back to article Hulk smash Musk and Zuck! Actor Mark Ruffalo and non-billionaire pals back network tech underpinning Bluesky

In a challenge to billionaire-controlled social media platforms, a group of nine less affluent technology leaders have formed a group that aims to raise $30 million to support the development of decentralized social media platforms. "We are former Twitter users who cherished the platform and the communities we built there over …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Where's the 'Just giving page...'

    I think the one thing we've all learned over the last decade is private ownership of media generally is uncomfortable. But private ownership of global scale media is fucking terrifying.

    Time to stamp out these pricks.

    How do I contribute?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Where's the 'Just giving page...'

      The irony is that these guys have managed to pull in 30M $... I would like to see what cars they drive and they houses they live in within the next 2 years and whether or not their attitudes are still as altruistic.

      There is no such thing as a free meal in western society.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The irony is that these guys have managed to pull in 30M $...

        It's just a grift right?

        Every accusation a confession. Everyone you know is a money grabbing shit so you assume everyone everywhere is a money grabbing shit.

        What you actually need is a better social cirlce.

        1. DS999 Silver badge

          Re: The irony is that these guys have managed to pull in 30M $...

          It's just a grift right?

          That's the only reasonable response from people who are fans of what they see Trump, Musk, and Zuck doing. They know Trump is conman using power to become rich, Musk and Zuck are leveraging their wealth to be close to power and gain more wealth. If you LIKE those guys you wouldn't want to admit even the slight possibility that there are people out there who aren't in it for themselves like the guys they worship. So you assume everyone is equally corrupt so there is no distinction from anyone on that front anymoer.

          Why do you think Trump and his enablers made such an issue out of Hunter Biden's position at Burisma? Of course Burisma gave him that job because they hoped it could benefit them in some way from his father's office. Don Jr is getting added to boards every week the past few months, and you hear zero outrage from the right. They'll either try to tell themselves that Don Jr somehow is qualified for that when Hunter wasn't, or that "Biden did it first" but either way they excuse it. That's what guys like Trump want. They want the bar lowered further and further, because they want to be able to do absolutely anything and have their enablers cheer it on or look the other way. Unfortunately for us it has worked for him all too well.

      2. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: Where's the 'Just giving page...'

        High up on the list of things I have never wanted is a status symbol car. Likewise maintaining a whole 50 room mansion seems a bit pointless when I doubt my family would actually use ten. Your expectations of what others would do with more money than sense says more about you than anyone else.

      3. jospanner Silver badge

        Re: Where's the 'Just giving page...'

        This notion that obscene wealth corrupts motives? Sounds like a good argument against having hyper rich people in the first place, and I’m glad we agree :)

  2. Guy de Loimbard Silver badge

    It's an admirable cause

    Personally, I hope it grows into something worthwhile, at least for those that crave a useful social media.

    There's some serious points being raised with this approach, using my own experience over the last few years, it has seen me dial back use and consumption of social media.

    Examples:

    LinkedIn - Has become Facebook

    Facebook - Rarely see anything on there apart from repeated suggested posts, basically asking me to train their algorithm to sling ads, not show me content from friends on the other side of the planet.

    Instagram - Sort of occasionally see things from people I know.

    Xitter - Gave up on that some time ago, so couldn't comment.

    Maybe it's an age thing for me, but Social Media has had it's heyday and no longer provides sufficient accurate and relevant content to keep me engaged.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It's an admirable cause

      I have been dialing back my own use and I think that it has worked out for me.

      The problem I have with these and any new social media platform is that there are too many bots!

      How can people have a fair discussion when someone who wants to push an agenda, can just spend and spend on bots?

      1. pfcurtis

        Re: It's an admirable cause

        With zero cost, there is no barrier to entry for bots on all of the social media platforms. Place a subscription on them ... not too crazy, and watch the bot population dwindle.

    2. I could be a dog really Silver badge

      Re: It's an admirable cause

      Maybe it's an age thing for me, but Social Media has had it's heyday and no longer provides sufficient accurate and relevant content to keep me engaged.

      I never got into it in the first place - well I think I did once try out Feacesborg in the early days, and for work reasons have a LinkedIn account.

      The thing is, if they'd started off by offering a subscription based service, doing what the likes of Feacesborg originally looked like it was supposed to be, and without all the intrusive faeces and data mining - then it would be a genuinely useful tool. But as it is, I wouldn't touch the smelly things with a very long pole - and that's written as someone who works on a farm so is used to the smell of manure. And if someone told me "you have to be on WhatsApp to interract with <whatever>" - then my response might be along the lines of "then I'll report you to the ICO for your criminal activity as it is not possible to use WhatsApp legally as a business without jumping through a lot of impractical hoops. Meta know this, but they don't care as the whole business is built on ignoring the law.

      If this project managed to create something that fulfilled the social media aspect without the manure, then I'd consider using it.

      1. Filippo Silver badge

        Re: It's an admirable cause

        +1 for knowing that no business should use WhatsApp. Made me feel a bit less lonely.

    3. Elongated Muskrat Silver badge

      Re: It's an admirable cause

      Two things are killing social media: Advertising (especially advertising masquerading as genuine content, such as "sponsored posts") and "the algorithm," when that algorithm isn't used to promote things that coincide with your interests, but is used instead to promote things that are in the interests of the owners of that platform, especially when that is used to either change your interests through constant "engagement bait", or is used to skew political opinions by promoting one viewpoint over another.

      Both of these things have made Twitter unusable, and the advertising part has made Facebook considerably less useful than it once was.

      Bluesky (for now) has no ads, and if the idea is to allow the algorithms that control various feeds to be open, it would massively reduce the capacity for powerful individuals to skew public opinion. I wonder how long it is before Trump and Musk denounce it as some sort of communist plot and ban it in the US?

      1. Elongated Muskrat Silver badge

        Re: It's an admirable cause

        Ooh, looks like the RWNJs and billionaire simps didn't like that!

      2. Filippo Silver badge

        Re: It's an admirable cause

        Not just social media. Last week I wanted to install the app for a local newspaper. I knew the exact name of the app, so I inserted the exact name into the Play Store search bar. Top result? The competition's app. The one with the name that literally equality-matched my query was second.

        Yesterday I was searching for an obscure bit of C# voodoo on Google, and the entire first page of results was fluff that sounded similar to my search terms, but did not match them. Even though I had wrapped them in quotes and everything. Eventually I gave up and searched duckduckgo, which returned the doc page I wanted as first result.

        And you know what's the underlying problem here?

        It's that the people who decide to make their product crap for the sake of advertising - and it is a conscious decision, do not doubt this - have no disincentive at all. By the time the users start leaving and the company starts creaking, they'll be long gone, enormous bonuses already pocketed, golden parachutes already deployed, stock options already redeemed and resold. I don't think I'd be exaggerating if I said that this is one of the major problems with the current economic model.

    4. BartyFartsLast Silver badge

      Re: It's an admirable cause

      May well be age related, I'm pretty much a social media refusenik and all the cool kids are on tiktok now.

      Only a coincidence that Elmo is trying to claw that under his control for the next US election.

      1. Elongated Muskrat Silver badge

        Re: It's an admirable cause

        From what I read, the rumour is that TikTok's Chinese owners are considering offloading the US operations to Musk, rather than close it down there. This makes sense for them for two reasons:

        1) They will get money for it.

        2) The Chinese state (just like Russia) stands to gain from destabilising the West. A clear fascist like Musk being in control of multiple social media platforms accomplishes this goal.

  3. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Meh

    Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

    It already does all of this. It's a real decentralised protocol which is in use now, not a protocol that one day would like to grow up and become decentralised.

    Just spend a fraction of the money making a UI which looks exactly like Twitter (like BlueSky has) and everyone would flock to it.

    1. werdsmith Silver badge

      Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

      Bluesky had a burst of publicity and gained a few million new users in a short while, but the growth curve seems to have levelled off. The UI not quite enough to maintain the flocking.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Mark #255
        Facepalm

        Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

        Mastodon is mentioned only in passing, and nowhere does the (fine) article provide any counterpoint to the AT press release.

        To reiterate: Mastodon/ActivityPub does all this already; but Free Our Feeds is apparently suffering from NIH.

      2. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

        Yes, the final paragraph out of all of them was about Mastodon.

        That still doesn't change the fact that the allegedly already-decentralised ATProtocol is getting more money thrown at it to make it really decentralised this time even though Mastodon is already decentralised. Also it's often said that Mastodon isn't as popular as BlueSky because choosing an instance is too complicated for the average person, yet if BlueSky really does become decentralised it will have exactly the same problem.

        So why not just spend a fraction of that money to make Mastodon's UI more familiar and build on the initial work that's already been done to make it easier to choose an instance?

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

      "Just spend a fraction of the money making a UI which looks exactly like Twitter (like BlueSky has) and everyone would flock to it."

      No, they wouldn't and we have seen that they don't. Echo chamber are not interesting, regardless of your political bias.. What's the point of reading stuff to which you already know the response..

      If the goal is to read actual articles or having decent public debates, interviews etc, then Social media is the wrong place to start with.

      1. Ali Dodd
        Coat

        Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

        "Echo chamber are not interesting, regardless of your political bias.. What's the point of reading stuff to which you already know the response..

        If the goal is to read actual articles or having decent public debates, interviews etc, then Social media is the wrong place to start with."

        Am on mastodon, it's not an echo chamber unless you make it one for yourself & it's a nice friendly place to chat, catch up with things you are interested in and be well social in may ways. For modern social media it's pretty damn social really.

        However if you are just looking for an argument that's another room, this is abuse*..

        *obligatory python**

        **not that one

        1. beast666 Silver badge

          Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

          "Am on mastodon, it's not an echo chamber unless you make it one for yourself & it's a nice friendly place to chat, catch up with things you are interested in and be well social in may ways. For modern social media it's pretty damn social really."

          You and everyone else there have made it the worst sort of echo chamber by your own admission. The conceit is sickening.

          1. Casca Silver badge

            Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

            Oh look, the most right wing conspiracy muppet has spoken...

            1. that one in the corner Silver badge

              Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

              A Muppet duck : he is upset that his quackery doesn't echo on Mastodon.

          2. jospanner Silver badge

            Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

            People having a good time discussing things with people they like? Having positive experiences and building personal and business relationships?? Sickening! Social media is for doing battle in le meme wars. I’m the normal, sane one here.

            /s

          3. Elongated Muskrat Silver badge
            FAIL

            Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

            I bet you're a right hoot at parties.

            Everyone is talking to each other and enjoying themselves, run into the middle of the room, stand on a table and shout "ECHO CHAMBER" until the room empties.

            I'm joking, of course. Nobody in their right mind would invite you to a party.

          4. TheFifth

            Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

            What these "it's an echo chamber!!!!!1111" idiots don't seem to understand is that not everyone wants to be bombarded with politics and polarised views every time they view their timeline.

            I want to read about science, development, retro-tech, guitar, music and maybe a bit of history too. I don't want people shoving their political views down my throat all the time, no matter the stripe. I don't want any politics at all. I don't use social media as my source for political news (and I advise others not to either!), so when I'm using it, I don't want to see any.

            With Twitter I don't seem to have that option. Politics, especially of the right-wing American flavour, will be forced on me at every opportunity. It's why I left. With Mastodon I can read about what I want and avoid all the shouting. It's pleasant and it's what I want to use social media for.

            I am just about able to put up with arguments over the use of Hungarian notation and tabs vs. spaces.

    4. I could be a dog really Silver badge

      Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

      Just spend a fraction of the money making a UI which looks exactly like Twitter (like BlueSky has) and everyone would flock to it.

      Except that's not how it works. If "everyone" you interact with is on Faecesborg then you'll use Faecesborg, if they are on Shitter then you'll be on Shitter, and so on. And then we hear of things like schools who insist that parents use WhatsApp for communications, and things like that.

      So until hell freezes over, the heat death of the universe, or less likely the major platforms opening up to distributed operation - then people will stick with what they are already on until/unless sufficient of their friends/contacts/whatever have moved to a new platform. But since few will move until many have, then people stay where they are.

      And if, as seems likely from previous comments, the better/open alternatives are harder to use/set up then that makes it even less likely.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Nobody's mentioning the Mastodon in the room

        "schools who insist that parents use WhatsApp for communications"

        If such thins as WhatsApp and schools insisting on it had existed when my children were of school age the insistence would have met with pretty short shrift.

  4. Kane
    Alert

    ...as one person took over what we had believed to be a global public square...

    There's a key word here being used that underpins everything.

    Public.

    The assumption that the platform is public is only reinforced by the fact that members of the public can use it. This does not mean that the platform itself is public.

    Twitter X is a company, not a public platform. His Muskiness can do whatever he likes with it. And this is what everyone has woken up to.

    1. Khaptain Silver badge

      Re: ...as one person took over what we had believed to be a global public square...

      That has always been the case on all the platforms. Musk didn't change anything..

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    50 million Ned Flanders all being REALLY nice to each other (or else!) on Bluesky will never break out or make culture. When it comes to internet content people choose the junk food -- the insults, the hate, the drama -- every time. And X, Tiktok, and Instagram will still have a monopoly on "can you believe they're saying this???" type stuff that actually breaks through and grabs eyeballs.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Nah

      It's not about homogenization of liberal /safe/ gentle attitudes and personalities. It's about not having extremists pushed to the forefront as part of a 'disrupt' hunger-game.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Nah

        "It's about not having extremists pushed to the forefront as part of a 'disrupt' hunger-game."

        First you have to define "extremist" and then you will realise that it is subjective.. You will always have an "extremist" at the forefront...

        It could be a fully left wing site but you can be sure that hard core extremist leftist will be at the forefront. Extremism does not have a political bias, it's just extremism.

        1. jospanner Silver badge

          Re: Nah

          This is some of the weirdest enlightened-centrist nonsense I’ve ever heard in my life.

          No, people don’t want to hang around nazis.

          That is the fact you’re going to have to come to terms with.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Nah

            How about hanging around extreme leftists , would that be OK ?

            Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Kim Il-sung would they be fine ?

            1. jospanner Silver badge

              Re: Nah

              That would be quite the achievement, considering that they’re dead.

              Also “extreme leftist” would also cover Proudhon, Kropotkin, Makhno, Goldman, Marx, Foucault, Malcom X, Chomsky, Graeber, Fisher… and any number of well regarded and interesting scientists, artists and philosophers. So yes, I think that extreme leftists can be great to hang out with.

              Like what, are you going to sit there and put Du Bois and MLK Jr in the same breath as Pol Pot? What is this clown show. Einstein too because he wrote for a Socialist magazine? Yeah I’d hate to share a platform with him. /s

              1. jospanner Silver badge

                Re: Nah

                I think missing here is the real point underlying this: the question of why the far right gets the specific treatment that it does.

                And the answer is intent.

                Marx did not envision the holodomor.

                Hitler did, quite literally, envision and action, the holocaust.

                Communism and socialism can be debated until the cows come home. However, there's a term that comes up when discussing fascism: "The cruelty is the point". Naziism is predicated on violently enforcing white "aryan" racial supremacy over Europe and the world in general, and all the horrors that that entails.

                Communism is not. Communism does not have a Mein Kampf where the Diggers sat down and wrote about eliminating the Ukrainian peasantry.

                To conflate the two is ignorant at best and dishonest at worst. It's meme-brained level understanding of history - the notion that they're at opposite points on the graph, so they must have similar "extremist" characteristics based upon that alone.

                It also completely ignores the atrocities committed in the name of "centrist" western democracies and capitalism over the last few centuries, another horrifying set of tails that can be told. King Leopold still stands proud on his arches just down the road from the European Commission's Humanitarian Aid & Civil Protection centre, not to mention the slave traders we keep on literal pedestals here in the UK. But let's not go there. :)

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Nah

                "No, people don’t want to hang around nazis."

                How mentally ill do you have to be to consider that as an option.

                1. HuBo Silver badge
                  Gimp

                  Re: Nah

                  Well, the Dead Kennedys did feel it was enough of an issue that they wrote a song about it: Nazi Punks Fuck Off. Granted that was 44 years ago but these things tend to come and go, cycling around like a bad back, or a circus bear hooked to a boomerang and all, imho.

            2. Elongated Muskrat Silver badge

              Re: Nah

              When the Chinese Communist Party controls Twitter and Facebook, I'll be as concerned about it as Musk and Zuckerberg controlling them. Will that do?

              The fact is that the two main social media platforms we have in the West appear to be controlled by fascists. Especially Musk. If you don't happen to think that Musk is a fascist, then I suggest that firstly, you go and learn what the word fascism means, and secondly, get out of the fascist echo chamber you are in.

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Nah

          First you have to define "extremist"

          Let's start off with "Everything pushed by A/Cs" and then make such exceptions as might be necessary.

      2. I am David Jones Silver badge

        Re: Nah

        Isn’t more about being able to choose if or which extramist views are pushed to you? If I understood it right, if my preferred viewer app is e.g. bought out by someone who then starts pushing certain views (à la Musk/Twitter), then I can simply up sticks and swap to a different viewer app. All without losing my old content, friends, groups etc etc.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Nah

          All of the platforms push their ideologies ..

          Before Musk, Jack Dorsey was pushing ideologies on Twitter ( although I believe that he was being pushed by the Govt).. We also know that Zuckerburg was being forced to push ideas too . So no matter which platform you chooses you are going to get bias ( there are higher power that want it to be so).

          1. I am David Jones Silver badge

            Re: Nah

            That’s the point, this is a single infrastructure with multiple, freely interchangeable ‘platforms’ (app views). Everyone’s content / friends / groups etc is stored independently of the app chosen to access it. Which if it works and gains traction, is a game-changer.

            One thing it doesn’t have afaict is privacy, so this is a truly public forum. It is even public that user A is blocking user B. By design. But ok, an open, decentralised, public forum, not beholden to any particular company or person? I’d sign up to that.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Nah

            That's how media has always worked. Swap the words Twiiter/FB/Insta and platforms for words like program and channel and this is TV. Every news/documentary/opinion program on TV is someone else's perspective, you just have the choice to move your eyeballs and brain to a different program/channel with ease with the click of the remote button (or voice command, whatever's your poison).

            The decentralised proposal is the only way to get social media into the same space as TV programming where the user can pick and choose the feed they want with ease (the crucial part for any massive uptake to an addiction). TV was and still is a massive addiction for the majority of the planet, social media is taking the top spot but the behaviours remain the same and is driven by escapism. Unfortunately it will take a bunch of fairly rich and/or prominent people to take that fight on against the billionaires currently controlling it all. Murdoch was the template for this, look how much his empire has influcened the world so far, I reckon Musk must idolise him as he seems to want to walk the same path but more outwardly hostile about it.

          3. tiggity Silver badge

            Re: Nah

            Indeed, I know quite a few women who tried BlueSky & their accounts got banned for saying things opposed* to the general group think on that platform.

            There are massive biases on all the platforms, at least if things were truly decentralised and you could have one account & use multiple social media platforms** then would stop a particular site acting as a gatekeeper as you would only be banned from that one site.

            * Feminists generally making comments revolving around basic biological facts such as a man in a dress is still a man & should not be in female only spaces.

            ** if you must, or maybe don't bother. El Reg comments generally the nearest I get to social media.

    2. jospanner Silver badge

      Or maybe people got sick of the outrage which is why Bsky is actually the only usable social media site these days. I go there to have interactions with people I like and find stuff I find interesting. I know these concepts have been degraded in the last 15 years or so, but it is still a part of the human character, no matter how much the cynical losers in positions of power insist otherwise.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Love it when rich folks ask for hand outs

    Nabiha Syed net worth - $1.29 million

    Mark Surman net worth $5 million

    Jimmy Wales net worth ~$500 million

    Shoshana Zubof net worth $5 million

    Mark Ruffalo net worth of $35 million

    That's not all the names and they still have about $547M between them. Don't think you need my money dig deep for the cause y'all.

    1. beast666 Silver badge

      Re: Love it when rich folks ask for hand outs

      Can't stand any of them.

    2. werdsmith Silver badge

      Re: Love it when rich folks ask for hand outs

      A school friend of mine who became very rich as a businessman did once give me some advice. He said: "never use your own money for anything".

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Love it when rich folks ask for hand outs

        I've met some very rich people over the years and the vast majority would fight to the death over a bent tuppence.

        A few of them lived in a swimming pool of debt which allowed them to live like kings despite being paupers on paper. This never seemed to catch them up and the supply of money from banks has never ended.

        Strangely they were living the dream via "you will own nothing and be happy" which doesn't fit the conspiracy theorists description. They seemed to own nothing (all on debt or leased via businesses) but had everything and were very happy.

  7. Howard Sway Silver badge

    Why does this need to cost $30 million?

    Surely they're just reinventing the HTTP model for posting and publishing text, and simple markup would be sufficient to solve the problem. So a post would look something like :

    <Username>Fred56789</Username>

    <AuthToken>435jn54oh6oi45i6ho5u6houh</AuthToken>

    <Title>Here is my witty post></Title>

    <Post>Zuck 'n' Muck suck</Post>

    <Groups></tech@bluesky.com></politicsusa@myspace.com></Groups>

    <Tags></Zuck></Muck></Tags>

    And once a secure authorisation protocol has been agreed, any post to a site could also be passed on to other federated sites the user has included in <Groups> and tagged with <Tags> - this would be easy for client sites and apps to manage on a per post or default preference basis. All you then need is the server side processing and forwarding, which is equally simple. The main problems are going to be trust and security, to authenticate users and keep credentials secure - this would probably require some kind of independent 3rd party OAuth authorisation service.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why does this need to cost $30 million?

      So.... kind of like usenet, but with http tags?

      1. Howard Sway Silver badge

        Re: Why does this need to cost $30 million?

        Yeah, that's all social media is anyway really. But the point here is this would put the user back in control, presuming some sort of browser support materialised for it, and go some way to breaking down the power of walled gardens.

  8. Irongut Silver badge
    Stop

    Just stop

    Perpetuating the lie that Bluesky is decentralised. It is not.

    Everything relies on Bluesky's servers - it will not work without them.

    As for the AT Protocol.... what a load of shite. Try setting up your own server and you'll see how useless it is.

    ActivityPub is the only truely decentralised social media protocol, as used by Mastodon, Pixelfed and others.

  9. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    Just a thought but here's something that might work. There's a protocol described here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc977 All it needs is a few servers federated with each other and a few clients to interact with them. Perahaps they were to put a bit of their money into promoting this.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      In the early 2000s, as a systems performance troubleshooter, I was dispatched to a cable-based ISP to assist with problems they were having with their Usenet News service. I’m not sure whether the phrase “social media” had been invented then, but having been a user back in the 80s and 90s, I was delighted to see Usenet News reaching a new and much larger community.

      My enthusiasm was tempered somewhat when I found that the performance issues were associated with some of the content; an active community of cable users was exploiting the service for storing and sharing videos, some ripped from DVDs, while others (allegedly) were of a more dubious nature. Back in the day, a multiprocessor server and Fibre-Channel disc array would have been overkill for the task (not to mention unavailable), but in those days, the dubious content mostly comprised static images.

  10. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

    And for those of us in the free world..

    What the hell is a "US-based 501(c)(3)"?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like