Facebook flags Linux topics as 'cybersecurity threats' — posts and users being blocked
cross-posted from: beehaw.org/post/18210719
ArchivedFacebook is banning posts that mention various Linux-related topics, sites, or groups. Some users may also see their accounts locked or limited when posting Linux topics. Major open-source operating system news, reviews, and discussion site DistroWatch is at the center of the controversy, as it seems to be the first to have noticed that Facebook's Community Standards had blackballed it.
[...]
DistroWatch says that the Facebook ban took effect on January 19. Readers have reported difficulty posting links to the site on this social media platform. Moreover, some have told DistroWatch that their Facebook accounts have been locked or limited after sharing posts mentioning Linux topics.
If you're wondering if there might be something specific to DistroWatch.com, something on the site that the owners/operators perhaps don't even know about, for example, then it seems pretty safe to rule out such a possibility. Reports show that "multiple groups associated with Linux and Linux discussions have either been shut down or had many of their posts removed." However, we tested a few other Facebook posts with mentions of Linux, and they didn't get blocked immediately.
[...]
Addition to include the DistroWatch link: distrowatch.com/weekly-mobile.…
Facebook flags Linux topics as 'cybersecurity threats' — posts and users being blocked
DistroWatch is one of the largest affected organizations.Mark Tyson (Tom's Hardware)
like this
Technology reshared this.
Angel Mountain
in reply to schizoidman • • •I assume Facebook runs on Linux, as does the rest of the internet?
I wish Linux distros use a license that prevents this nonsense.
(I know including ethics in a license is a bad idea, but still...)
like this
giantpaper e FartsWithAnAccent like this.
Fecundpossum
in reply to Angel Mountain • • •“Linux for me, not for thee”
They need the serfs to be hapless surveillance targets, not power users with technological agency.
like this
Eggyhead e FartsWithAnAccent like this.
LainTrain
in reply to Fecundpossum • • •Such a good term for it.
🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖
in reply to Fecundpossum • • •jmcs
in reply to Angel Mountain • • •fmstrat
in reply to Angel Mountain • • •Quacksalber
in reply to schizoidman • • •ObstreperousCanadian
in reply to Quacksalber • • •A_Random_Idiot
in reply to ObstreperousCanadian • • •ouRKaoS
in reply to A_Random_Idiot • • •Schrodinger's Razor:
The answer is both really smart and really stupid, but you won't know which until you look at the source.
ReginaPhalange
in reply to ouRKaoS • • •Microsoft's Schrodinger's Razor
The answer is both really smart and really stupid, but you won't know which until you look at the source, and you can't view it.
Atherel
in reply to ReginaPhalange • • •sugar_in_your_tea
in reply to ouRKaoS • • •ouRKaoS
in reply to sugar_in_your_tea • • •That's the reason I got out of programming. Spending days reinventing the concept of the wheel so you can then reinvent the wheel, and as soon as you finish someone looks at your code and says "why didn't you just add 1 here?"
I didn't make enough money to maintain a drug habit that would have allowed me to keep my sanity.
MalReynolds
in reply to A_Random_Idiot • • •Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity (or incompetence).
This works for individuals, but when it comes to corporations, you really have to ask, why not both?
philosophical adage stating "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)roofuskit
in reply to Quacksalber • • •Kushan
in reply to Quacksalber • • •noorbeast
in reply to schizoidman • • •like this
FartsWithAnAccent, BlueKey e Quantumantics like this.
reksas
in reply to schizoidman • • •like this
FartsWithAnAccent likes this.
Corkyskog
in reply to reksas • • •reksas
in reply to Corkyskog • • •it shouldnt be allowed to go there because it might not be reversable by then. I wish I was just paranoid but way the world is going makes this very plausible.
By the time things like that become evident its like trying to stop a boulder that has been gaining momentum for a while, which is why I wish people were more active about doing something instead of waiting until there is clear evidence that something should be done. This kind of wasnt a direct reply to content of your comment, sorry
_cryptagion [he/him]
in reply to reksas • • •I don't think it was Microsoft, in the past few years they've been being a little chill towards Linux.
As for being an attack, even if they wanted to, they couldn't get rid of Linux. Even the US government can't tell people to stop using it. I mean, they can tell people to stop, but there's no practical way for them to enforce such a law. Most distros out there also distribute via torrent, so even if you took down the websites for all the distros, you couldn't stop the distribution of the ISOs. Not to mention, if they outlawed or restricted Linux, I can't think of anything that would absolutely make the Linux users become very rebellious. Imagine the majority of the hackers, white, gray, and black hat, all of a sudden becoming very angry with the US government. It would be absolute chaos.
Not to mention, there are corporations like Valve and Ubuntu that have invested millions into Linux. I don't believe for a second they would just lay down and not fight the government outlawing something that has become very lucrative for them.
reksas
in reply to _cryptagion [he/him] • • •webghost0101
in reply to schizoidman • • •CORPO-FOSS WAR
The great prophet @pmjv@lemmy.sdf.org has warned us for this.
lemmy.sdf.org/c/unix_surrealis…
like this
FartsWithAnAccent e BlueKey like this.
pmjv
in reply to webghost0101 • • •like this
BlueKey likes this.
misk
in reply to schizoidman • • •Go and read original Distrowatch post and tell me this doesn’t sound like a plausible and way more boring explanation.
like this
arunshah likes this.
fin
in reply to schizoidman • • •sugar_in_your_tea
in reply to fin • • •brucethemoose
in reply to schizoidman • • •axios.com/2025/01/10/mark-zuck…
Way to tackle censorship, Zuck…
The irony is Facebook is a major contributor to a lot of open source software, and Zuckerberg in particular publicly praised the "open" approach of Llama and some other projects. Buts it’s clearly all just self serving, huh?
Krompus
in reply to schizoidman • • •PrettyFlyForAFatGuy
in reply to Krompus • • •like this
Quantumantics likes this.
Krompus
in reply to PrettyFlyForAFatGuy • • •like this
Quantumantics likes this.
PrettyFlyForAFatGuy
in reply to Krompus • • •rumba
in reply to PrettyFlyForAFatGuy • • •Ehh, we still have family and HOA's that only use Facebook.
hell, my kid's school still uses Twitter to communicate that the busses have left.
VitoRobles
in reply to Krompus • • •kibiz0r
in reply to schizoidman • • •like this
Quantumantics likes this.
_cryptagion [he/him]
in reply to kibiz0r • • •like this
Quantumantics likes this.
Ricky Rigatoni
in reply to _cryptagion [he/him] • • •rumba
in reply to Ricky Rigatoni • • •Are we the baddies?
No, no, we're not the... wait what distro you running?
msage
in reply to rumba • • •jj4211
in reply to rumba • • •rumba
in reply to jj4211 • • •TonyTonyChopper
in reply to rumba • • •rumba
in reply to TonyTonyChopper • • •probably2high
in reply to _cryptagion [he/him] • • •john89
in reply to kibiz0r • • •The powers that be know the threat free software is to their control.
Richard Stallman was right when he said "free software, free society."
cy_narrator
in reply to schizoidman • • •_cryptagion [he/him]
in reply to cy_narrator • • •psycho_driver
in reply to _cryptagion [he/him] • • •NevermindNoMind
in reply to _cryptagion [he/him] • • •naught101
in reply to NevermindNoMind • • •_cryptagion [he/him]
in reply to schizoidman • • •like this
Quantumantics likes this.
Teknikal
in reply to _cryptagion [he/him] • • •-> @jrgd@lemmy.zip
in reply to Teknikal • • •Adequacy.org || Is Your Son a Computer Hacker?
web.archive.orgTeknikal
in reply to -> @jrgd@lemmy.zip • • •Revan343
in reply to Teknikal • • •That's exactly what it is
vonbaronhans
in reply to Revan343 • • •Probably not in the sense that the average American uses the word "communist", which is more about their remembered history of authoritarian regimes of the USSR and mid 20th century China and those sorts. Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, and the atrocities thereof.
Linux is communist insofar as it is open source, and therefore less affected or tied up in capitalistic practices. Capitalists still use and contribute to Linux, but often those contributions go back into the commons of the open source code.
You probably know all that, I'm just feeling long winded.
Revan343
in reply to vonbaronhans • • •vonbaronhans
in reply to Revan343 • • •Phoenixz
in reply to _cryptagion [he/him] • • •Mushroomm
in reply to schizoidman • • •Hupf
in reply to Mushroomm • • •- YouTube
youtu.beLordKitsuna
in reply to schizoidman • • •probably2high
in reply to LordKitsuna • • •john89
in reply to probably2high • • •You're definitely onto something. This isn't the first time corporations have targeted FOSS, but because Linux is gaining in popularity we're starting to see the old FUD and EEE tactics come back into play.
Once we start seeing more normal people using it, primarily women, we'll also see tons of misinformation that exists to sow the seeds of doubt in their minds.
Probably something like the old "mac vs. PC" commercials but with "windows vs. linux"
probably2high
in reply to john89 • • •This is a hilarious thought, because you know Windows Chad couldn't get through two sentences before vomiting out something about AI "Linux can't even have Copilot baked into the fiber of every piece of the system like Windows does, Linux is just an old fashioned computer."
Might be the one thing that would actually bring the year of the Linux desktop.
fallowseed
in reply to schizoidman • • •Spezi
in reply to fallowseed • • •labbbb2
in reply to schizoidman • • •ne0n
in reply to schizoidman • • •john89
in reply to ne0n • • •I don't use facebook, but I'm seeing Linux brought up way more among the consumer tech-crowd.
Looks like they all want to fit in with each other by resisting "windows surveillance."
Personally, I think it's pretty stupid where they decide to draw the line, almost like they're not even making the decision for themselves. But I'll still accept it if it causes more people to drop proprietary software.
viking
in reply to ne0n • • •Doolbs
in reply to schizoidman • • •This is the first shot
Even though almost every big tech company uses Linux on the backend they don't want you to use it.
Think of Peacock not letting people running Linux be able to use their application.
It's free and open source, and the powers to be don't want anybody to have that.
You can do what you want with it if you are willing to learn about it. Governments don't like that.
I may be wrong, but I see more of this coming.
kent_eh
in reply to schizoidman • • •