On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 16:45:53 PM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 04:28:31PM +0200, M. Fioretti wrote:
>
> > BTW, since I'm getting offlist questions about this: in case you were
> > thinking "what you want is the FreedomBox", NO, what I'm talking about
> > is NOT the FreedomBox. What I'm suggesting is compatible with the
> > FreedomBox, but it's something else, much more concrete. See the
> > details in the comments to that same post.
>
> Your model of what FBX is trying to achieve is faulty.
(what follows, with the exception of the last paragraph I added right now, is
the answer I had just sent to Eugen when he pointed out the same thing off list)
it's the model that Moglen was announcing around with Diaspora in
2010.
> FBX is not about hardware, but about a number of FOSS (Debian)
> packages
see above.
- it is a fact that this is the first time somebody points out this
difference so clearly. Nobody, including members of the
debian/software Freedombox ever pointed this out to me (that there
was, that is, a software freedombox separated by Moglen's
hw/project). Even if I've been posting for months on twitter, lists,
etc.. that link every time it was on topic.
- I'm almost sure I never came across that project myself earlier, in
spite of:
- me reading FOSS-related feeds daily for a living
- having already presented my idea on several other mailing lists,
forums, etc (INCLUDING the one on which you saw the link today...)
Even the people who commented on my blog, they knew nothing of this
"other" FreedomBox. Except, indirectly "Hans", who said it in such a
vague form that back then I didn't realize at all what you just told
me.
Ah, well. Now: what I'm suggesting in my posts is equivalent to the
"Leaving the Cloud" part of that project
http://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox/LeavingTheCloud
with the important difference that in my own mind it's a bundle you
could/should be able to install on any Gnu/Linux system. This is
essential to make it popular. Even, say, independent hosting providers
who run Centos or whatever, should really be able to offer the bundle
as a managed service on their CURRENT systems, to "capture" as many
users as possible. When they have it, they can always migrate later to
a fully self-managed debian-based box.
I have two deadlines this week, and another the next one. I see
you've subscribed to the debian freedombox list. You're welcome to
forward this email to that list, to gather feedback. If there is any,
I'll subscribe and join the discussion later.
Thanks,
Marco
ADDITION:
> As to much more concrete, there's the 0.1 image out
> ...
> This 0.1 version is primarily a developer release, which means that
> it focuses on architecture and infrastructure rather than finish
> work.
this, that is the timetable and priorities may be the main difference
between my proposal and the debian freedombox. I am suggesting
something that may be used outside debian, on any distribution, for
the reasons explained above.
Later,
Marco
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
