Nikolai Bezroukov. Portraits of Open Source Pioneers

For readers with high sensitivity to grammar errors access to this page is not recommended :-)

Chapter 3: Prince Kropotkin of Software

(Richard Stallman and the War of Software Clones)

version 0.98

Contents

• Timeline

• Introduction

• Philosopher

  • Stallman as the founder of Software Anarchism

  • "True Believers" and Utopian Visions

  • Personality

    • Early years

    • Lab Dweller

• Programmer

  • Assuming the Role of the King of Software Clones: GNU Project as the Opening Shot in the War of Software Clones

  • Emacs and XEmacs

  • GCC period

  • Failure with Hurd

• Prophet: Building Free Software Temple and the Emergence of Stallmanism as a Software Cult

  • GNU General Public License

  • FSF: a very closed organization that promoted free/open software

  • Fighting Software Patents

  • Linux schism -- commercially sold GPLed software undermined GNU project and FSF

  • New Name for Free Software and the growth of RMS' appetite for interpreting GPL License

  • The Start of GPL Jihad

  • KDE GPL-purity saga
    FSF fiasco with KDE Jihad: support of Gnome rose serious question of conflict of interests

  • Sun Driver Kit and Napster

  • GPL, Government and private companies: Allchin's critique of GPL discrimination of Commercial Developers

  • GPL cloning and the danger of GPL-contributed stagnation

  • European Critique of Stallman's Brand of Software Anarchism

  • Craig Mundie critique of GPL, Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative and indirect support for BSD licensing

  • Radicalization as a proven method of destruction of good will

  • Microsoft's "Twenty four nails in the GPL coffin" FAQ

  • An attempt of hostile takeover of glibc

  • Defense of liberties

  • SCO puts an interesting stance on IBM adoption of GPLed Linux

  • Negative PR hammer of GPL as a source of income for FSF

• Conclusions

• Webliography

• Supplements:

  • Interviews

  • RMS related humor

Timeline

• 1969-70 Development of the Unix operating system begins at AT&T's Bell Laboratories.

Emacs period

• 1971 Stallman joins the Artificial Intelligence Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He works with ITS -Incompatible Time-Sharing System.
• 1974 Stallman got a magna cum laude degree in physics in Harvard (1970 to 1974).
• 1975 Cons Lisp machine was created by Greenblatt
• 1975 Emacs for Cons
• 1977 Symbolics was formed
• 1979 ??? Grennblatt left Symbolics over disagreements with Noftsker and forms LMI
• 1982-1983 ???may be myth propagated by Steven Levy??? Stallman helps LMI in its fight with Symbolics by reverse engineering Symbolics OS and put enhancements into LMI OS

Start of GNU project: the Opening Shot in the War of Software Clones

• 1983 Stallman resigns from MIT to start the GNU project with the explicit goal of re-implementing , Unix as a "free" operating system. The name stands for "GNU is Not Unix."
• 1984 Steven Levy "Hackers" book is published with a chapter devoted to RMS that presented him in an extremely favorable light.
• 1984 Stallman published a rewritten version of Gosling's Emacs (GNU Emacs, where G stand for Goslings) as "free" software (Goslings sold the rights for his code to a commercial company), and launches the Free Software Foundation (FSF) to support the GNU project. One of the first program he decided to write is a C compiler that became widely knows as gcc.

GCC period

• 1985 The first version of GCC was able to compile itself.
• 1985 GNU Manifesto published

GPL period

• 1989 FSF introduces a General Public License (GPL). GPL is also known as 'copyleft'. Stallman redefines the word "free" in software to mean "GPL compatible"
• 1990 As the president of the League for Programming Freedom (organization that fight software patterns), Stallman is given a $240,000 fellowship by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
• 1991 ACM Grace Hopper Award for developing Emacs.
• 1991 Linus Torvalds started his development of Linux kernel.
• 1992 XEmacs fork. The first blow against RMS Bonaparte tendencies.
• 1994 First official Linux version 1.0 kernel released. Linux already has about 500,000 users. Hurd efforts became doomed.

Political activism period. Development stalled, OS kernel development stalled and Linux took the lead.

• 1996 Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, awards Stallman an honorary doctorate. Hurd is dead, XEmacs became more popular that Emacs.
• 1997 GCC fork. Second and more serious blow to the idea of FSF as the center of free software universe. FSF lost all its importance as a development center for free software. It's no longer a primary GCC maintainer, or XEmacs maintainer.
• 1997 Eric Raymond paper "The Cathedral and The Bazaar" was delivered at the Linux Congress 97 conference. Reformist, slightly anti-Stallman and anti-GNU open source movement was created. The term open source software largely replaced the term free software.
• 1997 Stallman started Great License War. The first skirmish was jihad against KDE.
• 1998 Netscape released the source code for Navigator on controversial terms. The event that was used by Eric Raymond to publicize an Open Source movement as distinct from GNU -- the movement that offers a much friendlier face to the business world, than FSF with its Anarchist view of intellectual property. .
• 1998 Stallman and Torvalds are given Pioneer awards by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Torvalds moved to the USA and gave in one year more interviews that for the rest of his life. As a public speaker he almost completely displaced RMS. Linux has approximately seven millions users. Intel and Netscape invested in Red Hat. The fight for GNU/Linux as a proper name of a combination of Linux kernel with GNU products is over: RMS lost it and the standard name remained just Linux.
• 1999 The year of Linux IPOs. Red Hat IPO produced first Linux millionaires like Robert Yong, Linus Torvalds, "surprised by wealth" Eric Raymond, and several others. RMS declined RH stock offering.
• 2000 GNU project morphs into almost purely political organization without any significant development activities. Donation of SUN StarOffice to GPL (dual licensing) became the largest GPLed project in history. It also eliminated weaker volunteer efforts to create a free alternative of MS Office. Radicalization of the RMS agenda. RMS critique of LGPL as an inferior to GPL license. Final stage of the jihad against KDE. Transmeta IPO signaled the end of Linux IPO wave. Linus Torvalds got an "undisclosed amount" of Transmeta stock. Jihad against KDE ended by Qt adopting a GPL license. Gnome was adopted by Sun and other big Unix players as a new Unix standard desktop environment. Caldera acquired SCO. SCO Unix became the first victim of Linux among proprietary Unix brands.
• 2001 Licenses war has first victims. The slide of stock market hurt Linux companies and almost eliminated prev. year "mass Linux enthusiasm" among investors. VA Linux and Transmeta lost their CEOs. Microsoft vice president Allchin pointed out that government sponsored software cannot be released under GPL and that GPL might stifle innovation. IBM adopted Linux as a unifying desperate products lines OS and due to this managed to revive VM. Sales of mainframes with VM/Linux instead of MVS or VM/CMS were up almost 20%. The draft of GPL v3 was released. Proved to be dead born.
• 2002 An apologetic book Free as in Freedom about Stallman was published by O'Reilly. The number of "free" software licenses far exceed the number of fingers on both hands. The surreal world of free and incompatible software licenses the Stallman helped to create really flourished far beyond his widest dreams. Age of "free and open" lawsuits got really close.
• 2003 SCO vs. IBM lawsuit started. GPL got under microscope due to IBM alleged transfer of proprietary code into GPLed OS (Linux).
• 2005. Price fixing lawsuit against GPL threatens to undermine Stallman's legacy.

Introduction

Richard M. Stallman "The King of Software Cloning", "The High Priest Of Free Software", the originator of "The Great Free License War" or simply RMS is (first and foremost) a founder of the GNU project: the first project explicitly oriented on creation of existing commercial software clones and first of all Unix OS. approximately in 1998.

Since mid-90th GNU project was by-and-large superseded by Linux project and movement but still has its own historical place and importance.

RMS also is the main contributor to the redefinition of the word "free" in the English language. From now on the meaning of "free" is enriched by a special dimension of "GNU-free" or "GPL-free" which is essentially a freedom to work for Stallman's private charity or even simply "approved by RMS" (see below KDE jihad story). And to receive in return (in most, but not all cases, see the chapter devoted to Linus Torvalds, who managed to beat RMS in this poker) just appreciation of one's efforts. This new, "free as in GNU" meaning of the word used to be quite popular in most university campuses in 90th of the last century. Stallman also happened to be an original and influential Utopian philosopher and the leader of the first organized (and partially successful) software cult.

In this part of the book I am mainly interested in the dynamic of his evolution as a "true believer" and parallel evolution of the "GNU-free software" movement that he created, and that he, for some time represented ,until it was absorbed into the newer "open source" movement at the end of the last century, the transformation that led to rejection of RMS as well as moving on the forefront of the movement of new leaders. The irony of all forms of extremism is that they inevitably lead to results that are completely unanticipated by the originators and often are in conflict with their initial goals.

That happened to almost all Stallman's projects : GPL, GCC and even Emacs.

Among the questions that are of interest to me are:

• How "GNU-free software" movement managed to obtain the critical mass ?

• How Stallman attracts followers? What kind of people "GNU church" has appeal to?

• How does RMS as the leader of a mass pseudo-religious (or techno-religion, if you wish) movement keep his followers in the fold?

• How "The Great Free License War" was started and became the root case of FSF disintegration and demise?

Stallman's doctrine (Stallmanism) is another interesting point of exploration. One obvious problem with Stallman's doctrine is his approach to authors. The church of GNU denounces copyright doctrine as an evil plot, unless it is useful to fend off attacks on the legality of GPL. See for example his article "Science must 'push copyright aside'" published in Nature in 1991 [Stallman1991].

Of course Stallman views drifted with the time, but still this denunciation of copyright can be considered as an immanent part of Stallmanism. That's why outside of his its anti-American (or, more correctly, software anarchism) stance it never has strong following in Europe and produced a very mixed level of enthusiasm (if at all) in Eastern Europe. For Eastern Europe analogy with one particular political doctrine was especially transparent, and thus the level of skepticism was much higher that say in the USA or France.

European tradition presuppose that the author's creativity and effort in bringing about his creative work creates a claim that must be recognized because it is only just to do so. Thus the author has some immanent rights for his creation. Although it is a more European than American law notion, it is not completely foreign to the American law. For example in the US, artists' moral rights have been invoked to prevent the destruction of artistic works. But the assumption of the creator moral rights creates a very serious problem for RMS. Without moral rights, it's much easier to say "copyright is bad, freedom is good".

Only if copyright is an economic bargain favoring the privileged few, it has no intrinsic, independent value. If we assume that copyright has some intrinsic ethical value, this hypothesis alone instantly undermines the foundation of GPL. In best traditions of revolutionaries that threat was sometimes taken RMS too emotionally and the problem is made more acute by Stallman's attempts to denounce alternative approaches. Yet, despite all RMS rumblings, the actual trend in copyright law has been in the other direction: extending it to new areas (like it was extended from books to films and then to software), and it is not clear where it will end.

It is important to understand that Stallman played an important part is launching of "Great Free License War" that has pretty destructive influence on the community. While naive or crooked authors often point to the fact that, say, 80% of Freshmeat-listed software project use GPL they conveniently forget to note that 80% of Freshmeat projects are dead wood, an attempt to create another useless program or clone of the known program "because I just can do so". If we talk about the projects that reached critical mass (let's say top 10% of open source projects"), here the picture is different and GPL is just one of the many licenses. Developers who are involved in such projects understand pretty well that GPL incompatibility with most other licenses creates serious obstacles to code sharing, and make contributions from corporate developers much less likely.

"The Great Free License War" was first unleashed as a GPL crusade and initial shots were fired by RMS himself by releasing to the unsuspecting world his newer "completely incompatible" with every other license GNU 2.0 license. But it soon become a global war with multiple mutually incompatible licenses participating in it instead of countries. This "license separatism" movement that RMS created and the most prominent figure of which he was from the very beginning is probably the most controversial part of RMS heritage.

Another interesting issue with Stallmanism is his Romantic ideology of software authorship: an individual genius (possibly working part time in McDonalds to support himself) creates entirely original work, has no debt of gratitude to anyone, no obligations to any organization, and at the same time has no moral rights to all his work and are obliged to bestow them to the public charity (that is accidentally supervised by RMS) getting nothing but respect in return. This idea of sacrifice make Stallmanism very close to fundamentalist religious sect. There are two major similarities between fundamentalist religious sects and Stallmanism:

• Each screens out the less zealous (sacrifice makes the sect a paragon of redistribution and mutual insurance; it also helps screen out potential free-riders-those who might take advantage of the sect's benefits without contributing their fair share. The test of belong is "Show me the code" as Linus Torvalds used to say).
• Each discourages members from mingling with outsiders (norms against contribution to commercial project serves the same purpose as non-standard clothing of many sects or shaved heads of the Hare Krishnas by making it harder for the club members to stray from the fold.).
• The modern culture is an anathema. This is true for most fundamentalist sects. It is rejected the same way Stallmanism rejected evil Windows. But was is interesting this rejection is very hypocritical. for example Stallman does not reject evil Intel proprietary CPUs, because this is very inconvenient to him. But in essence Intel CPUs are more closed then Windows and if he wants to be consistent he needs to limit himself to SPARC as the only open hardware platform in wide use.

Also RMS essentially concealed the main idea of the movement under the "freedom rulez" propaganda: the idea was not to write, but to rewrite popular commercial products, using as a launch pad existing free implementations and to became "The Republic of Free Software Clones" with his own private charity as Central Committee of the Party. In a way the idea was an institutionalized plagiarism because he wants to re-implement and absorb even the projects that were already created by other people for free use and with source freely available but under different licenses, especially BSD license. Actually destructive role of RMS played for BSD project and the level of hypocrisy that he demonstrated in treating BSD developers is the subject of separate discussion and research.

The idea behind software cloning is to write a new piece of software that duplicates the appearance and functionality of the original (usually commercial) software as closely as possible. "GNU-style" software cloning involves the case when source code for the original software is not available and somebody wants to recreate the same software with source code available. Software cloning does not imply source code copying. However, software cloning goes way beyond simply implementing a similar user interface. The goal in cloning is to create a new software program that duplicates all of the functionality of the original software in the same way as the original software, and presents that functionality in a nearly identical package with the identical or very close interface.

Also RMS emphasis on contribution of free software by individuals from all over the Usenet (later Internet) was somewhat suspect from the very beginning: while individual contribution is the name of the game in software, individual genius phase in software development is over if it ever existed.

Computers from the beginning were quite an expensive toys and only those who were under umbrella of some rich organization were able to write programs for them and only privileged few has the access to the underling free development communication infrastructure (including Usenet and Internet connections). But this is a fair game as long as their activity is not undermining the very products that permits the company to provide this infrastructure. Unfortunately a lot of people who create software clones "just for the fun of it" or because they are for some reason are frustrated with the their current situation in the organization (which is pretty typical for large organizations) do not seem to realize that their actions undermine the very organization that is providing the infrastructure for their projects.

Most large software projects are done by teams working for organizations with multi-million budgets and it is not clear whether such a project can be accomplished without financial incentives and strict discipline imposed on developers by such an environment and professional managers (not all managers are Dilbert's PHB-style suckers, they can be extremely talented themselves, as was the case with Brooks, who supervised the development of OS/360, or, say, Bell Labs managers who supervised the development of Unix).

The individual geniuses or even loosely coupled network of individual geniuses are the most important asset of any project and the prerequisite of it being successful, but clearly the level of satisfaction of talented people with their working place vary dramatically. Still in no way the real or imaginable dissatisfaction with the current workplace situation should be used to funnel their creative energy in a way that helps to destroy the organization that provides them a place to work (wonderful or not).

Universities are completely another game in town. Here creation of free software is just another way to be engaged in academic life. Still the selection of license is an important issue. One important requirement is attribution in case of reuse, the cornerstone of academic ethics. That's why GPL was not very popular in universities and for many years BSD licensed software was the most prominent; only huge infusions of money into GPLed software projects during the Linux gold rush changed the balance. The second less evident issue is discrimination against reuse of developed software by private companies, if only because such companies are important contributors to the university funds.

Also it is important to understand that large software projects are pretty harmful for the health of people involved (note the Stallman himself can no longer program, supposedly because of repetitive stress injury to one of his hands) and are extremely exhausting and even dangerous for the mental health. You need to be driven and really work on it day and night. And unlike academic projects which, even if they are of substantial size, are mostly proof of the new concept type, any large project require a lot of maintenance and after a couple of years is usually far from being fun. So the issue of compensation is far from being moot. In this regard software development is not unlike chemical industry. Would anybody like to work for free in the chemical industry ? Inhale fumes just for the fun of it ?

Like many revolutionaries before him, Stallman became quite a rich man as the result of his free software crusade. Although exact figures are difficult to obtain, his personal worth can be estimated as more then $500K. That's much less then, say, Linus Torvalds' personal wealth but enough for a pretty comfortable living of a single man in his 50th. Not all participants in free software movement that suffered health problem because of their excessive zeal in free software projects earlier in life find themselves in this situation in their 50th.

NEWS CONTENTS

• 20210330 : Free Software Foundation leaders and supporters desert sinking ship - ZDNet ( Mar 30, 2021 , www.zdnet.com )
• 20191022 : Richard Stallman Defies Push By 27 GNU Project Developers To End His Leadership ( Oct 22, 2019 , news.slashdot.org )

Old News ;-)

[Mar 30, 2021] Free Software Foundation leaders and supporters desert sinking ship - ZDNet

Mar 30, 2021 | www.zdnet.com

Free Software Foundation leaders and supporters desert sinking ship

Major corporate supporters abandon the FSF, while board members and leaders resign from the organization, as the outrage over Richard M. Stallman being allowed back on the board continues to grow.

[Oct 22, 2019] Richard Stallman Defies Push By 27 GNU Project Developers To End His Leadership

Oct 22, 2019 | news.slashdot.org

(zdnet.com) 386

Posted by EditorDavid on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:34PM from the GNUisances dept. "27 GNU project maintainers and developers have signed on to a joint statement asking for Richard Stallman to be removed from his leadership role at GNU," writes Slashdot reader twocows .

The statement argues that "Stallman's behavior over the years has undermined a core value of the GNU project : The empowerment of all computer users. GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to."

The Register reports: The GNU maintainer memo follows a statement issued by the Free Software Foundation on Sunday. The FSF said that because Stallman founded the GNU Project and the FSF, and until recently had led both, the relationship between the two organizations remains in flux . "Since RMS resigned as president of the FSF, but not as head of GNU, the FSF is now working with GNU leadership on a shared understanding of the relationship for the future," the FSF said.

Matt Lee, a free and open-source software developer and one of the 18 [now 27] signatories of the joint statement, said that the two organizations have been intertwined for so long -- the FSF provides GNU with financial, technical, and promotional assistance -- that their relationship is confusing. "For example, the GNU GPL is published by the FSF, not GNU," Lee said. "Key infrastructure that GNU relies on is owned by the FSF, and used by GNU and non-GNU projects alike."

ZDNet reports : Stallman's only comment on this situation so far has been : "As head of the GNU Project, I will be working with the FSF on how to structure the GNU Project's relationship with the FSF in the future."

LWN.net notes that the next day Stallman issued an additional statement: As Chief GNUisance, I'd like to reassure the community that there won't be any radical changes in the GNU Project's goals, principles and policies.

I would like to make incremental changes in how some decisions are made, because I won't be here forever and we need to ready others to make GNU Project decisions when I can no longer do so. But these won't lead to unbounded or radical changes.

But the Register notes that Stallman's personal web site has also changed the first headline across the top of its page.

It used to promote the Free Software Foundation's giving guide , saying "If you participate in the commercial ritual of end-of-the-year presents, please avoid the digital products that would mistreat the people you give them to."

It nows says: I continue to be the Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project.I do not intend to stop any time soon.

Recommended Links

Softpanorama Recommended

Top articles

Sites

Etc

Society

Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

Quotes

War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes :  Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce :  Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

Bulletin:

Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

History:

Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS :  Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development :  Scripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

Classic books:

The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month :  How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

Most popular humor pages:

Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D

The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

Last Modified: November 02, 2019