You can find all of these videos as written articles, plus some extra content, at https://thelibre.news You can the channel grow by donating to the following platforms: Paypal: https://paypal.me/ni...
We need them here now more then ever unfortunately. But yeah, stay safe and spread out for sure.
They're the only thing I wear tee shirts for, have stickers all over my gear, and talk about way too often. Underappreciated champions of the people and nobody outside of these kinds of circles knows who the hell they are.
So I guess funds were cut, but then the courts ruled the president doesn't have authority to do this himself since the funds were allocated by congress, and so as of now they have been restored, although congress needs to approve them every year and there's concern they might not do so for next year.
Until Trump ignores court orders and cuts funding anyway.
Supreme Court will probably rule that while congress has the power of the purse, the president has the power of canceling the credit cards in the wallet, because fuck you that's why
Well, this is what the relevant part of the video says:
USAGM disbursed $7.5M to these entities, in "what seemed to be an effort to delay the hearing or woo the judge". Regardless, the latter has sided against USAGM, and just a few days ago, the agency has decided to back off and release the funds for the 2025 fiscal year.
He's doing a suck job of it. The things he's gutting are pennies towards his dark-souled oligarch masters. Cutting small government projects like the NEA, PBS or like FOSS grants is only used as an appeal to fiscal responsibility conservatives that aren't willing to cut into old-people benefits like Social Security and military sacred cows. Not because gutting tiny projects does anything useful, rather it gives the vibe that representatives are doing something.
This is an appeal to the imbicile MAGA though the tech bros might have specific FOSS projects that compete with their own commercial offerings. Not enough to cut all FOSS grants, though.
I can hear ypu americanness from behind the screen darling.
Free means freedom not "no payments" it takes huge money to develop and maintain software and infrastructures like these. So they need funding to survive.
While it sucks that FOSS projects will have their funding sapped, let's remember why the open source model is used in the first place: it can't be bought. If it goes down, someone will just fork the last known repository and have it up and running again.
If you use these services, please donate once or regularly if you're able. They are free as in puppy, not beer - dev work costs money. I would guess many people using Tor/privacy tools are tech savvy enough to have financial comfort due to a good career. If you do it you're doing an everyday act of rebellion for the sake of progress!!!
This is not an example of leopards eating someone's face. Unless those projects threw their support behind Trump's admin, and I have no reason to believe they did, this is simply falling victim to fascist idiots.
Not the one you answered to, but I think I can understand the idea of US funding having been a toxic source of dependency, and it being better in the long run to get money elsewhere. That "elsewhere" is a good question, though.
Just me, personally, my dream would be an international fund, carried by the UN or maybe an independent NGO, that can get funding from both private and public funds, that prioritises free internet access the way the WHO prioritises health. But I think that's still far off.
How could you read it that way ? I'm saying eventually they were going to conflict with the interests of the US (oligarchs and techbros) and lose funding. Shocker, it happened under cheeto.
Does this government funding really ever result in a hands off approach. In the case of Tor I wouldn't be surprised that funding comes with backdoor access.
TOR fundamentally cannot be backdoored. The US government funds it because more traffic on the network helps mask the traffic coming from CIA agents and the like
"In response, the Tor Project acknowledged that one user of an outdated application called Ricochet was likely deanonymized through a “guard discovery attack.” However, they emphasized that this vulnerability has since been patched in current versions of Tor software."