“When you point the finger at someone, there are three fingers pointing back to you”

year ago my wife and I sent this message about Garrett: “We should note that 100% of his social media posts from December 15 until December 23 were about us, which seems obsessive/compulsive.”

His latest 10 “tweets” are 70% about me and my wife. 7 our of 10 are about us, nothing else. And if about 70% of his latest 10 “tweets” are of this nature, whereas only about 3% of pages/articles of ours are about the SLAPPs (maybe at most 5%), then maybe we are merely responding by explaining what really happened; and he calls others “obsessed” (and pays a barrister to use that word)… he does accuse others of many of the same he himself is guilty of.

The cause of the criticism is my opposition to a back door called “Secure Boot”, UEFI insecurity, or “Restricted Boot”.

The real aim is Software Freedom

he Linux kernel is increasingly leaning towards cargo cults like slop.

The issue isn’t how Linux is developed per se. It’s a matter of trust. As it stands at the moment, Linux promotes all sorts of lockdown mechanisms that go against the goals of GNU.

We need to talk more about GNU in order for the GNU Project’s philosophy to be widely understood and broadly appreciated.

“Free software” as a term is OK. If it helps, “Software Freedom” helps emphasise it is about freedom.

Nothing lasts forever

esterday I rebooted the laptop “bubi” for the first time since December 2023. It was up and running nonstop for nearly 3 years.

When reboots are as rare as this you kind of worry the reboot sequence might not complete due to file system repair needs.

GNU/Linux is thankfully still reliable enough

n some of my recent articles about ‘secure’ (restricted) boot, someone has said “good work” and added that Garrett is attempting to silence me because of the technical things I write, hence I should “remember to keep Restricted Boot tied to him and vice versa” (the person is as bad as the things he promotes). Here are all the latest parts of the latest series:

He also goes back to sex.

Leba Hotel

oday it’ll be another cold, rainy day. That’s fine, we could use some more water and the fish are OK now (heated up water, just in time for winter).

I don’t suppose we’ll go to the park today (to feed the birds). With umbrella and coats it won’t be the same.

I guess it’s really winter already, except in Japan.

In the Techrights site we have progressed further with a long series that might interest Linux users. This series will last until next month, maybe even December.

Recent: James Bottomley Has Promoted Microsoft-Controlled Restricted (‘Secure’) Boot, His Blog Has Just Been Cracked

oday, or very early in the morning, I published a somewhat chronological explanation regarding things that went on and have gone on for 15 years.

“One goal there is to associate UEFI and restricted boot with other crimes,” a community member told me, “via crazy matt [Garrett] among other connections.”

Some of these connections are full-time Microsoft staff. Some of the assisting actors are ‘former’ Microsoft staff that was arrested for strangling women and had done corrupt things. A further connection said illegal things and committed Hate Crimes against my wife and I (already registered with police for years). Two of them already got arrested.

“I’ll go as far as to say it is strategically (and politically) dangerous to keep omitting mention of Garrett’s connection to Restricted Boot,” the community member remarked. “The omission makes it look exclusively like a personal spat and that REALLY hurts TR and TM in the near term and might damage standing with the courts eventually.”

I disagreed on the basis that the Court needs to also be able to assess the character of the people, as it does not easily understand technical mechanisms such as UEFI.

It’s not outlandish to all (universally), but it would not draw the attention when dealing with lawyers.

The community member pointed to an article which said Garrett had “…many problems. Serious problems. Real problems.”

Yes, interpersonal also. His own spouse accuses him of very serious things and those things are in the UK’s National Archives. Garrett’s solicitors were required by the judge to type down what the spouse had said.

“Above and beyond having boosted code to afflict systems with Restricted Boot on behalf of Microsoft” would be the more accurate or important thing to note about Garrett, but some deaf ears it would fall on do not understand what that technically means and why it’s so important.

It’s a question of what audience it targets or a matter of tailoring one’s message based on one’s knowledge.

“If that “on behalf of” should be included or not,” I was told, “I cannot recall the details,” but they’re all in this together (the law firm as well; it doesn’t understand and never comments on anything technical).

I separately said that the threat the solicitors send my way have “…no actual legal grounds”.

It could be mentioned that the threats are “due to criticism over his helping Microsoft get let off the hook about Restricted Boot.”

But again, the judges would not relate to that aspect without me shifting focus to technical matters. The case is not about technical matters.

“By turning it / presenting it as a personal spat it allows s–tholes like social control media an easy out,” a reader remarked, adding that “social control media is a throwaway and not worth the effort but I remain firm on the above otherwise…”

When I write about these legal disputes I ensure that if read by judges they will get across the key message/s as comprehended by a person without a Computer Science background.

It’s never of any concern what a bunch of trolls say in social control media. What they say does not matter, they’re there to provoke and even make stuff up for “likes” and groupthink/affirmation.

When did something innocent turn from benign (e.g. Charlie Chaplin) to malicious or “warning sign”?

believe I purchased my first (maybe only) bowtie in 2001 (possibly 2000) at a shop called Manchester Wippell (of Manchester). Or maybe “J Wippell & Co. Manchester”; some people I know call them “Wippells” (with an S) . There’s a very long history to these folks. It moreover seems that they still exist and operate in the same address (9-21 Princess St, Greater, Manchester M2 4DN). They’ve survived a lot. The name and reputation matter. I also got a silk handkerchief there once.

I recently wrote about James Bottomley, the Microsofter who helps Microsoft inject back doors and kill switches into Linux.

Bottomley became “known” for wearing bowties; it’s like he attempted to make these garments of clothing/apparel his “signature”, I honestly don’t know why (the bizarre logic of it).

Like “normal” ties, they serve no practical function, they only ever get in the way (e.g. inside some food), but those are class or hierarchy symbols (worn at the expense of one’s comfort).

I dress casually every day. I don’t try to project “value” using cotton and leather.

Like many of his background, Bottomley seems pretentious and uncarting about Software Freedom, he’s just chasing money. Money, money, money.

Because of this man (Bottomley), I nowadays associate bowties (in the context of software) with bad people. I think I’ve now worn a bowtie for well over a decades.

Even when Bottomley was at IBM/Red Hat/Novell I already didn’t like and didn’t trust him. I had good reasons to feel that way.