On topic 1.2 google blocks tor-fs-community

Hi there,

here I am back. Some days pasted.


And now I am here to deliver my result for a case. I tried to reach the needed community resources how it was told to me: By running to a internet cafe initially once and then being able of connecting the habitual way to the community. The result of the story is, that I – first – failed. I maid some photos of the screen of the monitor of that internet cafe I state the experiment. Google requires one to bring him an anonymize  phone and and phone credit. I guess one should buy such things somewhere, maybe in the shadowed economic branch. Anyway you use it once and then throw it away. And I mean this can considerably not be part on an environment that supports the fundamental ecological human rights? Can not it? One might comment on the process that not even the speech on the responsibility of this ecologically to be disapproved trash amounting had not begun. Free software meant trash amounting, could some object? Is it still then anything, good, gossiply it is to whistle?

That’s on the finding to be delivered. So go deliver it, would some mean. But have a look about what have really happened. I had a technical problem. Yes, it blocked my proceeding for various hours, I guess 3, 4h. And it was an old problem. So to say I pull the ticket to be fouled and trying to repair the underlying problem, here by this way. What happened here with me? One would ask? Who could you trust, one could even also ask. That’s the story:

When I wanted to classically connect my android phone with my my Linux computer in order to present the photos on the net, happened what? Yes quiz times, who knows? Bi, ba? Bug. Yes Bug. Two Linux system and they cannot connect via usb. Classically not?

I tried it as always considered the classical way, something that is quasi something as one of my tool boxes for everything and everybody. First root console, everybody moans early, but that is of what consists obviously the front line between linux interest and economic public player interests. At least the result of it consists of a present defunct facility. Therefore root here.


and the first we saw dmesg log reporter shew no device name for so call mass storage devices, such as the laymen could identify as an “usb stick auto mounting”-device. That does not not work, here in linux, why? The answer it unpleasing: It is there is no bug, there had never been one. Only the presentation of other players had build up a speech which misleads ours all imagination in routinewisely. So we come all as cattle and accuse the linuxers for a bug that does not exist, which is – first – surely enough to be excluded from further discussions just for of having been now disqualified. Yes, it should be a feature, then. For that linux has no solution up to now. It is all because the error of expecting a computer with a mass storage to be connected rather than a two computers to connect, whereas one computer should read the mass storage it holds. Something for a row of users should be deemed as incriminatingly difficult, – just even to think of. So the first and easiest answer to this, is after some reasoning: Take the one sd-card from the android phone and plug it in your computers sd slot.


It is the problem of the perceived bug, which by nothing less a problem for both users as developers with just declaring the bug non existent. Hopefully we cope with communication problems of such some day by itself. Cause the companies propaganda may miss its target and gets to die out simply.


Here someone denounces this unavoidable misunderstanding and gives a solution? Just for the sake of curiosity, lets follow this. Is it wörth to adopt such a system: modern MTP-Protokoll (Media Transfer Protokoll)? Is it worth learning something over it?

In this article one experiences much unappetizing things. For example:

Der große Nachteil aus Sicht des Linux-Anwenders ist, dass MTP ursprünglich von Microsoft entwickelt wurde und unter Linux nur eingeschränkt unterstützt wird. Es gibt zwar Lösungen wie mtpfs, aber der Zugriff schlug in diesem Artikel unter Linux Gentoo und einem Samsung Galaxy S2 mit der Fehlermeldung “PTP_ERROR_IO: failed to open session, trying again

The article writers tried a work around which helped them for android linux user interface of google on version samsung device number communication others than mine. So I bet the “idiots prevents us from delivering a proper system”-once-more-sign, should be collocated on top of the stack and not under it. That at least is my humble bet.

And yes one could ask “who could you trust”. One would ask who is google: On the one hand they give money for free software freedom -promotion. With the other hand they discriminate linux using it. Had they even no money for delivering a proper code for its solution team and an outstanding number of humans could connect from fs-system to fs-system, without any occasion of recurring on non-free products? What should one answer other than: “Welcome to Normality.”


– Now: uff, I need a pause. Here. This is incriminating=belastend here. I notice the sd-card from android is mini, but I need a card size normal, so I got to know where to seek for an adapter. Somewhere. I hopefully have one there, if not: I needed to buy one.

In the end I found one of such adapters in my black pocket deeply stacked in the bottom of the counter. And mounted as Mister Tootle the pictures to here:

20150510_132700 20150510_132341 20150510_131803

This screenshot prove that nobody on earth can connect to such free software resources anonymously. Fact that nobody knows. Recognizes. Kind of secret one might suggest? Something that comes commonly combined with an taboo? Where is it? We awaiting you great taboo, that you prevents us from speaking freely? Where are you? Taboo, we are awaiting your orders.

Adjustment of situation model: If it is a taboo it is not necessary one that bases in one color or another on some brain wash and that is easily done with by ignoring it. On the level of industries and devices we could as well nowadays stumble with an https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omert%C3%A0#Funktion.

So in the end one asks constructively: What holds us from declaring such a phenomenon as a bug and then fix it?

“How could one check that is then: fixed once?” might one cleverly ask oneself. Is such a might be worth of being complained-complaint processed orderly in this apparatus? Could there be perceived then other measurements to meet the target? Others that I am simply not aware of? How do these fsf(e)-people normally function, how could these fsf(e) could function to meet my target were the exact general question?

The situation is uncomfortable: if I ask this here, there is no safety that actually someone answers. And I am not comfortable in world where bugs like exist that are declared as “never to be fixed” to mine.

So now having done that – we after a further pause – gonna focus on posting the: google maintained free software mailing list tor users block.

Till then, see you later.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s