:: Re: [DNG] Which is Free, Which is O…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Miroslav Rovis
Date:  
To: dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Which is Free, Which is Open Source, is there any difference?
On 170426-08:40+0100, KatolaZ wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 06:35:59PM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Steve Litt <slitt@???>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > the distinction he strongly made was that Open Source didn't prioritize
> > > freedom, but instead prioritized convenience and value to business, and he
> > > felt that was a bad thing.
> > >
> >
> > You didn't dream this, it's what he says.
> >
> > The problem with the *a priori* approach that people must be won over to
> > valuing their freedom first is that it doesn't win everyone. And Richard
> > doesn't have a viable approach for the people it doesn't win. The problem
> > with the Open Source approach is that some folks may indeed never get any
> > farther than appreciating the convenience and value to business. But I
> > figure that if we win some of them over to understanding Free Software,
> > it's a win.
>
> Dear Bruce,
>
> That's a god point, indeed. If we all share the same motivation (i.e.,
> to convey the importance of guaranteeing a fair set of digital
> freedoms to digital citizens), then the differences between the two
> narratives reduce in fact to the way we approach new users and
> adopters. For some of them the "freedom first" narrative is the most
> appropriate, while for others the "efficiency first" narrative is the
> winning one. Fair enough, if the final objective is to let them
> appreciate the importance of digital freedoms.
>
> But we must ackowledge that, more often than not, even Open Source
> evangelists focus almost exclusively on the convenience and efficiency
> of the free software model, and never make the next step. There is
> nothing wrong with that, but this is what has effectively led to the
> identification of the "tiny virtual fracture" between FS and OS, which
> reflects the fact that different people can stay in the same community
> for different reasons, and with slightly different motivations.
>
> In the specific case of systemd, the "this is technically superior"
> narrative has been perused to superseed more basic (and more
> important) aspects, which are human, social, and ethical before than
> technical. Ironically, systemd is under LGPL-2.1+, so it's not a
> matter of licenses (and never has been), rather a matter of attitude,
> motivations, and objectives.
>
> HND
>
> KatolaZ
>
> -- 
> [ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - GLUGCT -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
> [     "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
> [       @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
> [     @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
> [ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]


It is beautiful, it is the stuff of dreams to have a Devuan/Debian
legend like Bruce Perens participate in this discussion.

Devuan DNG list being open and kind, I dare contribute my vision of the
issues touched upon in this thread
(
which started off in view of the thread that I opened
a few days ago:
Creative Commons licenses, which are free? WAS: BAD sig with Devuan Jessie 1.0.0-RC
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20170425.094753.17d46924.en.html
BTW it was temporary blankness of memory when i didn't remember what
DFSG meant, in that thread, and I find it kind that the main author of
Debian Free Software Guidelines didn't use the acronym, but full name
).

The "efficiency first" (narrative) users do need to be won over. But the
"efficiency first" schmoogs of the world will never ever help fix the
broken internet (if they remain what they are like today)...

The freedom of the the digital citizenship and therefore to a
significant extent of the world of today depends on the "freedom first"
programmers and associations, communities, and businesses, and even
inclined and helping establishments and legislatures...

Profit is fine, but only if ethically justified. And the huge not
justified profit of Larry and Sergey and Eric's[1] kind of people,
helped and brought about to a significant extent by the Open Source
Initiative (the Schmoog is using F/OSS a lot, but it is using it in ways
that almost always exploit it, very often damage it, and sometimes even
ruin it)...

...[The huge not justified profit of the Schmoog and Schmoog's kind of
people can, mostly, only amount to the level of usefulness for the
community that, say, one BoringSSL program of theirs has --very little
usefulness-- but their Open Source projects often are actually damaging
to the digital citizenry, like the extremely damaging protocol
HTTP2/SPDY --useful only for, basically, their spying (surveillance) on
the world.

But it is possible for businesses to get into ethical and just
narrative. It is... IBM appears to offer beautiful narratives these
days. I'm not very familiar with it, but I did read this report by a
fellow Gentoo user:
SHA-1 has just been broken
https://lists.gt.net/gentoo/user/323811#323811
You can now get some Open Hardware servers from IBM, which is amazing!

So I'm not against businesses and profit, but I'm against
hardware/software like, say, the stinking Schmoog's Own Galaxy's and its
Android Linux...

Just look at the freedom left for users:
http://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/ReplicantStatus
Only old models supported, and only so much... It's the picture of the
missing freedom of the world we live in, because of the schmoogs... Pls.
note that the other side of that page demonstrative of the missing
freedom is... near total, stress: *near total* surveillance. Pls. stop
and think about it for a while...

...How do you get a cellphone that the Schmoog, or Billy the
Bandit's, or Steve Jobs' inheritance owners do not control?...

How do you get a cellphone that they do not cotrol, they, along with, of
course, of course, the big subjects (such as secret services) whom they
sell the control of to, and teach them in?

This is not a digression. Open Hardware is the second (or maybe really
the first; I listened to some Jakob Appelbaum's talk on that, it's
linked from gnunet.org somewhere, I think from v10.gnunet.org Christian
Grothoff's, the main Gnunet developer, pages or such, reader say, and
I'll search for the link), [Open Hardware is the second] indispensable
*sine qua non* of the freedom and the rights of digital citizens today.
And the other is Free/Open Source Software.

Just imagine the Schmoog, or Zucky's Stasibook, or the Yooch (pronounced
with the guttural "ch" like in Loch Ness; ah, it's just an endearment
term for Yahoo!) providing any real sponsorship/support to:

https://gnunet.org/

Just imagine. Those are dirt, and this one, as is Devuan, are the true
goodness in the digital era we live in. Gnunet and Devuan are free,
while Schmoog's open source project can very easily be little more than
dirt and can really be truly downright dirt, like HTTP2/SPDY.

It's sad that Richard Matthew Stallman is so poor, while having done
such a huge service to the humanity.
(
I was, for a while, mad at him because there was this moral vituperation
of the NSA Linux --oh I made a typo again, sorry, I meant SELinux--
mentioned with kind of a recommendation on his Emacs pages a few years
ago, and I stopped using the term GNU/Linux for a while; it was
recommended via some Emacs SELinux policies or such, but that may not
have been of his writing... and I hope he would not really recommend
using NSA Linux...
)

But Richard Matthew Stallman's way is the right way. And also, but only
good Open Source (I believe, but somebody correct me if I'm wrong, that
IBM tends toward Open Source licensing)... And also it is fine if
businesses make projects which are truly open like the hardware as I
provided link to above... But the Schmoog's Open Source projects and
projects of the likes of the big Schmoog... Beware of those Open Source
projects!

---
[1] No, you guys can not dissociate from the damage you've done to the
    humanity at large, not simply by giving over your Schmoog leadership
    to someone else (that Indian guy, a year or two ago, IIRC), and not
    even if you now began dedicating wholly to philanthropism like Billy
    the Bandit Gates --(sic!) he is morally and ethically a robber--
    (his philanthropism, BTW, being of a eugenic kind, along with
    profit-driven)...

    
    No, you guys can't dissociate that easily... But actually I fear you
    are doing new damage with stuff like your computers on wheels, i.e.
    driverless cars (and other "enterprises")... that has already made
    for quite a number of killings by secret services.


    Likewise, I have no doubt many dissidents worldwide have been
    tortured and their death is on you, because of your spying and your
    selling of whatever the intelligence you gathered (ah, it's always
    been much more than just meta data...  you've always invaded privacy
    of anybody's within your reach without any respect! and so
    surveillance is too weak term for your methods) because your spying
    and selling of whatever the intelligence you gathered to secret
    services has made for those dissidents' deaths, Sergey, Larry and
    Eric!


--
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
https://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr