James, are there any reasons that having a community-friendly opinion on
the subpoena, national security letter, political risks and related
overheads of using closed source hardware with backdoor coprocessors is an
inappropriate litmus test for the Technology Expert seat on the Board?
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:45 PM, James Hare <jhare(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
This mailing list thread is about the Wikimedia
Foundation recruiting
members for its board and I would like to ask we stick to that, please.
----
James Hare
Associate Product Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
https://wikimediafoundation.org
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:22 AM, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
To follow up on this, Katherine, would you please
state the relative risk
to politically controversial editors of using CPUs without backdoor
coprocessors to host Foundation projects?
Ref.:
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2017/02/03/for-deep-security-
use-arm-avoid-intel-amd-processors/
Are there a corresponding subpoena and national security letter burden
differences in choosing open source hardware without backdoor
coprocessors?
Thank you for considering these questions.
Best regards,
Jim
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:28 PM, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On the original topic of technology advocacy representation on the
Board,
[c]an we
please get someone from the open source hardware community and
Legal to tell us how much we could save in subpoena, hardware, and
overhead
> costs by avoiding backdoors? Has anyone on the Board ever championed
open
> source hardware, since, Sam maybe?
>
> Please see:
>
>
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/5xvn4i/update_
> corebootlibreboot_on_amd_has_ceo_level/
>
>
https://np.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/8aovfb/
> china_has_started_ranking_citizens_with_a_creepy/
>
>
https://teachprivacy.com/why-i-love-the-gdpr/
>
>
https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_
> Technology%2FAnnual_Plans%2FFY2019%2FCDP3%3A_Knowledge_
> Integrity&type=revision&diff=2762601&oldid=2762351
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Philippe Beaudette <
> philippe(a)beaudette.me> wrote:
>
>> And even if such laws do not exist (and I'm no expert), as an
employee I
>> would be gravely concerned about taking
a role with any employer
where I
> knew
that they would be publishing the reason for my departure.
>
> Now, employees may /choose/ to publish a reason (as I did) but to
presume
>> that it would be mandatory (and to be willing to stake your career on
it
> in
> advance) would likely seriously inhibit some candidates from applying.
> When you pair that with the WMF's (relatively) transparent
organization,
I
>> think the two together would be a significant inhibitor to recruiting.
>>
>> Philippe
>>
>> On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Joseph Seddon <
josephseddon(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > "I am unaware of any laws which would prohibit WMF from publishing
the
>> > entirety of executives'
compensation
>> > details including their employment contracts, severance agreements,
>> > and the circumstances
>> > in which their departures happen."
>> >
>> > Pine, I often appreciate your view and input on a range of topics
but
>> to be
>> > blunt if this is your genuine opinion I'm personally rather glad my
>> > employer does not base its HR policies and practices on your
personal
>> > interpretation of employment law.
>> >
>> > Seddon
>> >
>> > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 8:59 PM, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Given Jaime's previous statement on this matter, and my general
> > > dissatisfaction with WMF's level of financial transparency, I am
> > > uncomfortable with his involvement with selecting a new WMF Board
> member
> > > based on his or her finance expertise. I would encourage the Board
to
> > > reconsider Jaime's role in the
selection process, and to place a
> strong
> > > emphasis on identifying a new board member who has experience with
> > > significantly increasing the financial transparency of
organizations.
>> > >
>> > > Pine
>> > > (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>> > >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>