Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Friday, 12-May-2023 18:44:47 JST SuperDicq

   • chjara

   @charlotte@akko.chir.rs @chjara@snowdin.town I do not feel responsible for trashing hardware that can not be fixed without proprietary software. This is the hardware vendor's fault.

   • 翠星石 likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Wrongthink (wrongthink@cdrom.tokyo)'s status on Friday, 12-May-2023 18:44:45 JST Wrongthink

     in reply to

     • chjara
     • awooo :blobfoxcheck: ? ⎇

     @awooo @SuperDicq @chjara @charlotte Nirvana fallacy. Just because perfection is out of reach, doesn’t mean that one should just give up. And the fact that some blobware is currently unavoidable does not excuse its presence.

     翠星石 likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     awooo :blobfoxcheck: ? ⎇ (awooo@pawb.fun)'s status on Friday, 12-May-2023 18:44:46 JST awooo :blobfoxcheck: ? ⎇

     in reply to

     • chjara

     @SuperDicq @chjara @charlotte What's the difference between shipping said software burned into the hardware itself vs shipping it as a binary with a redistributable license in the OS and sending it to the hardware? Yes, the distro must state that it contains said software, it is usually required by the license to have a notice, but that software doesn't run inside your userspace or kernel.

     And I agree, firmware should be open source and replaceable, but that's a separate issue to solve.

   • Embed this notice
     awooo :blobfoxcheck: ? ⎇ (awooo@pawb.fun)'s status on Friday, 12-May-2023 18:44:46 JST awooo :blobfoxcheck: ? ⎇

     in reply to

     • chjara

     @SuperDicq @chjara @charlotte Right now you can't get anything without some proprietary firmware running on it. Your keyboard probably has it, your mouse has it even in the very sensor itself, there are practical limits to what you can do without refusing technology outright.

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 12-May-2023 19:08:59 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • awooo :blobfoxcheck: ? ⎇
     @awooo The difference is that the microcode burned into the CPU is *hard*ware not software - and so the Free *Soft*ware Foundation has no comment about such microcode.
     
     Also, you purchased the CPU, so it's physically yours and also you don't need to agree to any proprietary software license merely to use such CPU.
     
     >as a binary with a redistributable license
     You clearly haven't read the license of microcode.
     
     One "microcode update" license from intel here is:
     <snip>
     Redistribution and use in binary form, without modification, are permitted,
     provided that the following conditions are met:
     
     1. Redistributions must reproduce the above copyright notice and the
     following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided
     with the distribution.
     
     2. Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its suppliers may
     be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without
     specific prior written permission.
     
     3. No reverse engineering, decompilation, or disassembly of this software
     is permitted.
     <snip>
     
     Such license is unacceptable, as it violates freedoms 0, 1 and 3 and so it would be hypocritical for the FSF to say that the usage of source under such license is acceptable.
     
     The fact that intel specifically doesn't permit reverse engineering glows so bright that they must be hiding something incredibly malicious inside the "updates" that might not be in the ROM version (as something malicious burned into hardware is probably a lot easier to present as evidence to a court than specially obfuscated malware provided in the form of encrypted software that's also in an undocumented instruction set (as good luck explaining the malicious functionality to a judge that doesn't even know what software is)).
     
     >but that software doesn't run inside your userspace or kernel.
     You're running proprietary software on your CPU with ring -3 access, so I would say it's worse.
     
     
     The real solution is to get decent hardware that's stable and works well without having to agree to a single proprietary software license.