rt/Reticulum
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/markqvist/Reticulum.git synced 2026-10-25 18:40:17 -04:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Added history folder

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Mark Qvist 2026-09-19 16:13:01 +02:00
parent e699bb23f1
commit 484cf2d1a5
No known key found for this signature in database
1 changed files with 317 additions and 0 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

317
docs/history/2026_09_18_Yes_I_am_Angry.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,317 @@
# Yes, I am Angry
Polite, but deeply malicious bullshit is a much worse evil than the coarse variant, so you will have to excuse my bluntness here.
Unfortunately, the only way to respond, as a normal, healthy human being, to something so astronomically tasteless and disgraceful as this, is not in kind, but in honest outrage, modulated to some degree with sarcasm and humor (the dark variant, yes).
Because *this* shit, this *is* outrageous.
The man that produced the "article" in question here is either so disposessed of intelligence that his head is teetering on the brink of collapsing into a singularity, or he is deeply malicious.
If any rational explanation can produce an alternative, I am all ears.
**To the footsoldiers of the "cause" the article represents:**
Let's get this show on. Let's see the barrage of new smear pieces you can prompt forth from the fuel I provide you here. It'll fit straight into your theater production, so: Be my fucking guest, and dig your own hole of delusion, mistrust and ridicule even deeper than it alraedy is.
**To anyone else**
Consider this a paranthetical, sarcastic (and for me, cathartic) aside in the whole of the corpus of writings I have published, and weigh it in the context of the rest of those 200,000 words or so, together with the frustration and exhaustion that inevitably entails from dealing with this same fabricated campaign and its regurgitated nonsense for *years* on end, while trying to do constructive and helpful work; and not expecting anything else than basic decency in return.
I am no angel, not perfect, flawed in many ways, but I certainly ain't afraid to show that I am a real human being, with the capacity for anger, and that in this case, the anger is fed by the most bitter form of disappointment and sadness in what people will stoop to for influence and attention.
[This is the article in question](https://gaggl.com/blogs/2026-09-05-enclosure-by-good-intentions/)
[This is the polite, measured analysis of the *generalized* phenomenon, all 18,000 words of it](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html)
*This*, right here, is the real, human and honest response. And the only sane one there could ever be, lest madness be allowed to descend wholly.
While this is *written* as a response to you, Leo Gaggl, you absolute degenerate piece of fecal matter, it is really a response to the phenomenon *as a whole*.
I chose your article because it is such a complete and rich example of the madness. What I attack here is *conduct*.
Leo, according to his own evident preference, is the actor on the theatre stage, and I will treat him as such, in the play that follows.
---
> So when Mark Qvist, the person behind the [Reticulum](https://gaggl.com/blogs/2026-02-25-lpwan-meshes-reticulum-deep-dive/) mesh networking stack
Color me surprised, the link to "Reticulum" doesn't even point to the repo, but to *another* one of your sloporated "articles".
Don't wanna accidentially lead users to anywhere they could discover the truth about things now, would we? Like commit histories, the *actual* Reticulum community, that kind of stuff. Nah, nah...
> ... replaced its MIT licence with a custom one built to keep the project out of corporate AI training sets and out of weapons systems
Which happened 18 months ago. *Fuuuunny* timing bringing it up again now, right where it's [mighty fucking convenient](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#a-persistent-but-fragile-triad) for your slop-coding license-violating friends, don't you think?
Interesting you don't bring up *any* of the extensive argumentation made against the same old points you recycle here, but act as they simply never existed. Or maybe you just chose to completely ignore them in the service of your God-given mission?
> Reticulum is now marked non-free by Debian
Which is excellent, since debian users will not have to use old, and potentially outdated versions of a package that updates *fast* everytime it is required.
And "now"? Weasel wording.
> kept out of the main F-Droid repository
RNS? In the F-Droid repository? How would that even work? People install the base stack as an *app* and run it... how? Are we going to bundle a command line or `systemd` with that? Do you have any idea about how software actually works?
If people want to do that, open Termux and type `pip install rns`. Done. Has been possible and documented since the dawn of the project.
All actual *apps* that use Reticulum are distributed as APKs, ready to install and download, offline, from their websites, over Reticulum itself, or whatever platform they prefer. Commercially or for free. That's the point.
> It cannot be combined with GPL-licensed code
Cry me a river. Not my fault that people choose to use viral licenses that absolutely must subsume everything and their aunt under their own restrictive terms.
> It is not eligible for most open-source grant funding.
Exactly, and I specifically rejected that, several times, to keep the license right and avoid political takeover. That's 50.000€ I said no to, right there, while I barely had enough to make it three months into the future. Because I value integrity and *real* sustainability a lot higher.
Do *you* have anything to show for it, in that regard? Who's footing your pay-check? A varied community of people from all walks of life who use the things you created? No? Didn't think so. I wonder who, then.
> And the clause that triggered all of this is very likely unenforceable.
"Very likely" is very likely a lot of handwaving, Leo. It's certainly not an argument. [This is](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#what-the-reticulum-license-is).
> As one Debian developer put it in the project’s own discussion thread, people who build harmful systems are not going to be stopped by a term they were always going to ignore.
It turns out [that most do](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#the-prediction-and-what-happened), because of a thing called "the law".
Or are you proposing we live in a state of complete and utter anarchy already? Or maybe that your cult is simply above the law?
> The moment you add a “not for harm” or “not for AI” condition, you have left open source behind
Strike up the organ, start the hymns.
> The Open Source Definition rules out licences that discriminate against people or groups, or against fields of endeavour
[Erratum](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#open-source-means-open-source): *Your* "open source" religion, not "The Open Source Definition" (Capitals Of Authority, bravo).
Yes, let's not discriminate against people, **BY FUCKING MURDERING THEM WITH DRONES**. Time for a party Leo!
Beauuuutiful way to hide [the true nonsense](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#what-the-argument-is-actually-doing) of the "fields of endeavour" by slyly insinuating *I* am being discriminatory.
Side-note: The overall patronizing, better-than-thy and fakely knowledgable tone is almost hilarious, if it wasn't so malicious.
> The tool was already on the shelf
Oh for Christ's sake, this one [again](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#recycled-wine-fermenting)...
> Kaonic tactical mesh radios are sold for military command and control, drone and autonomous-systems networking, and operation in “austere, contested environments”, and which has since been selected for NATO’s DIANA defence-innovation accelerator. It is MIT-licensed, it is an independent implementation of a protocol that is itself public domain, and its repository predates Qvist’s harm clause by nine months.
Those fuckers came to me and presented themselves as wanting to create a rust port for the good of the ecosystem, the world and the community. That was a blatant lie and front for their actual goal of acquiring my goodwill and expertise so they could quickly create a shallow clone, hardfork it with their own sloppy "Post-Quantum" crypto, and get big money from the military. They deliberately lied and manipulated to extract from a whole community and someone they believed to be a naive, vulnerable autistic developer.
Why do you think a non-harm clause is needed? Their implementation is still not *working*, by the way, and has provided **nothing** to the community or world at large.
I cut ties with those bastards when I found out what their end-game was, but not until I had spent every ounce of energy I had slowing them down as much as humanly possible, while *I was still working on the actual Reticulum implementation and providing updates to users, managing a community, and living on next to nothing in a camper*.
Holy fuck I hate people like you Leo, you willfully ignorant, destructive, spoiled piece of shit.
> His fix trades a door nobody has worked out how to close for the loss of every distribution channel
Every distribution channel that [we never used, and never needed](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#the-distribution-argument)? I haven't seen PyPi acting up about our apparently infuriating conduct yet.
Moot point, even if they do, since we can distribute over Reticulum just fine. With full cryptographic authentication, and no centralized infrastructure or PKI required. Also, no governance required. *That's* resilience.
> and every downstream collaborator who needs a known-good licence.
We are definitely not short of downstream collaborators currently, so no thanks, you don't have much to sell me there.
> You pay the full price in distribution and collaboration
The quality of collaboration has gone up *significantly* since that decision. Most of the wannabes stay away and sob in their Stallman handkerchiefs, while we keep working, dilligently as always. Great success.
(Sorry Stallman, I love you)
Reticulum is available everywhere. It is one of the leanest, most dependency free software packages there is, and it ships an entire networking stack, a plethora of management utilities, a device flashing utility, a full GitHub replacement running over Reticulum, remote shell utilities, and supports a whole ecosystem of application-layer protocols and user-facing applications, including messaging (LXMF), voice (LXST), chat (RRC), content hosting and browsing (nomadnet), and many others.
*In a cross-platform, portable wheel of 537 kilobytes* that installs or embeds on every platform known to man. Drop it on a floppy, baby.
The delusions run so deep here I cannot even begin to fathom it.
> and you get an AI-training restriction a determined actor routes around in an afternoon.
In reality, of the 10 sampled language models (both proprietary and open-weights) that were tested for traces of Reticulum source material, *all* stopped training on the Reticulum source after the license change.
Turns out, *it worked*, Leo.
Did *you* check? No you didn't, handwaving and inventions again.
> A written answer to “what happens when the maintainer walks away”, because for Reticulum that stopped being hypothetical in December 2025.
Did you check the [commit logs](https://github.com/markqvist/Reticulum/commits/) you dimwit? No, you just randomly rolled around in the personal puddle of phantasmogoria you constructed from wishful thinking.
Have you seen what I have produced in those ten months? I'd wager it's a lot more than you, you lazy fuck, not even doing the most basic fact-checking of your smear-job propaganda pieces.
Try that on for a "written answer".
> There is now a Reticulum_CE, a “community edition” fork that exists mainly to carry a redistributable licence.
What psychosis are you getting these from? [Reticulum_CE](https://github.com/Reticulum-Community/Reticulum_CE) is published under the Reticulum License. Did you read their repo? No, you did not:
*"This is a community maintained fork of the Reticulum Network Stack and is intended as a public forum for discussion and issue reporting, as well as a repository to collect community enhancements to RNS."*
> There is RetiNet, an AGPL fork of the Python stack.
Which has been [defunct and abandoned for 8 months](https://codeberg.org/SkyGuy/RetiNet). Are you not equipped with visual perception or basic literacy?
> There are side-loaded F-Droid repositories so people can install the apps at all.
What nonsense is this? You are literally so horny to paint a picture of a dead system that you have to assume people cannot think for two seconds straight?
There has never been a point in time where people could not install Reticulum-based apps on Android. These have always, intentionally, been distributed as *re-distributable* APK files so people could share them offline. Sideband can host and share it's own APK. This is the point, Archimedes.
The F-droid repository was made as service to users by a volunteer in the *real* Reticulum community (not your abhorrent confabulation of what it is) who *has never once objected to the license and project directions*, and who just wanted to help make things easier!
Don't use them as ammunition in your perverse fantasies!
> Every one of those is real maintenance work, done by volunteers, spent entirely on the problem of being allowed to share the software.
A copy of my repo, then pasting my (Reticulum Licensed) work into four files, then abandoning the project is not "real maintenance work".
What I have been doing, for over a decade, is real maintenance work.
> four independent teams have rebuilt Reticulum from scratch in Rust.
Those [have not "rebuild"](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#the-clean-room-delusion) anything ["from scratch"](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#copyright-the-two-legal-layers).
They are feeding the source code of RNS directly into an LLM, running automated agent loops, and copying it, blatantly, bit for bit, without any modicum of creative input, work or understanding.
Such a connoisseur of the commons you are.
> The people rebuilding the project to keep it alive
The project is already alive, and has been for a decade. You are lying so hard that it's fucking raining.
Those people, are in their own words, "Killing Reticulum" (quote, Lew Palm, "author" of "Leviculum"), so they can appropriate it for their profit and control.
> The two that put enclosure resistance first, Leviculum and the rsReticulum stack behind Ratspeak, both chose AGPLv3.
And all of those are void and null, because what they *really* chose is **copyright violation**, and complete disrespect ([as is now becoming tradition](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#licensing-analysis)) for open source development practices, attribution and basic decency.
> Underneath the licence choice sits a harder problem, and it is the one this site keeps coming back to: a system can be decentralised in its architecture and completely centralised in who decides things.
Oooooh... Tension. Drama. Tell me more, let's have the juicy details, huh? Outrage incoming, I can feel it! Ramp up your audience like a good boy, Leo!
The only thing your site keeps coming back to is nonsense.
The decisions follow those responsible over years, and the work. Not cry-babies like you. Get used to it.
> Relicensing a codebase other people contributed to, under MIT terms, with a single unilateral commit, is itself a small act of enclosure.
I am responsible for over 98% of commits in that repository. Not a single one of the other contributors disagreed to the decision.
But your ideology runs so deep now, *that we cannot ourselves decide how we license our own software*? Yes, let's consider for a moment **who the fucking dictator is here**...
It's *almost* like you've decided you already personally own Reticulum.
> The pattern shows up off the codebase too. In late August 2026, after a badly-behaved crawler hammered his NomadNet git node with tens of thousands of requests
Ah yes, so I got personally mad, and had a tantrum?
The scraper was hitting *every node across the entire fucking intermesh*, from a high-bandwidth VPS, with no throttling, no regards for peoples radio links, airtime concerns, metered connections or limited compute resources.
For what reason? To gouge **millions** of requests to a broken piece of shit software that an idiot deployed and left running without oversight, trying to infintely download **everything that everyone had ever put on their nodes several times over** on a recursive loop.
Who made that stop? I did, because I contacted the idiot and talked him out of it.
Let's hear more of your brilliant ideas about how to "protect the commons" you fucking ape.
> Qvist removed the volunteer moderator of the Reticulum subreddit, deleted roughly three years of posts, and closed it with a notice that ended “Well done, vibecoders. You ruined it for everyone.”
The moderator was not moderating anything, and hadn't been for months. The precise original agreement with him for allowing him moderator rights was exactly the arrangement, that if the space was not moderated, it would be closed, and that I would maintain the final decision on that.
This is now being spun into yet another [bottle of piss](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#recycled-wine-fermenting) by the dipshits like you. Well done, moron.
> Around the same window the project’s Matrix room shut down and the GitHub issue tracker was hidden.
Does time not exist in your alternate universe? The events you allude to are separated by month or years, and the rationales were clearly stated. You deliberately ignored all of that.
Further, I did not manage or administrate the Matrix room. It was a community room, run by volunteers, flooded with spam and bad-faith actors. I had *zero* admin rights on it. The moderators of the room made that decision themselves, long after I had left - *to focus on actual work*.
The development was *never* centered on the GitHub issue tracker, it ran over Reticulum long before the preposterous madhouse of GitHub was left behind, as it continues to do today, as is documented and stated several places (including the front-page of the repository you refuse to link to).
Signal to noise ratio has gone up *significantly* because of that. The community is more alive, and more productive.
You are literally making things up as you go.
> One community member’s summary: for a supposedly decentralised network, the founder holds and uses a lot of centralised levers.
Yes, let's just [invent](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#the-movement-of-a-dozen) another concerned "community member". Who? Some random nutjob on reddit?
A random strager of your choosing is not a "community member" that gets to decide how a highly complex engineering project is run. But damn man, you wish it worked that way. You wish it badly.
> None of this is meant as a pile-on.
Oh, *thanks*, you're SO *considerate* and full of empathy Leo!
> The Reticulum Licence is presented as a shield for the commons
**Because that is what it actually is.**
How about trying to actually *prove* otherwise, with *a coherent argument*, instead of getting an LLM to spin a load of high-strung nonsense to further your deranged religion?
> If your users are European public bodies
Oh, those poor administrative organizations! Do you think I dedicated my life to empowering European Public Bodies, or actual people?
> Then spend the effort you saved on the part that is actually hard: governance that survives the founder losing interest.
[Ze Governance](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#a-history-of-what-works), again, I see.
Maybe when you've worked 12 hours a day on a project for ten years, which is persistently flooded with this kind of profound idiocy, and kept going, can you begin to consider expounding your finer points on "losing interest".
> The commons is not protected by a clause forbidding bad uses.
It sure as hell ain't protected by pretending the world is made of candy-floss either, like you seem to prefer.
> It is protected by how many people can fork it, ship it, and keep it running without asking anyone’s permission.
Oh isn't that convenient now? How many can do that today? 99.999999% of the worlds population. What's the equation if we change to your beloved AGPL again, you moron?
> Reticulum’s licence made that number smaller.
[Mathematical failure](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#on-freedom).
> The intention was to guard the commons. The effect was to fence off a piece of it.
On the intent, [correct](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#what-the-reticulum-license-is).
On the effect, no: The effect apparently was to induce the uncomfortable feeling of grinding against your own inconsistent dogmas in dishonest, propagandistic nutjobs like you, because *you* now feel *fenced out*.
There's an important difference there.
The self-referential circle-jerk you've got going on here is *exactly* the definition of a fence; one made of hysteria and propaganda with the ulterior motive of usurping power away from a community of thousands of people, and putting it, squarely, into your own, trembling, wanting and lazy little hands.
> Reticulum is also not a toy. People run it over LoRa and packet radio for emergency and off-grid communication, so “someone degrades the network” is a safety question, not an inconvenience.
**Bingo**, Leo.
Which is why you need a *real* [responsible, accountable and competent person](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#a-history-of-what-works), with a decade-long track-record to run the project, not a bunch of kids with a fixation on Claude, and their sugardaddies like you.
> Here is the part that frustrates me.
Yes, you must *surely* be frustrated Leo, how very frustrating this must be for you and your ChatGPT subscription to have to go through all of this.
Tell me about frustration once you have actually done something that required more than pillow-fucking your own sense of grandiosity.
All your github repos are minor personal projects with up to... count them... coooount them... five stars. No users. You must surely know a lot about software development, distribution, and these commons you are protecting so heroically.
I can see you have a lot of skin in the game here, and a lot of work and experience on your back to bolster your authority.
Fuck off, you fraud.
> Every few years a piece of infrastructure I care about gets a new licence
You don't care one fucking bit about infrastructure Leo. *You don't even know what it is*, least of all what it takes to create it.
I do. Because I did it.
Go home, you're drunk.
Thanks for the material, though. You've provided a textbook example of the incessant bullshit, appropriation, deliberate enclosure and intentionally weaponized manipulation that [this project is up against](https://reticulum.network/manual/brandolinis.html#intent-consequence).
*In ideology and war, self-justification wears the same coat, and feeds the same destruction, perpetually.*
Yours truly,
Mark Qvist
September 18th, 2026