3 ms·

Apparently people working on open source are just looking for an excuse to pontificate. Same as with Bitwarden, simply raising the issue and then waiting a litt

by chx 2y ago

Apparently people working on open source are just looking for an excuse to pontificate. Same as with Bitwarden, simply raising the issue and then waiting a little for an answer is enough. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e7d548a7fc835f9f3c9cb2e5ed97dfdfa164813f.camel@HansenPartnership.com/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e7d548a7fc835f9f3c9cb2e5ed97dfd... > If your company is on the U.S. OFAC SDN lists, subject to an OFAC sanctions program, or owned/controlled by a company on the list, our ability to collaborate with you will be subject to restrictions, and you cannot be in the MAINTAINERS file. That's all. Both could've been handled better but there's no need to write ten thousand open source philosophy comments on the issue itself, bad articles and HN comments.

mdp2021 2y ago
> simpler [...] That's all Actually it is not, because the confusion shifts to OFAC and the question becomes "why should people employed by companies under those identified by etc. be barred from contributing to the Linux Kernel".
- chx 2y ago
  > why should people employed by companies under those identified by etc. be barred from contributing to the Linux Kernel Because the OFAC literally prohibits a US person receiving anything at all from a sanctioned person. Can't find the specific sanction but here's a typical sample from https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1102 https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1102 > All transactions by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of designated or blocked persons are prohibited unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC, or exempt. These prohibitions include the [...] receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person. Note: for both "U.S. persons" and "blocked person" also consider corporate personhood. It's not just individual people. And so the Linux Foundation, Linus himself and every Linux user in the U.S. can't receive anything at all from the sanctioned so it's no wonder they needed to be excluded. You are welcome to lobby the OFAC to carve out an exemption for open source contributions. Or the White House or the Congress, what do I know who has the authority to write such.
  - mdp2021 2y ago
    > Because the OFAC literally prohibits a US person receiving anything at all from a sanctioned person That does not answer the question - it is circular. "Why does the low forbid X?" // "Because it is the law". [I mistyped 'law' as 'low'. I'll keep it.] Of course the doubts are about whether that action makes sense.
gizmondo 2y ago
Try looking for NetUP in the sanction list, whose employees (including a former one who's actually working for Amazon) were removed. You won't find it. I'm surprised nobody called out James Bottomley on this bullshit answer.

by chx 2y ago

mdp2021 2y ago

> simpler [...] That's all Actually it is not, because the confusion shifts to OFAC and the question becomes "why should people employed by companies under those identified by etc. be barred from contributing to the Linux Kernel".

chx 2y ago
> why should people employed by companies under those identified by etc. be barred from contributing to the Linux Kernel Because the OFAC literally prohibits a US person receiving anything at all from a sanctioned person. Can't find the specific sanction but here's a typical sample from https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1102 https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1102 > All transactions by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of designated or blocked persons are prohibited unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC, or exempt. These prohibitions include the [...] receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person. Note: for both "U.S. persons" and "blocked person" also consider corporate personhood. It's not just individual people. And so the Linux Foundation, Linus himself and every Linux user in the U.S. can't receive anything at all from the sanctioned so it's no wonder they needed to be excluded. You are welcome to lobby the OFAC to carve out an exemption for open source contributions. Or the White House or the Congress, what do I know who has the authority to write such.
- mdp2021 2y ago
  > Because the OFAC literally prohibits a US person receiving anything at all from a sanctioned person That does not answer the question - it is circular. "Why does the low forbid X?" // "Because it is the law". [I mistyped 'law' as 'low'. I'll keep it.] Of course the doubts are about whether that action makes sense.

gizmondo 2y ago

Try looking for NetUP in the sanction list, whose employees (including a former one who's actually working for Amazon) were removed. You won't find it. I'm surprised nobody called out James Bottomley on this bullshit answer.