Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   ??? 妛彁 :xf_nyxsigil: :xf_nyxdisapproving: (nyx@social.xenofem.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:27:48 JST ??? 妛彁 :xf_nyxsigil: :xf_nyxdisapproving:
   impending Google acquisition of GNU and the FSF. Stallman ousted once more for serial harassment of female free software community members, found living under an overpass because he kept getting kicked out of places he was couchsurfing at for being an asshole. next Linux kernel unveils support for new security measures to block malicious software that endangers end users like adblock. /g/ caught planning mass suicide, blames trannies for everything as usual. Wired correspondents calling this a "bold new era" for free software. year of the Linux desktop announced as Microsoft capitulates to the unstoppable juggernaut of Google/Linux and the GPL (Google Public License)
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:27:45 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @lanodan >Imagine the zealot tears of the ones that assigned their copyright to the FSF.
     You can't help yourself but spread FUD can you?
     The copyright assignment is only valid if the software remains free software.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:27:47 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to
     @nyx Imagine the zealot tears of the ones that assigned their copyright to the FSF. (Don't ever assign copyright)
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:40:32 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @lanodan >Free Software for him is getting back the things of the past, rather than pushing forward.
     In the past it was easier to have a reasonable level of freedom.
     Pushing forward would mean pushing towards proprietary software.
     
     >LibreJS isn't something in the style of GreaseMonkey to enforce the four freedoms, it's just a blocker.
     LibreJS does exactly as it is marked - it only allows JavaScript marked as free software (or trivial JS).
     If you want the ability to replace the JavaScript of webpages, install Haketilo.
     
     >RYF hardware certification also isn't pushing for making all software modifiable, but instead has the effect of building a fucking wall around the main free software components with preferring that proprietary software be kept unmodifiable.
     More FUD huh?
     The RYF has a *temporary exception* for secondary processors simply because they couldn't approve any hardware at all about it.
     If "software" is unmodifiable by anyone (i.e both the user and the manufacturer/seller/business), then that's not software, that's hardware.
     The FSF has no comment on proprietary hardware.
     
     If you have a problem with software on the secondary processors, then it's up to you to replace it and thus put an end to the exception.
     Once an exception is no longer required, it's withdrawn - sellers of hardware need to use the libre replacements within a reasonable timeframe or the devices will be dropped from the certification.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:40:35 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook @nyx
     > Since when was Stallman conservative?
     
     I don't mean the career politician thing, rms isn't a politician. I mean that Free Software for him is getting back the things of the past, rather than pushing forward. And it's very visible in the way GNU/FSF pushes things.
     For example LibreJS isn't something in the style of GreaseMonkey to enforce the four freedoms, it's just a blocker.
     RYF hardware certification also isn't pushing for making all software modifiable, but instead has the effect of building a fucking wall around the main free software components with preferring that proprietary software be kept unmodifiable.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:40:37 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     @lanodan

     1. Since when was Stallman conservative?
     2. It’s not about “leaders,” you do not understand. Stirnerites don’t need leaders, they need apprentices. I do not share Stallman’s moralism and left-liberal sentiments, Hayley’s position is more attractive to me. It’s the same logic of identity essentialism, thinking that just because you share something in common with others you should always agree with them on everything ever. I, for example, don’t think it makes sense to use “per/pers” as a gender-neutral pronoun. Something that Stallman thinks makes sense.

     @nyx

   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:40:38 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook @nyx Imagine being for ephemeral affinity-based associations but sticking for one of the most conservative software leader.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:40:40 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @nyx
     It's hard being a Stirnerian Stallmanite…
     @lanodan
   • Embed this notice
     ??? 妛彁 :xf_nyxsigil: :xf_nyxdisapproving: (nyx@social.xenofem.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:40:41 JST ??? 妛彁 :xf_nyxsigil: :xf_nyxdisapproving:

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @lanodan the schadenfreude would be too much to bear
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:45:18 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @lanodan Yes, I am aware of the concept of base software that is free, but with disgusting proprietary extensions.
     
     Really, there are derivative works shared between a lot of GNU software, so any attempt to do "Open-core" would end up in with GPLv3 infringement against people who won't hesitate to sue.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 19:45:20 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @Suiseiseki Never heard of Open-Core?
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 20:21:16 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @lanodan >The Free JavaScript campaign persuades companies, governments, and NGOs to make their Web sites work without requiring that users run any proprietary software.
     The intentions of LibreJS are written out there for you.
     
     >All it takes is a soldering iron or replacing the board/component.
     Maybe when it's a through hole ROM chip or a simple component, replacement is feasible, but you just replaced hardware.
     In that case, only you have the freedom to make the replacement, as you own the hardware, so I don't see what's wrong.
     
     >Your manufacturer/seller is still reserving it's own right to modify the software they probably have full legal rights to modify.
     Just because something is legally allowed doesn't always make it right.
     Sure manufacturers can modify their own software for themselves and there's nothing wrong with that.
     There's a big problem when there is tyrant hardware that only runs software digitally signed by the manufacturer mind you.
     
     >RYF will tell your to remove hardware that that we know for sure can have libre software being written for. >Enjoy the novena without things like HDMI or a computer without integrated networking.
     The novena case was when it was known that HDMI wasn't supported without proprietary software, but it was submitted for certification anyway.
     Obviously the answer was that such HDMI output encouraged users to install proprietary software, so it would need to be disabled for certification to be awarded in the current state.
     If you're so sure that you'll have a libre software replacement for the proprietary parts, then great, first do the replacement and *then* make a RYF certification application.
     Novena is a special case really, in that there was eventually a libre replacement - that almost never actually happens.
     
     I use wired networking myself and I do indeed enjoy integrated networking in freedom.
     If you want Wi-Fi, is it really that hard to swap in a card that works with free software or use an external one?
     If you must stick with the original integrated, then great, better get writing that libre loadable firmware.
     
     >peripherals and co-processors being libre is just as important if not more.
     Great, stop writing, get reverse engineering.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 20:21:18 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @Suiseiseki
     > If you want the ability to replace the JavaScript of webpages, install Haketilo.
     
     I know about it, but it's also not a GNU/FSF project.
     Could also put Woob as a way of actually reclaiming things back.
     
     None of it being on https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/freejs/
     
     >More FUD huh?
     
     Is that the only card in your deck? Please look again at what FUD means.
     
     >If "software" is unmodifiable by anyone (i.e both the user and the manufacturer/seller/business), then that's not software, that's hardware.
     
     All it takes is a soldering iron or replacing the board/component.
     Your manufacturer/seller is still reserving it's own right to modify the software they probably have full legal rights to modify.
     Or did you forget about licences?
     
     > The RYF has a *temporary exception*
     
     That's fucking bullshit, hardware is a quite permanent thing. And RYF will tell your to remove hardware that that we know for sure can have libre software being written for.
     Enjoy the novena without things like HDMI or a computer without integrated networking.
     
     > If you have a problem with software on the secondary processors, then it's up to you to replace it and thus put an end to the exception.
     
     And effectively go against the GNU/FSF with getting hardware that doesn't necessarily have libre software support and adding it or supporting it.
     And the "secondary processor" thing is non-sense to me, peripherals and co-processors being libre is just as important if not more.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 20:24:58 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook >Plus those who produce better libre software
     Except every single person and group that has attempted to replace specific GNU software has made worse software?
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 20:24:59 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @lanodan
     It's not necessary to use the software produced by the FSF to be a libre software supporter, it's a false dichotomy. Libre software is not software made by the FSF. The FSF and The GNU Project try to supplant you with basic tools so there's at least something. Plus those who produce better libre software don't really want to make it a part of the GNU Project. That's not the problem of FSF but of the developers of the software in question, the FSF can't do anything about it. Both GNU, the free distros list and RYF are "opt-in," meaning that the FSF won't add anyone unless they want to.
     @Suiseiseki
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 20:50:26 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook >That's debatable.
     It's not.
     GNU ensures the software has freedom without fail and so that makes it the best.
     The software also happens to be technologically the best usually, but that's just a nice bonus.
     - BusyBox attempted to replace GNU coreutils and it sucks.
     - clang/LLVM attempted to replace gcc and while it's neck and neck, gcc is still a better compiler.
     - I can't find a shell as good as bash.
     - GNU Linux-libre is better than Linux as it doesn't have proprietary malware.
     - glibc is still the best libc although there have been a few attempts to write a good libc like musl.
     - GNU has nano and emacs - superb editors.
     - grub is the best bootloader you can get for AMD64.
     I could go on, but that's enough.
     
     >Claiming that all the GNU software is better than anything else is not exactly an unbiased claim
     It's a biased but correct claim.
     There is plenty of other free software that is excellent, but GNU's not comparable to that software, as there's no overlap.
     
     >Not as cool as TempleOS but still.
     TempleOS was written with the help of GNU software.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 20:50:27 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     That's debatable. I'm not hating on GNU or anything but that's kind of a relative claim and depends on the case-by-case basis. Claiming that all the GNU software is better than anything else is not exactly an unbiased claim, although it's still impressive hnw Stallman and his team were able to make a complete operating system in such a short time. Not as cool as TempleOS but still. Really makes you think that the BSD folks' claim of GNU+Linux being inconsistent is false because it's mainly due to the software that wasn't developed by the GNU Project.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:02:59 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     @lanodan >Open-Source is pretty much just branding/marketing Free Software
     Maybe that was the intention at the start, but it has morphed into a different beast.
     As you wrote, "open source" is even more confusing than free software, as the natural meaning is "you can look at the source code" and that cannot be explained away without taking 4 minutes at least.
     As you wrote, the misunderstanding when it comes to free software can be rectified by quickly saying: "free as in freedom, not free beer".
     
     >probably why the Open Source Definition exists.
     Yup and that page contains proprietary software in the form of JavaScript and is clownflared.
     
     >Want true compromise? It's stuff like Open-Core.
     True compromise is going for proprietary software?
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:03:01 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook I really fucking wish Stallman would be the only one spreading his literal FUD about Open-Source. I can understand him not liking it, but get some fucking integrity.
     
     Open-Source is pretty much just branding/marketing Free Software without having to go "free as in freedom, not free beer" almost all the time or ending up with a misunderstanding in discussions with people that aren't familiar with the details (like most non-techies).
     I could also critique "open-source" for not being very transparent by itself (it's not source-available), which is probably why the Open Source Definition exists. (that plus, you know, stallman)
     
     Which is why I use the term "libre software" myself, it gets the point across much more reliably and unfamiliar people will likely ask if they don't know instead of "Oh year, it's just gratis" for free software or "Oh yeah, it's just source-available" for open-source.
     
     Want true compromise? It's stuff like Open-Core.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:03:02 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     I'm not saying that we should stop at what is provided by the FSF. That mindset is legit conservative. But I really don't think Stallman has intended all this to be sacred cows. I think it's taking an "ought" from an "is:" the fact that RYF is the accepted certification does not mean we should accept this certification. GPL itself changed over time and adopted to changing realities like Tivoization, stopping somewhere and saying "Yes, this is perfect" is contradictory to the whole history of libre software, starting from when Stallman started replacing proprietary UNIX software with libre GNU alternatives. I would even argue that it plays into the hands of proprietary developers and is the sole reason of the existence of the open-source movement. That is, compromizes, moderation, conservatism.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:03:03 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook A lot of hardware uses things like eeproms for storing software instead of actual roms (which are more like die-cast with a CPU and so stuff that manufacturers want to really avoid because mistakes would be seriously expensive).
     
     And actuals ROMs are were I can go like "Well okay, that's a bummer but I can make an exception", but it just shouldn't become an exit gate like it did with the RYF certification.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:03:05 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     I didn't. That's what I wrote in my post. Libre firmware/software and libre hardware are two completely different things. Now, I think one can get rid of all proprietary firmware only through libre hardware. Because how are you going to remove it otherwise? It's tied to an SoC.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:03:06 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook Libre Hardware is a completely different thing with *very* different problems.
     RYF really is just about software support like drivers, not hardware.
     Please don't do the same mistake.
     
     > JShelter
     Describes itself like a firewall for JavaScript APIs.
     Interesting but still a fucking blocker.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:03:07 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     I understand this. But most devices don't do even this basic thing. And you also must take into account that FSF restricts its sphere of concern to libre software, although Stallman himself supports all libre movements.
     
     Regarding LibreJS: you should look into JShelter. LibreJS is not the only extension FSF made and JShelter gives you more freedom when it comes to using websites.
     
     I didn't say I only support libre software. I support libre hardware too. I support libre everything. I think if there was some libre hardware certification that would've been great. There is OSHWA but it has the same problems of OSI and its OSHWD is rather… bloated. Just like OSD. I think both RYF and OSHWA are important though, one for the bare minimum, the other as an extra certificate on top. Same for Right to Repair. It's like with UNIX: all these pieces do one specific thing. But when they're used together they create something more.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:55:06 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook
     > Open Core is an outgrowth of Open Source because the open-source crowd does not care about freedom
     
     It would be very visible if OSI members would have done anything towards Open Core.
     Until you come with proof, to me Open Core is outsiders that didn't want to follow the Open Source Definition, just like the anti-capitalists poseurs that go on restricting fields of endeavors and effectively make proprietary software.
     
     Google software like Android isn't really a libre vs. open-source problem.
     Or even a lack of copyleft or license virality.
     It's that Google doesn't really wants to collaborate, so it creates forks everywhere and uses the proprietary-culture of things like vendoring and monorepos which makes it much harder for outsiders to reuse and meaningfully modify software (not only you would have to modify upstream but all the slightly modified copies downstream as well).
     
     Effectively because hacker practicality and user freedom isn't only a license problem, the license is just a foundation. Quite like infrastructure tools like compilers or a openly accessible version control system (thanks OpenBSD for that innovation).
     Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: likes this.
     翠星石 repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 21:55:07 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     Open Core is an outgrowth of Open Source because the open-source crowd does not care about freedom, preferring opportunist collaborationism with Big Tech giants (the Big Tech obviously exploits their naiveté for their own gains but what did they expect?). Associating yourself with an open-source movement is associating yourself with this opportunist collaborationism, and I don't know why you would want to do that.
     
     Open Source is synonymous with libre software but not always (as I said before, software that is encumbered with intellectual property issues is not libre, neither is the one tied to non-libre software). While 90% of the time non-libre software is proprietary even if it's made from open-source software (Android), it's not black-and-white, it's more complicated than that.
     
     I'm not saying that "free software" is a better name. It's a terrible name that leads to more confusion, hence "libre software" and "freedom software" are better names.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 22:00:43 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook @Suiseiseki
     > However, JavaScript runs directly on your computer so it’s akin to running proprietary spyware with a universal backdoor so get rid of it.
     
     I have JS disabled by default and I would except Suiseiki to do roughly the same.
     
     Also please don't praise so much in your chapel that it almost feels like you're shouting in it.
     Why do you think I self-host *everything* and participate in self-hostable software?
     Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 22:00:44 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     @lanodan
     Server-side software isn’t the software you run so it is irrelevant, you cannot audit the server-side software, period. Accessing a site is akin to using proprietary software. There’s no ifs or buts, it is outside of your control. However, JavaScript runs directly on your computer so it’s akin to running proprietary spyware with a universal backdoor so get rid of it.

     If you can self-host or use offline libre software, do it. It is the only way to guarantee software freedom, there’s no other option unless you make your connection absolutely secure and anonymous as much as you can.
     @Suiseiseki

   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 22:00:45 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @Suiseiseki
     > Maybe that was the intention at the start, but it has morphed into a different beast.
     
     No, it didn't.
     
     >As you wrote, the misunderstanding when it comes to free software can be rectified by quickly saying: "free as in freedom, not free beer".
     
     And I'd rather avoid misunderstandings entirely, specially because not all communication forms are two-way and detecting misunderstanding is kind of hard.
     
     Detecting a stallmanite with saying "open-source" on the other hand is very reliable. :)
     
     > Yup and that page contains proprietary software in the form of JavaScript and is clownflared.
     
     The JS isn't required. As for cloudflare… just block them (how-to: https://hacktivis.me/articles/blocking%20cloudflare%20IP-range%20be%20like ), use archive.org or something when it's an actual website and that's it, you don't have to make it annoying.
     翠星石 repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Tuesday, 20-Dec-2022 07:28:46 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
     google's unwillingness to collaborate is not the issue that the free software movement cares about. that's an issue for another movement that cares about different issues and has different goals
     
     our qualms with google are its unwillingness to respect users' essential freedoms. that's what we stand for, and it doesn't involve any form of collaboration. that's also the reason why the equivalence you propose is false. see, this other group is so misleading that the issue they claim as key is not even covered by their definition, appropriated from ours. and they try to confuse people by claiming to struggle for the same thing, while acting like a counter-revolutionary movement, a docile opposition. and some people fall for it, because their propaganda budgets run circles around our marketing volunteers :-(