OTF, which backs Tor, Let's Encrypt and more, sues to save its funding from Trump cuts An organization that bankrolls various internet security projects has asked a Washington DC court to prevent the Trump administration from cancelling its federal funding – and expressed fears that if the cash stops flowing, the tools it supports could become harder to access. The Open Technology Fund (OTF) backs projects …
I think this must be the most idiotic comments I've read on this site, and with the way things have been the last few years, that's saying something.
Like Musk, you clearly don't understand how governments are meant to work.
But yeah, first Elon got rid of the branches that were investigating HIM, and now I suppose he's following your philosophy, because I guess nuclear weapon controls and also the seed bank aren't in the constitution.
If you look at what USAID did, you may figure out why Russia was so pleased it was abolished.
As for the seeds, as Dr. Iago Hale (professor of specialty crop improvement at the University of New Hampshire) and Dr. Michael Kantar (associate professor of plant genetics at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.) put it:
"Such losses directly undermine the United States’ ability to ensure continued food security and dietary diversity amid challenges to our agricultural systems.For the sake of all Americans, we denounce any attempts to weaken the N.P.G.S. The generations before us understood that it is the minimum function of a responsible government to invest in the long-term ability to feed its citizens."
None of this is the fucking tax payers job to fund! We had the Biden regime killing chickens across this country because of a bird flu that was nothing more than a damn scare tactic!
We are just so tires of the "Russia/China fear tactics to keep the government grift going!
If your efforts are valuable, generate you're funding through private donations! Oh, wait, that tales work, it takes producing things of actual value!
This post has been deleted by its author
> "Marxist"
Translation: I'm a foaming-at-the-mouth right winger that thinks anything to the left of Ayn Rand is "Marxism", "Maoism", "communism" or whatever.
> "stupid"
The only question is whether *you're* genuinely "stupid" and/or ignorant enough to think the opinions expressed actually constitute Marxism. Or whether you're just enough of an unthinking, reactionary kneejerk drinker of the culture war Kool-Aid that you parrot the dumb-as-fuck line that anything to your left is "hurrrr durrrrr Marxism!!!!!11111"
(I'd guess the only reason "Marxist" is the preferred insult over "communist" these days is that the latter can't be taken seriously any more due to boy-that-cried-wolf overuse and association with swivel-eyed 1950s-style paranoids calling anything and everything "commie".)
Musk doesn't "understand" how governments are meant to work because he doesn't *care* about understanding.
The "efficiency" thing was only ever an excuse to tear down and vandalise what he's opposed to- regardless of the consequences- and remake it in his own right-wing ideological and self-serving image, i.e. having those functions replaced by large private businesses owned by him and his super-wealthy friends and tearing down any sort of regulation that gets in the way of letting him do whatever he wants.
One problem with governments, NGOs, and businesses is what I'll call "tentaclisation". This is the distribution of work among multiple people in such a way that you can't just eliminate a bunch of jobs and still get the organisational output you want, even though that desired output could reasonably be produced by the fewer people.
One could treat the organisation like a greenfield computer program, define carefully the outputs and priorities you want, create the needed structure, hire the right number of people to run it, and figuratively burn its bloated predecessor to the ground. (And, damn, wouldn't we love to do that?!)
The problem with such a restart is the loss of data which needs continuity (tax records, house deeds, medical records, etc.)
An alternative would be simple budget-slashing. The problem with that is the upper management, which makes financial decisions for the org, would protect their own jobs, and fire the people who do the real (vs make-)work.
Rather than chainsaws, wood-chippers, and flame-throwers, you need a swarm of army ants which would carefully pick apart these bureaus and get rid of what's not needed, taking extreme care that the swarm of army ants does not become a bureaucracy unto itself.
...between governments.
It's not like you owing your friend or your dad money. If you have debt to your friend or your dad, they can sue you and get a court to confiscate your owed wealth to close out the debt. Or they can get some friends and kick your ass and take what you owe them plus a little extra for the inconvenience. Maybe they break your legs to improve your future motivation toward timely repayment. We've all seen those movies.
National or "sovereign" debt isn't like that. The closest solution to leg-breaking is war, and all sides lose in war, and all sides know this from the outset. It's too expensive and too damaging. Ask Russia how much wealth and treasure they're winning in Ukraine, and how much that "winning" is costing them. Go back in time and ask postwar Germany how that WWII investment paid off. Ask England and the United States of America why they helped rebuild the Germany that they just bombed back into the stone age, but without actually claiming Germany for their own.
So countries take or offer debt to bind others to them as partners, but as *voluntary* partners. Carrying debt is a way to signal connection and to encourage trade, kinda like your favorite restaurant giving you a 10 <your-currency-here> coupon even though you're already a good and paying customer - they want to ensure that relationship lasts.
It's also important to recognize that countries literally print money as needed. If the USA needs to pay a five billion dollar debt, they have the option of printing five thousand units of million dollar bills (or their digital equivalents) and delivering it to whatever country they owe. As long as the USA's creditors are willing to accept USA currency at the current exchange rate, job done. And if the creditors won't accept that currency, the USA either buys an equivalent amount of some other country's currency or...they do nothing and only lose the ability to do future business with the nation(s) that extended credit - much like your favorite restaurant might refuse to serve you if you stiffed them on the check last time.
Here's more detail and a pint up top to get you through it:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/10/sovereign-debt-default.asp
Isn't the core problem that the US has pretty much blackmailed most countries in the world to use USD for energy purchases and international trade and so forced them to also take on USD reserves?
As far as I can see, that's where the problem now sits for the US - there used to be no alternatives because the US bombed or embargoed nations back to the stone age if they didn't play along (ask Iraq). Now, with everyone seeking to switch away from oil et al and China being a tad too big to bomb on account that they're big enough to return the favour, there's a (for the US) troubling event on the horizon for the US.
It'll take a few years to play out, but Thorium reactors stand to change the whole ballgame of power generation and it's here now, not continuously 20 years away (but I think we will eventually get nuclear fusion to work too). Worse, China has just discovered massive new Thorium deposits and - and this is crucial - actually holds most of the patents on how to build these reactors because they actually invested the money to develop this technology. Also fun fact: China has had its own currency accepted by the World Bank as a reserve currency, ages ago.
The issue is thus that there is an ever increasing powerful alternative to trading in USD, and I think it's at this point that their National Debt might come back to bite the US in the rear end. Just printing more notes if you need to pay someone only works if what you print has value and nobody talks about the inflation you so create. The moment that trust even just weakens you have a whole house of cards collapsing, and then it can get mighty ugly. They talked themselves out of a lie with CDOs (which, by the way, are being sold again, I guess on the principle that you cannot let a good scam go to waste), I am uncertain there is enough BS in the world to cover up this one when it happens.
I have no clue about finance (obviously, see above :) ), but I do see problems. And if I see them it'll be abundantly clear to US people who do have a clue, so I expect capital flight. In my opinion, that is the whole purpose of the current US government: grab as much as they can and bail..
"Isn't the core problem that the US has pretty much blackmailed most countries in the world to use USD for energy purchases and international trade and so forced them to also take on USD reserves?"
I mean, as core problems go, that's at least one of them...
But it's a long list. Hey, aren't we about due for a pointless "war" in a mostly defenseless and unprepared country? Magic Eight Ball says yes!
"Isn't the core problem that the US has pretty much blackmailed most countries in the world to use USD for energy purchases and international trade and so forced them to also take on USD reserves?"
This WAS a problem. The world changed. Some years ago, Gaddafi tried to change the oil price to euro - he was promptly killed. Saddam as well. But now we have SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) that pretty much provides nuclear umbrella to their members - Iran included. So, USA cannot threaten a lot of regimes with their nukes anymore. Only conventional weapons. But Iran has A LOT of conventional weapons.
So, the balance of power changed. Smaller countries can defy both USA / Israel / UK / France and get away with it.
But better to have a lot of weapons to do that. Both conventional and cyber.
I don’t think Wood-chippers and Chainsaws are in the constitution you cock-womble.
Perhaps because they hadn’t invented the internal combustion engine in 1788…. oh and electricity .. and many more things..
Guess we are banning ICE’s then and back to horses. Thankfully the steam engine is good though.
Moronic fuckwit … Leopards Eating Peoples Faces Party member.
Oh and *adding* a further $4tn to the USA Debt, to fund $4.7tn of tax cuts for corporations and the rich won’t bring the debt down.
only disingenuous ass is you and your lies.
the previous term tax cuts from orange turd for middle/poor were time limited and had other shit to make em worthless, the cuts for rich fuckers wasn't.
the new cuts for trumpy turd are just for rich useless fuckers
you must be so far up trumpy's ass you can see his tonsils
Tax cuts only affect people who pay tax.
The people in most need of the money are likely to not pay any of the taxes that have been cut, so will see absolutly no benefit from tax cuts.
The types of cuts given by Trump benefit the people who pay the most tax, who are often the people who need it least!
Ahhh Cliff, as you obviously flunked maths in high school, it's best to keep out of debates with any form of numbers in them.
- https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/the-2017-trump-tax-law-was-skewed-to-the-rich-expensive-and-failed-to-deliverAs this debate unfolds, policymakers and the public should understand that the 2017 Trump tax law:
Was skewed to the rich. Households with incomes in the top 1 percent will receive an average tax cut of more than $60,000 in 2025, compared to an average tax cut of less than $500 for households in the bottom 60 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center (TPC).
As a share of after-tax income, tax cuts at the top — for both households in the top 1 percent and the top 5 percent — are more than triple the total value of the tax cuts received for people with incomes in the bottom 60 percent."
.. if applied linearly.
That is exactly where the problem lies. If literally everyone paid 20% tax on their entire income there would not be a problem or a deficit. But it's exactly the elebvated tax on those who have little that creates all the issiues. If the top 1% would pay the same percentage as the average cleaner there would not be an issue.
Umm, recent figures show this here Social-Security-dependent retiree paying about $1500 annually in additional taxes, and other programs for health, nutrition, and energy upgrades/assistance drying up. While the morbidly wealthy get huge breaks, less IRS enforcement, and fox-in-the-henhouse regulation.
The government doesn't need to manage its finances like a household because the government is not a household. The analogy is a false one, but that hasn't stopped people falling for the argument over the past 40 years or more.
I know you want a combination of Mad Max and 1984, but why do you assume you will be in one of the MAGA compounds and not with the hordes out in the wilderness fighting over the last can of beans?
There's only room for the billionaires on the nice side of the fence, and maybe a few slaves to serve them - want the job of Trump's toilet attendant?
This post has been deleted by its author
"leave millions of people worldwide trapped behind authoritarian information firewalls."
as they are likely calling for EOI for information firewalls for the Mexican and Canadian borders. You don't want undocumented ideas supplanting the regime approved ones in the heads of decent Americans. /s
The way it works is that you point out to somebody that they said something wrong. If they can accept that, they say "Oh, yeah" and move one. Some can't. Their only response is to downvote all your postings. Those downvotes mean that something you posted hit home because you were right and they were wrong. Cherish your downvotes.
If they don't, they'd better start now, and they should be safe.
The Atlantic: The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans
In which we see war planning by emoji, in case you doubted their suitability to run a government.
War planning, to the extent that the current Vice-President and Secretary of State could plan a piss-up in a brewery.
At least they can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act by anyone with the balls to do it, and not rely on the now demonstrably ineffectual impeachment process.
How Open is Open Source if it relies on State funding (as in USA) to survive?
The current US administration has shown that there are no sacred cows in his slashing of what they see as over-reach in Government funding.
How many other OS projects would be endangered by a change of government, regardless of country?
There are alternatives and roll your own options but a large portion of people making money and doing non profit things with information technology are in the US. A large portion of leadership in the space was in the us. Things like lets encrypt got funding from the government as it is a public good and keeps the US in a leading position in a hugely influential and profitable space. The EU could fund similar things to lets encrypt and more decentralised or alternatively funded secure messaging systems could be run outside the US, it wont be instant and the biggest harm that would do is to take leadership and soft power away from the US.
Also people and/or organisations can move to Canda or the EU for the moment, so thats possible if there is a hostile environment in uncle Sam's house.
well before the orange shit flinger got power, countries at east thought the USA was sane and possibly a help to the world in some ways.
Now we just consider it a fucked up mess with insane leaders that suck dictators cocks!!
What that means is every time I have to deal with an american, I first have to figure out how stupid and insane they are before telling them to fuck off.
Of course you are right, which is a huge shame for decent sensible folk living in the USA, but we all know that once trust is lost it can only be regained by actual and ongoing demonstrations of honesty and good faith—which can take a while.
In the meantime people see what they see, and what they see coming out of the USA right now is nothing to be proud of, nor in any shape or form is it building trust and good faith. And so, instead of starting out from a basic position of trust, people are now being led to start with suspicion.
Hopefully, before too long, there will be a genuine cleaning of the Augean stables in the good 'ol US of A.
I am native to a small foggy island off the main European continent so not directly harm to me.
I was referring to harm to the economy/people of the USA, whether that would in the long run harm the rest of the planet is less clear. If the US continue to head in an authoritarian direction I see your point it could be said leadership shifting away from there might not be harmful but desirable, depending where it shifts to.
I do find it hard to see what direction the US will take in the next financial quarter, this makes working out if the US will return to operating within expected parameters after a second term of hateful orange. So long term it does seem to be a question: will it be harm if the US looses leadership?
It's as open as it ever is: anyone who wants can access the source and modify it freely. The people who maintain it now will still be doing it. Open source is difficult to fund, and when it gets support indirectly from government action, that adds to the instability of funding, but it doesn't diminish the openness.
Now, in both the cases mentioned in the headline, these systems aren't just open source projects. Both use plenty of open source code, and those codebases are truly open, but both maintain large systems that they run themselves. Let's Encrypt is mostly the certificate authority itself, not the software used to implement it. Tor has a higher proportion of code in it, but the Tor-operated network is the major one, and forking the code but not operating in that network would be less useful. In both those cases, the resulting system's openness or lack thereof* is not the responsibility of those delivering funds to the project.
* Let's Encrypt is arguably less community-based than Tor is, but it is very difficult to compare them because they do completely different things. In addition, while there are several mostly compatible definitions for open source or synonymous terms, there is basically no definition for open with respect to a distributed system.
This was not a budget-buster, it was a relatively small investment in providing tools and training for journalists and anyone who felt they couldn't communicate or even access information on the Internet for fear of persecution, censorship or blocking. I am sure some of their investments didn't pan out, but for a government-funded effort, this was surprisingly down to earth, realistic and useful. Cancelling this program only helps those authoritarian governments who want to control information ... oh, maybe that's why it was cancelled.
int main(enter the void)... The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
