Technocrat

Above my Pay Grade: Miguel de Icaza and the Novell-Microsoft Agreement

Bruce Perens
Mon Mar 10 13:05:26 -0700 2008
Open+Source+Software.
manage
Miguel de Icaza's recent speech at the MIX 08 convention is a revelation. Finally, a year after Novell entered a patent deal with Microsoft that was widely perceived as a betrayal of the company's Open Source partners, Miguel has mustered some public criticism of the deal:
I'm not happy about the fact that such an agreement was made, but [the decision] was above my pay grade; I think we should have stayed with the open-source community.
At the same time he bemoans the bad decision, Miguel shows the problem attitude that made it possible: The decision was above my pay grade.
What's this about pay-grade? It's a military term, often misappropriated by civilians who are avoiding an ethical decision. It's a good excuse in the military: politicians are accountable for the decision to enter a war, while the military are oath-bound to follow orders at pain of court-martial and possibly execution, and are only accountable for the conduct of the war. But Miguel is no soldier. He's the founder of a company previously merged into Novell, and would not be subject to treason charges or capital punishment over this issue. Others, like Jeremy Allison, chose to leave the company while Miguel stayed.

Retired Major General Perry M. Smith nails the issue in his book Assignment Pentagon: A Guide to the Potomac Puzzle:

One of the most oft-used excuses in the Pentagon, this phrase means the issue is so important that it must be decided by someone above them. Since Pentagon officials at all levels can have impact or influence on even the most important issues, to say it is "above their pay grade" is often a "Pontius Pilate" exercise -- they could help, but they choose not to get involved.

General Smith's observation applies to Miguel: when the company broke faith with the community that Miguel had served in as a leader, Miguel decided not to get involved. Miguel, engineers are capable of ethical thought, and it's never above your pay-grade. Let's hope that the next person in Miguel's situation understands that.

Above my Pay Grade: Miguel de Icaza and the Novell-Microsoft Agreement
duhavid
Mon Mar 10 13:13:46 -0700 2008
 manage

Correct me if I am wrong, but didnt he have a statement or two at the time of the deal saying it was all OK?
Above my Pay Grade: Miguel de Icaza and the Novell-Microsoft Agreement
Bruce Perens
Mon Mar 10 13:28:55 -0700 2008
 manage
Yes, he publicly expressed approval at the time. Miguel can let his admiration for Microsoft's technical work blind him to their conduct.
Above my Pay Grade: Miguel de Icaza and the Novell-Microsoft Agreement
StonePiano
Tue Mar 11 22:33:02 -0700 2008
 manage

Everything I've read from Miguel de Icaza indicates to me that he is an optimist, a man of possibilities - but not a cynic.  While I agree than "above my pay grade" is a silly thing to say, I don't believe I can criticise the man this.

Others are cynics, others have a longsuit in seeing through this crap and calling it what it is.

Personally, I'm going easy on de Icaza because I know I've thought the best when a situation did not merit it.  I've been loyal to a fault - I've been dumb enough to support a cause long after it went rancid.  He has now said it was bad, and he probably feels pretty stupid about the whole thing.  I can simpathise.
Above my Pay Grade: Miguel de Icaza and the Novell-Microsoft Agreement
disco
Mon Mar 10 14:21:17 -0700 2008
 manage

> But Miguel is no soldier.

Which is why your analogy is bunk. There is no life and death involved here. The ethics involved are nowhere near comparable. He disagrees with a business decision made by his employer. Everybody at one time or another has done so. If you quit every time your employer made a decision you didn't agree with you'd spend half your life unemployed.

read it again

zogger
Mon Mar 10 14:59:29 -0700 2008
 manage
Bruce clearly stated that *Miguel's* use of the term was out of line and weird, as it wasn't a military related topic. And as an excuse it was still lame. Frankly, I don't even buy it for military folks, oath to constitution and accepted law comes before some doofus in chief "orders", we hung goose stepping jerks after the nuremberg trials over that "just following orders" stuff. You *never* stop being a (hu)man, no matter who you are working for or what you are doing or what your financial needs or expectations are or what sort of clothing you are wearing. IMO anyway.

As to being unemployed half the time if you do that, can't speak of the military as I wouldn't work for them because of what they do fighting in illegal wars-I'll pass, I believe in self defense but not wars of aggression or blood profits wars- but, I have quit a few civilian jobs over business or political ethics, *&^&! the money, some things are more important, and you can always find another job.

I quit once over not getting "permission" to go vote. That was pure political, I think it is a social responsibility to vote, even if you have to write in every name for every ballot position. Screw that not being "allowed" to leave and come back on a really long work day because some merchants crap needs attending. I work to live, not live to work, that's for termites. I was rehired the next day by another similar company with a similar pay scale (actually it was a little higher per hour pay so I made out better switching companies). I quit another one once I hit my first "suit" level management position when I found out paying sub rosa "consultation fees" was part of making sales. That one cost me roughly a 50% paycut, I bumped myself back down to foreman from city manager and started looking for another company someplace, found one soon enough.. I quit a farm job once when I was tasked with doing what I thought was some pretty dangerous stuff, orchard spraying without a hazardous chemicals mask provided, I just refused, went home, left the farmer there stewing in his own chemicals. Took me a few weeks to find another job that time. That's three I recall off the top of my head, maybe there was another but I can't think of one, and that is in over half a century of working full time now.

read it again
disco
Mon Mar 10 15:25:52 -0700 2008
 manage

With all due respect 2/3 of your quits were because your employer was treating you personally like shit. We all quit for that reason. Bravo for quiting for the "paying sub rosa consultation fees" job. That was admirable.
read it again
Bruce Perens
Mon Mar 10 15:33:02 -0700 2008
 manage
If nobody ever left an employer because they were doing underhanded and unethical things, employers would behave worse, and we'd all be really good at rationalizing ourselves out of responsibility for our own part in doing things we shouldn't. I'm having trouble understanding why you think Zogger should leave because of a bribe, and you think Miguel should not leave because of bad faith.
read it again
disco
Mon Mar 10 15:52:04 -0700 2008
 manage

Miguel was not asked to personally do anything unethical, as Zogger was.

The original fear of the Novell-Microsoft deal was that MSFT would then go after other Linux distributors in the court room. This hasn't occurred. It was fairly clearly a FUD and FUD-only move. The damage of the Microsoft-Novell deal to Linux has been next to nothing. Why quit over nothing? You are blowing the impact out of proportion. Novell have been a champion for Linux in the court-room in the SCO cases. You need to be more objective.

 
read it again
Bruce Perens
Mon Mar 10 17:18:26 -0700 2008
 manage
FUD does lots of damage. My own business once lost a Million-dollar deal over FUD, and I'm sure that's repeated for many different businesses. It's especially poignant in this case because Miguel, as leader of the GNOME project, got a lot of people to work on it, and then his employer set things up so that their customers were supposed to have more rights to run the GNOME software than its own developers did. It stinks of betrayal to me.

MS hasn't played its patent cards yet. There's no guarantee they won't tomorrow.
read it again
disco
Mon Mar 10 17:31:58 -0700 2008
 manage

> It stinks of betrayal to me.

Well that's just it isn't it? To you. While Miguel regrets the decision that was made, I don't think he feels as strongly about it as you do. Linus I think sits on the Miguel side of the fence. RMS probably thinks Miguel's, Linus's, and some of your actions "stink of betrayal" to free software too. That doesn't make RMS right, nor you, nor Linus, nor Miguel, nor me. It's all a matter of opinion. You calling him to step down because his opinion is different from yours is disrespectful. Holier-than-thou.
read it again
Bruce Perens
Mon Mar 10 21:59:10 -0700 2008
 manage
I'm not asking for him to feel as strongly as I do. The way he went along enthusiasticaly with the deal back then, viewed by his current statements, does not seem sincere. Resenting that insincerity is not holier-than-though.
read it again
WorLord
Tue Mar 11 09:54:51 -0700 2008
 manage

Sometimes, the only way to prove you have a mind is to change it.  Does a change of heart really speak of insincerity?  How can you tell the two apart with such certainty?
read it again
disco
Tue Mar 11 09:55:24 -0700 2008
 manage

I believe he was sincere, both then and now. His opinion changed. Is that not allowed?
read it again
Stefan Champailler(1)
Tue Mar 11 02:19:16 -0700 2008
 manage

Everyone is entitled to his opinion, but that's not a reason for everyone to avoid judgement by someone else. At some point, you have to measure you opinion against some form of moral, moral which is shared by others than you. Miguel has chosen to go the GPL way, he has chosen to lead a company (and thus other people) in a GPL way, with the GPL values. Getting caught in the MSFT trap was abandonning his opinions. Real bad, especially when you work with something like GPL where everything is a metter of politics.

It doesn't mean he has to be burnt for that, it just means once you choose your opinion, you have to confront them with reality, with other who disagree and stand firm. Not doing so means you live in an aquarium and you have no opinion at all.

That 's really basic moral.

stF

How much of a threat is Gnome?

zogger
Mon Mar 10 14:24:54 -0700 2008
 manage
A question I would like answered, as regards submarine patents, various other folderol that MS can inject into the system to gumn it up sometime in the future.. (and they seem to have enough juice/clout/power/whatever to ignore a lot of theoretical legal obligations like laches and so on, or any SEC notice with their constant patent threatsm at least in the US where the fix is obviously in, laws don't seem apply to them here)

And also, what on Earth or in the seven Hells *possessed* the KDE folks to "port" to Windows? Are they crazy?? They had not a golden but a platinum opportunity to be the real FOSS alternative choice then, and blew it, IMO. Billionaire company Microsoft and various other billionaire or millionaire MS shops aren't enough, they "need" some free help??? I was already to switch full time to KDE only after the Novell deal, then I found that out about KDE and thought "where's my choice again?". So I just stuck to Gnome desktop, not seeing any "lesser evils" anyplace to vote with my mouse clicks now. (and I prefer a full desktop environment, not a window manager and roll my own)

How much of a threat is Gnome?
rubycodez
Mon Mar 10 14:46:37 -0700 2008
 manage

Open source and Free Software projects have made Windows (and other proprietary OS such as many of the Unix, MacOS, SunOS, VMS etc.) ports from the very beginning, the FSF / Stallman did that to help get people moving in the direction. It's a kind of advertising.

GNOME has been ported to windows by the CyGNOME project, and other proprietary OS by other projects.

I use KDE on my older laptop and workstation because of the lesser memory footprint (a while back GNOME was the best that way) .  I threw in GNOME on my PC at work just to see what it's been up to lately but maybe I'll switch that back.

well...isn't that special......

zogger
Mon Mar 10 15:12:39 -0700 2008
 manage
I wasn't aware of all that other stuff..not a bit or a byte....this is going to make me rethink the whole FOSS deal again.

...still thinking, getting really annoyed now so I'll stop and go do something else for awhile, find some articles....learn new stuff everyday.....hmmm...

they didn't *have* a free OS to start with in the 80s.

rubycodez
Mon Mar 10 15:31:23 -0700 2008
 manage

well, you have to remember when FOSS started they had to lay the groundwork first, to make compiler and tools and utilities and a free operating system would need to run.  Along with that there were end user apps built using those tools.

that took almost a decade, and it wasn't even the GNU kernel that made it out the door, it was Linux.

but until then there was no where to work but on a proprietary system.

 

sure, a totally free computer, that boots from a totally free bios, totally free drivers, os, utilties and software would be awesome.  we're not there yet, very nearly though.

 

I've mentioned here I would love free CADD and CAE software, others the CAM end of that stuff, but I when I need to do such things there is not yet a free solution, and that will take a level of effort on the order of over a man-century of work just for the CADD end.  who knows, maybe in a few years when I've done all the spare time projects I have now I might even dust off the old computational geometry books and wail away on the CADD issue. 

 

but the universe I'm stuck with I have to reach for proprietary CADD tools right now.

Plenty of CAD

computersareevil
Tue Mar 11 05:22:04 -0700 2008
 manage
but the universe I'm stuck with I have to reach for proprietary CADD tools right now.
Huh?

QCad works very well.

47 other candidates.

Plenty of CAD, but not CADD

rubycodez
Tue Mar 11 07:52:42 -0700 2008
 manage

yes, I'm *very* aware of all the open source drawing packages and their status, the half-open ones and most of the closed ones for that matter. those are ok for many types of drawings

 

but CAD != CADD, I wouldn't, for example, be routing to locate cuts and bends in bus bars for some paralleling switchgear with QCAD.

 

 

 
Plenty of CAD, but not CADD
computersareevil
Tue Mar 11 08:12:40 -0700 2008
 manage
CAD != CADD
According to Wikipedia (which we know is authoritative ;), it is.
I wouldn't, for example, be routing to locate cuts and bends in bus bars for some paralleling switchgear with QCAD.
I was always taught that that was CAM, not CAD (or CADD).

But I will go forward thinking of CADD as something like CAD+CAM, and your point about lacking CAM tools is well taken.
Plenty of CAD, but not CADD
rubycodez
Tue Mar 11 08:26:59 -0700 2008
 manage

ha, I see what the issue is. I'm old school, CAD being computer aided drawing and CADD being computer aided drawing and design. maybe that terminology isn't used anymore.   QCAD is a mere computer aided drawing drawing package, an electric drafting machine and triangles, if you will.  it is not computer aided design, whereby I would, for example, create the 3D model routing bus bars  through space in such a pattern as to use the least amount of copper, and maybe then make some drawings from that, or maybe feed a CAM package which would produce code to drive a CNC bending machine.

 

with more advanced software, could even parametrically drive the routing problem as dimensions and current-carrying capacity changed.  For that kind of design, the QCAD and other cute electric pencils are useless.

 

 
Plenty of CAD, but not CADD
computersareevil
Tue Mar 11 08:40:14 -0700 2008
 manage
Actually, I think I may be older-school than you. CAD was computer-aided drafting, while what you are talking about was computer-aided engineering (CAE). One used CAD to draw it, CAE to check for collisions and, if you had a really expensive machine, generate a 3D model, and then used CAM to figure out how to machine it. The Wikipedia article does suggest (via a diagram, no-less) that all of that now falls under the broad umbrella of "CAD", and thus, the single entry for CAD and CADD. So we are having a difference of semantics only. :-)
Plenty of CAD, but not CADD
rubycodez
Tue Mar 11 08:59:09 -0700 2008
 manage

yes, phrase CA - "drafting" was used too.  interference checking was done by some design systems even without any other CAM add-ons, CAE  was finite element or E&M field packages or circuit analysis or such.  The CAM  would get into surfacing and toolpaths and working with manufacturing engineers to come up with way thing would be built in reality.

all those place I worked also had hand drawings, physical models and prototypes, and were in transition to more and more computer based.  The good designers and drafters could produce drawings just as fast either way, the computer only saved time when similar design or modifications or mirror images or such were needed.  Computers made possible more iterations so more frenzied activity but the end result had no less flaws or issues or need for redesign.

 

Digital computers modeling real objects have issues, especially under various transformations (like rotations in space), might find things that met before didn't quite anymore and other subtle funny-business.  the good operators knew what the score was and when the stupid 'puter needed a little kick in the pants to get things correct again.  but the believe-the-computer crowd seems to be growing.

 

true story, one job in realm of civil engineering, a computer-only person scaled down some "wetlands mitigation" principles down to where the guy with the backhoe was to make elaborate acres and acres of little half foot or foot and a half trenches to contain and channel water......result in real world was of course first rain turned the whole thing into a bunch of mud puddles and hill-lumps, a complete BS waste of time and taxpayer dollars.

does this help?

rubycodez
Mon Mar 10 20:22:12 -0700 2008
 manage

didn't mean to get you depressed with a total bummer at the end of the day, but maybe this part of interview at LinuxDevCenter.com, "Freedom Innovation and Convenience",  by F. Biancuzzi of Stallman would help? 

FB: Do you think it's a good idea to port a free software project to a proprietary OS such as Windows?

RMS: Porting free applications to nonfree operating systems is often useful. This allows users of those operating systems to try out using a few free programs and see that they can be good to use, that free software won't bite them. This can help people overcome worries about trying a free operating system such as GNU/Linux. Many users really do follow this path.

However, we need to be careful to avoid suggesting that the purpose of free applications is to be used on a proprietary system in that way. Using free applications is a step forward, but it doesn't take you all the way to freedom. To reach that destination, we need to avoid the proprietary software that denies users their freedom

 
How much of a threat is Gnome?
duhavid
Mon Mar 10 15:00:41 -0700 2008
 manage

"*possessed* the KDE folks to "port" to Windows?"

The idea is that you get people used to the KDE interface while on Windows.  Then the notion of changing to Linux is a lot more thinkable for those for whom such a change seems psychologically difficult. 

How much of a threat is Gnome?
Bruce Perens
Mon Mar 10 15:06:01 -0700 2008
 manage
A question I would like answered, as regards submarine patents, various other folderol that MS can inject into the system to gumn it up sometime in the future

MS tends to not directly attack because of the anti-trust issues. They'd use an intermediary. They can mess it up with patents very thoroughly if they wish. The patents don't even have to be valid, they just have to keep us in court spending enough money until our supporters give up.
How much of a threat is Gnome?
Uncle Entity
Mon Mar 10 23:31:30 -0700 2008
 manage
...they just have to keep us in court spending enough money until our supporters give up.

Novel probably spent a pretty penny on the SCO affair. Follow the money and MS was certainly involved in some way.

My take is they made the deal so something like this wouldn't happen again. Maybe even so they could sell a few more seats because the suits wouldn't have to worry about MS' piracy goon squad coming in and finding patent violations on a corporation's brand new multi-million dollar linux rollout. Now that would cause some serious FUD.

As long as patents exist you either have to play within the system or throw in the towel, no third choice unless you want to pay extra for 'willful' infringment. It's a government granted monopoly after all same as SCO's alleged 'million lines of code' IP was based on this concept.

Oh wait, make that *software* patents as the FOSS community isn't ready for the red pill.
How much of a threat is Gnome?
Bruce Perens
Mon Mar 10 15:36:38 -0700 2008
 manage
I think the real reason is that Qt, the GUI library under KDE, runs on Windows and Trolltech wanted more demonstration applications for the Windows platform. I don't believe that giving Windows users a taste of the KDE applications will do anything toward weaning them from Windows.
How much of a threat is Gnome?
Charles E Hill
Tue Mar 11 06:38:16 -0700 2008
 manage

My anecdote:

My daughter, now 19, started out on Linux/KDE, then switched to Windows.  After about 3 months, wanted back to Linux/KDE.  Her computing is typical to a 19-year old girl: MySpace, her iPod, e-mail, streaming video and music, and some homework (OpenOffice).

Her biggest complaint on Windows?  No Amarok.  She does NOT like iTunes and wanted Amarok back to manage her music collection.  She also finds K3B easier and more functional than the Windows-standard burning software, Nero and Roxio.
How much of a threat is Gnome?
Mathinker
Thu Mar 13 01:38:09 -0700 2008
 manage

> She also finds K3B easier and more functional than the Windows-standard burning software, Nero and Roxio.

If for some reason she can't switch back to Linux, she should check out InfraRecorder which is about as close to K3B for Windows as you can get (AFAIK). It's hosted on SourceForge.
How much of a threat is Gnome?
Sean Diggity
Mon Mar 10 15:41:56 -0700 2008
 manage

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence to support the idea that free software on Windows is a good thing; OSX I know much less about.  I don't know of any hard evidence that it leads to the adoption of free software operating systems, but I'm not sure how that could even be studied.  To me, it seems like free software on non-free operating systems is a good strategic move.  Beyond that, it's good to reduce reliance upon proprietary software for Windows and OSX users, especially because this often means reliance upon pirated software for the youth.

Some positive anecdotes from my own experience:
The "HuskyPC" Windows image at UConn now features a variety of FOSS, and our Software Licensing Group has been mostly receptive to the addition of that software (mainly because it's free to distribute as well as high-quality).  Firefox is now the default and recommended browser at the University, to give one example.  In my office, we've adopted free software for in-house web development for the same reasons (although I do talk about "free as in freedom" with some of my co-workers).  In my graduate classes, I have been able to give recommendations to OSX and Windows users (who are also mainly K-12 teachers), as well as during a recent Windows Vista training.

Friends and family have asked me software recommendations, and I have a ready-made list of good FOSS packages to install on Windows; a growing number of these users have been making the transition to Ubuntu.  The rest are using Pidgin instead of AIM/MSN/Yahoo clients, Firefox instead of IE, InfraRecorder instead of Nero/Roxio, Paint.NET/GIMPshop/Inkscape/Kompozer instead of the Adobe products, etc.

Now that KDE4 is cross-platform, I'll be adding the best KDE apps to the list (e.g. amarok as an iTunes killer).  And that's not to mention cygwin and its related projects (which sadly seem too complex for most Windows users).

Obviously, free software advocates (like myself) want to see users move to free software operating systems.  I think users dissatisfied with Windows and thinking about a Mac are a good target for that, as well as XP users who don't want to make the move to Vista (especially because it means purchasing new hardware).  If users can copy over their Firefox profile or are already used to working in OpenOffice on Windows, it makes it easier to move them to a FOSS distro.  Sometimes this means a slow transition with a dual boot, sometimes a nice, fresh install :)
Above my Pay Grade: Miguel de Icaza and the Novell-Microsoft Agreement
Timothy Brownawell
Mon Mar 10 16:09:46 -0700 2008
 manage
What's this about pay-grade? It's a military term, often misappropriated by civilians who are avoiding an ethical decision.

The concept is that direction is being handed down, "we/you will do this". Where the term comes from doesn't matter, it's applicable to any case where other people get to make decisions and tell you what to do.

It's a good excuse in the military: politicians are accountable for the decision to enter a war, while the military are oath-bound to follow orders at pain of court-martial and possibly execution, and are only accountable for the conduct of the war. But Miguel is no soldier. He's the founder of a company previously merged into Novell, and would not be subject to treason charges or capital punishment over this issue.

It is equally valid in the military and the private sector, it won't stop you from getting hung for war crimes or jailed for white-collar crimes.

Others, like Jeremy Allison, chose to leave the company while Miguel stayed.

I would assume that the issue is more whether these people consider the agreement wrong, or just stupid.

i dunno

Thomas Lord
Tue Mar 11 10:38:57 -0700 2008
 manage

I agree that engineers should have spines. Really, I think there are two things every engineer ought to have: a lot of scrutiny given to their activities and ethics, and a strong spine to DTRT when it comes around.

But, I think your criticism of Miguel is a bit low here and, worse, aimed at the wrong person. If he had been the sort to rock the boat earlier or more often, perhaps quitting or losing gigs in the process, winding up in poverty, many moralists would be saying he got what he deserved for having a harsh attitude and that if he'd wanted influence he ought to have learned to "play nice" for a while. Now he's played nice for a while and the criticism will be that he's lost the right to dissent?

Maybe he shouldn't have said "above my pay grade." More accurate might have been "above my station."

-t

 

Do you have questions about the site? Write to bruce at perens.com . List of all articles we've ever published. Source Code Developer's Documentation RSS XML Sitemap XML News Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict Valid CSS! [Valid RSS]