Z

  • Why You Should Speak At & Attend LinuxConf Australia

    Bradley M. Kuhn at 2016-08-05T15:36:28Z via AndStatus To: Public

    URL: http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2016/08/04/lca2016.html

    [ This blog was crossposted on Software Freedom Conservancy's website. ]

    Monday 1 February 2016 was the longest day of my life, but I don't mean that in the canonical, figurative, and usually negative sense of that phrase. I mean it literally and in a positive way. I woke up that morning Amsterdam in the Netherlands — having the previous night taken a evening train from Brussels, Belgium with my friend and colleague Tom Marble. Tom and I had just spent the weekend at FOSDEM 2016, where he and I co-organize the Legal and Policy Issues DevRoom (with our mutual friends and colleagues, Richard Fontana and Karen M. Sandler).

    Tom and I headed over to AMS airport around 07:00 local time, found some breakfast and boarded our flights. Tom was homeward bound, but I was about to do the crazy thing that he'd done in the reverse a few years before: I was speaking at FOSDEM and LinuxConf Australia, back-to-back. In fact, because the airline fares were substantially cheaper this way, I didn't book a “round the world” flight, but instead two back-to-back round-trip tickets. I boarded the plane at AMS at 09:30 that morning (local time), and landed in my (new-ish) hometown of Portland, OR as afternoon there began. I went home, spent the afternoon with my wife, sister-in-law, and dogs, washed my laundry, and repacked my bag. My flight to LAX departed at 19:36 local time, a little after US/Pacific sunset.

    I crossed the Pacific ocean, the international dateline, left a day on deposit to pickup on the way back, after 24 hours of almost literally chasing the sun, I arrived in Melbourne on the morning of Wednesday 3 February, road a shuttle bus, dumped my bags at my room, and arrived just in time for the Wednesday afternoon tea break at LinuxConf Australia 2016 in Geelong.

    Nearly everyone who heard this story — or saw me while it was happening — asked me the same question: Why are you doing this?. The five to six people packed in with me in my coach section on the LAX->SYD leg are probably still asking this, because I had an allergic attack of some sort most of the flight and couldn't stop coughing, even with two full bags of Fisherman's Friends over those 15 hours.

    But, nevertheless, I gave a simple answer to everyone who questioned my crazy BRU->AMS->PDX->LAX->SYD->MEL itinerary: FOSDEM and LinuxConf AU are two of the most important events on the Free Software annual calendar. There's just no question. I'll write more about FOSDEM sometime soon, but the rest of this post, I'll dedicate to LinuxConf Australia (LCA).

    One of my biggest regrets in Free Software is that I was once — and you'll be surprised by this given my story above — a bit squeamish about the nearly 15 hour flight to get from the USA to Australia, and therefore I didn't attend LCA until 2015. LCA began way back in 1999. Keep in mind that, other than FOSDEM, no major, community-organized events have survived from that time. But LCA has the culture and mindset of the kinds of conferences that our community made in 1999.

    LCA is community organized and operated. Groups of volunteers each year plan the event. In the tradition of science fiction conventions and other hobbyist activities, groups bid for the conference and offer their time and effort to make the conference a success. They have an annual hand-off meeting to be sure the organization lessons are passed from one committee to the next, and some volunteers even repeat their involvement year after year. For organizational structure, they rely on a non-profit organization, Linux Australia, to assist with handling the funds and providing infrastructure (just like Conservancy does for our member projects and their conferences!)

    I believe fully that the success of software freedom and GNU/Linux in particularly has not primarily been because companies allow developers to spend some of their time coding on upstream. Sure, many Free Software projects couldn't survive without that component, but what really makes GNU/Linux, or any Free Software project, truly special is that there's a community of users and developers who use, improve, and learn about the software because it excites and interests them. LCA is one of the few events specifically designed to invite that sort of person to attend, and it has for almost an entire generation stood in stark contrast the highly corporate, for-profits events that slowly took over our community in the years that followed LCA's founding. (Remember all those years of LinuxWorld Expo? I wasn't even sad when IDG stopped running it!) Your browser does not support the element. Perhaps you can or .

    Speaking particularly of earlier this year, LCA 2016 in Geelong, Australia was a particular profound event for me. LCA is one of the few events that accepts my rather political talks about what's happening in Open Source and Free Software, so I gave a talk on Friday 5 February 2016 entitled Copyleft For the Next Decade: A Comprehensive Plan, which was recorded, so you can watch it. I do warn everyone that the jokes did not go over well (mine never do), so after I finished, I was feeling a bit down that I hadn't made the talk entertaining enough. But then, something amazing happened: people started walking up to me and telling me how important my message was. One individual even came up and told me that he was excited enough that he'd like to match any donation that Software Freedom Conservancy received during LCA 2016. Since it was the last day of the event, I quickly went to one of the organizers, Kathy Reid, and asked if they would announce this match during the closing ceremonies; she agreed. In a matter of just an hour or two, I'd gone from believing my talk had fallen flat to realizing that — regardless of whether I'd presented well — the concepts I discussed had connected with people.

    Then, I sat down in the closing session. I started to tear up slightly when the organizers announced the donation match. Within 90 seconds, though, that turned to full tears of joy when the incoming President of Linux Australia, Hugh Blemings, came on stage and said:

    [I'll start with] a Software Freedom Conservancy thing, as it turns out. … I can tell that most of you weren't at Bradley's talk earlier on today, but if there is one talk I'd encourage you to watch on the playback later it would be that one. There's a very very important message in there and something to take away for all of us. On behalf of the Council I'd like to announce … that we're actually in the process of making a significant donation from Linux Australia to Software Freedom Conservancy as well. I urge all of you to consider contributing individual as well, and there is much left for us to be done as a community on that front.

    I hope that this post helps organizers of events like LCA fully understand how much something like this means to us who run a small charities — and not just with regard to the financial contributions. Knowing that the organizers of community events feel so strongly positive about our work really keeps us going. We work hard and spend much time at Conservancy to serve the Open Source and Free Software community, and knowing the work is appreciated inspires us to keep working. Furthermore, we know that without these events, it's much tougher for us to reach others with our message of software freedom. So, for us, the feeling is mutual: I'm delighted that the Linux Australia and LCA folks feel so positively about Conservancy, and I now look forward to another 15 hour flight for the next LCA.

    And, on that note, I chose a strategic time to post this story. On Friday 5 August 2016, the CFP for LCA 2017 closes. So, now is the time for all of you to submit a talk. If you regularly speak at Open Source and Free Software events, or have been considering it, this event really needs to be on your calendar. I look forward to seeing all of you Hobart this January.

    Elena ``of Valhalla'', Ben Sturmfels, sazius, Jason Self and 3 others likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza, der.hans, Stephen Michael Kellat shared this.

    I submitted a talk on Propellor and a followup tutorial for LCA. On the off chance they can fly me down there I want to provide maximum value. The one time I attended, in 2013 was really great experience. The travel time to SYD from here is nearly a full 24 hours, so I wouldn't want to do it every year though.

    BTW, my sister told me there's a train from SYD up to an overnight ferry to Hobart. Seems like a great way to make the last leg of the trip.

    joeyh at 2016-08-05T01:19:19Z

    I'm surprised to hear you thought your talk didn't go over very well. I was in the audience and really enjoyed it. I'd also like to echo the sentiments of those who were telling you how important your message was. Unfortunately I wasn't able to make it to the Conservancy lunch to say this in person.

    Hopefully you will be able to make it to LCA 2017, which just happens to be in my home town, to present another great talk.

    John Kristensen at 2016-08-05T01:29:29Z

    Agency security rules have me stuck within CONUS at the moment. There's some nastiness coming up for staff that I'm still pondering the potential outcomes of.

    Stephen Michael Kellat at 2016-08-05T01:42:28Z

    @joeyh the ferry from Melbourne is to Devonport on the north-west coast of Tasmania. Hobart is in the south and public transport between the cities isn't great (there is a bus). Overall it would be cheaper/easier to fly from Sydney to Hobart.

    John Kristensen at 2016-08-05T01:50:39Z

  • Chaoskey 1.0 released (USB hardware random number generator)

    Debian Project at 2016-08-05T14:44:33Z via AndStatus To: Public

    The ChaosKey hardware random number generator described in talks at Debconf 14 and Debconf 16 has been released. Details about its free hardware and free software in http://chaoskey.org /via @Bdale Garbee and Keith Packard in Planet Debian

    der.hans, Nathan Willis likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza, der.hans, der.hans shared this.

  • LibreOffice 5.1.5 & 5.2.0

    Krugor at 2016-08-04T18:21:40Z via AndStatus To: Public

    LibreOffice 5.1.5 et 5.2.0 sont sortis

    Annonce: (en) https://blog.documentfoundation.org/blog/2016/08/03/libreoffice-5-2-fresh-released-for-windows-mac-os-and-gnulinux/

    Téléchargement:
    5.1.5: https://fr.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-stable/
    5.2.0: https://fr.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/

    Vous pouvez choisir différents OS (Windows, Mac OS, Linux) et architectures (32 et 64 bits)

    Alberto Moshpirit, der.hans likes this.

    Iñaki Arenaza shared this.