It's happening.  The dominoes are starting to fall.

In December of 2023, a number of leaks from James O'Keefe and The Lunduke Journal were released to the public -- exposing the extreme racial discrimination happening within both IBM and Red Hat (the world's largest Linux company).

Now, a lawsuit has been filed against Red Hat, on behalf of Allan Wood, who was a Senior Director at the Linux giant.

That lawsuit alleges significant racial, relgious, and gender discrimination.  And, based on what information we currently know about Red Hat's discriminatory policies... his case looks incredibly strong.

Below is the entire announcement, originally as a thread of posts on X, put into a single, easy to read format (you can also read a variation of this announcement, as well as the full lawsuit as a PDF, on their website).

We just filed a federal lawsuit against IBM’s subsidiary Red Hat for illegal racial discrimination. IBM has allegedly implemented illegal anti-white and anti-male quotas. We will use every tool to hold IBM accountable:

With our co-counsel, including Barnes Law, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of our client against the International Business Machines Corporation’s (IBM) subsidiary, Red Hat, for violating Civil Rights laws by allegedly engaging in discriminatory employment and termination practices against white males.

Our plaintiff is a white male and was a dutiful Red Hat employee for eight years, rising to the position of Senior Director. He was an exemplary employee who had never received a negative review during his time at Red Hat.

But for the discrimination he faced, he was on the path to becoming one of the top executives at Red Hat…

In 2021, Red Hat began implementing illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) requirements. In accordance with its illegal activities, Red Hat hired a Chief Executive Officer of DEI to spearhead these programs — mandating employee training while implementing employment quotas aimed at achieving diversity goals by illegally treating race as a dispositive factor for employment and advancement.

On several occasions, managers and executives at Red Hat commented to our plaintiff and other employees expressing their dismay at the lack of diversity in the workforce and their desire to achieve certain workforce quotas based on race and gender. Red Hat executives indicated that these DEI initiatives would influence certain hiring and employment decisions.

 

Our plaintiff was vocal about his opposition to these discriminatory policies and continuously advocated for hiring based on merit and skill rather than other immutable characteristics.

 

Red Hat made express statements, both vocally and in writing at company events, that were derogatory towards white individuals and presented an anti-white agenda. Red Hat also remarked on the low number of women employed and expressed anti-male rhetoric. Red Hat made it clear that it was going to implement heightened DEI policies, with the sole intent of increasing diversity.

 

Red Hat has made it clear that it is in favor of discriminatory policies that the Supreme Court has found unconstitutional.

 

In the case of Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard, decided together with SFFA v. University of North Carolina, Red Hat, along with 70 other corporations, filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of affirmative action:

 

At a kickoff event in Texas, Red Hat brazenly announced its “Bold DEI Goals,” which included quotas.

 

Red Hat sought to remake its workforce demographic, seeking to reach 30% women globally and 30% associates of color in the United States by 2028.

 

Just two weeks after this announcement, our plaintiff was informed by his manager that his role was being eliminated following several months of discriminatory treatment.

 

Upon information and belief, 21 of the total 22 individuals were white males.

 

 

Following this shocking footage, we filed a federal civil rights complaint with the EEOC against IBM for alleged racial and sex discrimination.

 

We also wrote to IBM’s Board of Directors, demanding an end to the corporation’s systemic violations of law to prevent the waste of corporate assets and harm to shareholders.

 

 

Today, we are proud to file this lawsuit to continue to fight corporate America’s destructive, illegal, and odious use of illegal DEI initiatives that are fundamentally anti-white, anti-male, and anti-equality.

1982 was a big year for Atari video arcades — with the release of such classics as Gravatar, Millipede, and Space Duel (complimenting the already massive number of popular Atari games filling video game arcades).

In order to make the management (and, primarily, the accounting) of video game arcades easier — and more future-y — Atari developed and released the “Atari Coin Executive”.

And it is incredibly cool.

The central brain of the Atari Coin Executive was an Atari 800 computer (with 48k of RAM) with a number of accessories, including:

• 2 x Atari 810 Disk Drives

• An Atari 850 Interface Module (which added RS232)

• An Atari 825 printer

• An Amdek 13 inch color monitor

How the Atari Coin Executive worked was both simple… and, at the same time, incredibly cool.

The basic process:

1. A “Coin Monitor” was installed in the coin slot of every arcade game.

2. Each Coin Monitor is connected back to the Atari Coin Executive workstation (that Atari 800) via “telephone type wiring”.

3. The arcade manager can then use that Atari 800 to see how much each game is earning.

Fun fact: The Atari Coin Executive software was open source and written in a combination of BASIC and Assembly. Or, as Atari put it in 1982: “In Basic and 6502 Assembler - Source listings and manual supplied”.  You can find images of the Atari Coin Executive software over on the AtariAge Forum.

In addition to the above mentioned setup, the Atari Coin Executive also included a handheld computer called the “Data Recorder”.

The “Atari Coin Executive Data Recorder” was powered by a MOS 6507 CPU with 16K of RAM (8 2k chips), and communicated with the Atari Coin Executive computer via 300 baud serial. It even had a small built-in printer.

This allowed people to manage several arcades, in separate locations, by:

1. Plugging the Data Recorder into each arcade machine equipped with a Coin Monitor.

2. Then taking the Data Recorder back to the Coin Executive computer and downloading the data into the Coin Executive software.

Finally, here’s a color picture of the whole setup — including the custom desk which was used for the Coin Executive.

Floppy disks. Zip disks. Hard disks.

These sorts of spinning, magnetic storage mediums have been critical to several decades of computers. It’s almost hard to imagine the computers of the 1970s, 80s, and 90s without floppy and hard disks (and other magnetic drives).

But how, exactly, did they come into existence?

Let’s take a quick look at the very first of such devices… and their inspiration.

1946 - The Mail-a-Voice

We’ll begin our journey with the 1946 release of the Brush Mail-a-Voice.

A truly fascinating device, the Mail-a-Voice looked like a phonograph… except it used a paper disc that was coated in magnetic material. You could then record up to 3 minutes of audio on a single paper disk (which would spin at 20 rotations per minute)… and then fold the paper disc up and mail it to someone inside a standard envelope.

Thus the “Mail-a-Voice”.

This device didn’t store computer data itself -- it was only for audio -- but it did inspire engineers who were working on cheap data storage for computers…

February, 1948 - Andrew Booth’s Spinning Drum

In a 1947 trip to the USA, Andrew Booth (who was working on his own computer design), had the chance to see the “Mail-a-Voice” in action.

Since Booth needed a good, inexpensive storage medium for his computer… he attempted to build a similar device using a flat, paper, magnetic disk. What was, essentially, a first attempt at what we would now call a “Floppy Disk”.

Unfortunately, it didn’t quite work. Booth found that he needed to spin the paper disk quite a bit faster in order to make it viable as a data storage mechanism… and he had a hard time keeping the paper disk flat.

In fact, as Booth upped the RPM to 3,000 — which is what he determined he needed — the paper disk itself started to disintegrate. Booth would later comment:

“I suppose I really invented the floppy disc, it was a real flop!”

So he abandoned that approach and, instead, decided to use a brass drum. Why brass? Because brass is a bit less likely to disintegrate than… paper.

This system worked. His brass, rotating drum (with a magnetic coating), had a 2 inch diameter and could store 10 bits per inch.

Yeah. 10 bits. Per inch.

Not exactly massive amounts of storage. But, hey, it was a start! And it didn’t disintegrate! Huzzah!

Improving the magnetic drum

With the first prototype working, Booth set about improving his magnetic, rotating drum storage device. The final version ended up being able to store 256 words of either 20 or 21 bits each (different sources cite different values here and there does not appear to be consensus on if it was 20 or 21 bit words).

In modern terms: This would be equivalent to roughly 5 kilobits of data storage.  Give or take.

This storage drum was put to use on the ARC (the Automatic Relay Computer).

When all was said and done, the ARC could utilize that storage drum to handle 50 numbers and could load a program consisting of 300 individual instructions.

It wasn't exactly a “Hard Disk Drive”… more of a “Hard Drum Drive”.

Either way… Pretty darn cool for the 1940s.

1956 - The First “Hard Disk Drive”

Over the years that followed, this idea was refined and improved. The rotating drum was abandoned for hard, magnetic platters — ones sturdy enough to handle much higher RPMs (certainly much sturdier than paper!)... and thus leading to faster data access.

These improvements eventually leading to the 1956 release of the IBM Model 350 Disk Storage Unit for the IBM 305 RAMAC computer.

The Model 350 Hard Disk Drive, in a base configuration, could store roughly 3.75 MB — all contained in a cabinet 5 feet long, 2 1/2 feet deep, and 5 1/2 feet tall — with platters spinning at 1,200 RPM.

And all thanks to a voice dictation device built for mailing 3 minutes of audio on a folded-up piece of paper.