Thanks for your comments. I have added your response to the story.
--R On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 15:06 -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > OpenBSD Founder Theo deRaadt Has Conflict of Interest With AMD > > By David Marcus, 2007-08-05 03:41:29 > > Section: Technology, Topic: > > > > I formerly had a great deal of respect, bordering on admiration, for > > Theo deRaadt's refusals to compromise his open source principles, even in > > the face of stiff opposition. Although he has occasionally gone > > over-the-top, recommended some frankly very dubious changes to OpenBSD, > > and is regularly arrogant (which is even more annoying because he's so > > often right!), he's always remained consistent in his devotion to the > > cause of GNU/Free Software. > > > > http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/8/2/15233/84896 > > Too bad the author of that article is totally lying. Neither I or the > project have no donation relationship with AMD. > > The only donations the project ever got from AMD were three prototype > AMD64 machines. > > Two were given to us before the AMD64 had even shipped to the public, > so that they could benefit from us running on AMD64 cpus. They were > desktop machines with Athlon HX processors at 1.6GHz. One is in > Sweden, the other in Calgary. One nice thing about those machines is > that the BIOS does no self tests, and therefore boots really really > fast. > > The third machine was a quad-cpu Opteron machine the size of a fridge, > but that was quite a bit later, and it was surplus to us. I think > these were called "Melody" machines, or a name similar to that. > > I am sure that we've had more hardware donations from Intel. I am > also sure we've had WAY MORE donations from VIA/Centaur, even yet. > > I'd love to know that there have been more donations from AMD. If > there had been, perhaps we could spend them on a hackathon in the > future. > > It's amazing how people these days can just invent commentary out of > their ass, and have thousands of people read it and change their bias. > It's slander, that's exactly what it is, and I ask that the editors > take that article down and force some sort of apologize for it.
