Re: Is Matrix a good choice?
~ Dr. Trigon [2022-03-16 15:10 +0100]: >>Free Software and offers additional value for our community, and > > What is the additional value? (just curious) In the process of FSFE teams deciding to switch to Matrix, quite a few have been brought up. IIRC, just from the top of my head and rephrasing: * Reactions to messages (like thumbs-up) * More people use Matrix, therefore easier to attract new audiences * More reliable archiving * Upcoming features like polls * Federated rooms with multiple addresses allow preserving a room if the "original" server it was hosted on is offline temporarily or permanently * Easy and seamless encryption, also for group chats * Spaces allow for easy hierarchy and organisation of rooms * Feels more actively developed and at the same time usable on all servers. Good interoperability of advanced features All these points may have downsides, and in some cases XMPP may even be better (e.g. OMEMO has a few cryptographic advantages in terms of perfect forward secrecy). Also the client side of Matrix is admittedly far from perfect as the protocol is developed rapidly. Again, it's not an obvious choice, and I hope that fair and healthy competition benefits both (and more) worlds. >>see defects or bad developments, but let us also try to fix these >>issues. If they are unsolvable, one should at least try to make the >>competing software solution (in this case XMPP, but also sysinit etc) > > That is another good point. What facts would make you state "it is > unsolvable"? To me the critics cited target the foundation of Matrix and from > that I concluded even if it can be fixed it might be very costly and thus > it's not worth the try. Just thinking aloud... That can be a hard or soft fact. If the repository owner or project lead is unresponsive and thereby let's the project die slowly, issues are unsolvable, at least in this space (forks to the rescue). Also a license change to a proprietary license is a hard no-no for our community. But it could also be that you have personal difficulties with lead developers, or that you generally dislike the strategy of a project. Well, instead of badmouthing the project then, I am suggesting to invest your energy in a project or initiative you prefer. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager -- Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl -- @mxmehl The FSFE is a charity that empowers users to control technology ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Is Matrix a good choice?
~ Dr. Trigon [2022-03-10 09:58 +0100]: > The thing I wonder is; we have a quite good solution XMPP - now why > follow the hype just to get something that may be very dubious...? I see multiple problems with your statement. First of all, "may be very dubious" cannot be the foundation for a decision. Can you provide facts to support your doubts that take the most recent developments of Matrix/Element into consideration? Furthermore, while the FSFE has decided to set up a Matrix instance, it did not discontinue XMPP at all [^1]. Teams can freely decide which communication channel to use. Some moved over to Matrix, some stay with XMPP. As every software, it is imperfect. What's important is that Matrix is Free Software and offers additional value for our community, and therefore it is not fully overlapping with XMPP. On a personal and general note, I sometimes wonder about the energy some people put into badmouthing certain projects in lengthy posts because of personal taste or disliking a person behind the project. This did not happen in this thread or by the initial poster, but I recently see it a lot with Matrix or of course also systemd. Is that helping Free Software? I don't think so. Sure, we should have a close look at software solutions, criticise them based on facts if we see defects or bad developments, but let us also try to fix these issues. If they are unsolvable, one should at least try to make the competing software solution (in this case XMPP, but also sysinit etc) better than the one one is criticising; there have to be valid reasons why users and projects switched to the newer software apart from "hype". With this, we could achieve much more for the benefit of user freedoms as a community. Best, Max [^1]: https://fsfe.org/news/2022/news-20220202-01.html -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager -- Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl -- @mxmehl The FSFE is a charity that empowers users to control technology pgpP9bpW22N9V.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Debian package for REUSE
Hi Otto, ~ Otto Kekäläinen [2021-05-10 05:49 +0200]: > I reviewed the Debian packaging at > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/reuse and it looks good to me. Now we > just sit and wait for it to be processed in the Debian NEW queue: > https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html Excellent, thanks for your review! > If reuse wants to be perfect, please consider shipping a man page so > users can run 'man reuse' on their system. If the output of 'reuse > --help' and 'reuser --version' follow normal conventions, you should > be able to generate a man page with help2man > (https://www.gnu.org/software/help2man/). Yes, we already have an issue for that. If someone wants to take a short, please feel free to open a PR :) https://github.com/fsfe/reuse-tool/issues/334 Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Debian package for REUSE
Hi all, ~ Max Mehl [2021-04-28 15:23 +0200]: > But there is no official Debian package yet! And that makes it harder > for users and developers who want to improve the reusability of > software. I have been pointed to the following resource that indicates that there is an experimental package already that went under our radar so far: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/reuse_0.12.1-1.html But if someone here is still interested in contributing to this, please ping me. Also, I am certain that also Debian Developers are happy to receive some help by others :) Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join pgphhfxVEkKJS.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Debian package for REUSE
Hi all, I hope many of you are already aware of REUSE. For those of you who aren't, a short intro: REUSE is a set of best practices to make licensing and copyright easier for everyone – especially for developers who want to make the terms of reuse of their software clear. The focus is on simplicity. Read more: https://reuse.software Now, REUSE provides a helper tool, written in Python. People can install it via PyPi, download packages via Arch's AUR or NixOS, or just build it from source [^1]. But there is no official Debian package yet! And that makes it harder for users and developers who want to improve the reusability of software. Is there anyone who would be interested helping us getting this done, and who has experience with Debian packaging? If so, please let me know! There already is an inofficial package, but it would be great to channel this into the common Debian infrastructure: https://git.ostc-eu.org/OSTC/packaging/reuse https://git.ostc-eu.org/OSTC/packaging/license-expression (dependency) Best, Max [^1]: https://git.fsfe.org/reuse/tool/ -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join pgp5DNRfcV7Ys.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: New Organisation directory tool
Hi Carsten, ~ Carsten Agger [2020-01-09 22:07 +0100]: > Minor report from the trenches of free software development, but a > project for Danish local authorities I've been heavily involved with the > last few years (since 2015, getting up to speed since 2017) made it to > the Joinup site: > > https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-source-observatory-osor/news/authoritative-information > > Basically, it's about something as bureaucratic as maintaining > authoritative organisation hierarchies, e.g. for local authorities > (which the tools was specifically made to support). Ideally, all > onboarding etc. of new staff could be done in this tool with > integrations in place to allow automatic access to other systems the > employees would need. Or, as it says in the article: Thanks for sharing, and congratulations! I find this very interesting and relevant, as it is another example for ready tools that organisations like administrations can use, study, share, and improve. In particular, I am happy about the following: "OS2 already involves 66 of the country’s 98 municipalities, and 35 IT services providers. 'OS2mo could grow to become a standard application, because it delivers a common service that all public organisations in Denmark need,' he says. According to Mr Thirifays, the software can even be adapted to other countries. 'It can already be used as a standalone tool, helping public services, companies, or NGOs keep their address book and access directory up to date.'" The fact that it is supported by a wide range of companies and administrations, and the ability to be adapted by other players as well is a good indicator for its re-usability, which is a key asset for Free Software projects. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Free Software and IT security - your feedback
Dear all, (Some of you might have received this mail personally already) People often say, Free Software is more secure than proprietary software. But what may be the reasons? And is that actually true? We try to answer these and more questions in the following weeks, and you can contribute a great part with only 10 minutes of your time today. In a survey, we would like to ask you to share your opinion on various statements on IT security-related questions, rate different argumentations and approaches the FSFE could use, and share information we might have missed. Everyone is welcome to participate, no matter which level of knowledge about Free Software, IT security or programming. The survey takes ~10 minutes on average to be completed. https://survey.fsfe.org/853518 Apart from this survey, we interview experts in different connected fields and discuss in different teams and working groups. Our goal is to have a more clear and defined position, and to help people understand the influence of Free Software on IT security. The whole activity aims to answer the following broad questions: 1. What is the state of security in Free Software? 2. How can security in Free Software and its projects be improved? 3. How can Free Software contribute to security and safety in our society? Your participation in the survey will help us understand the perception of this topic within the FSFE community, and enable us to concentrate on specific arguments and questions. Thank you for your time! Best regards, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Get REUSE tool packaged for more distributions
Hi Tobias, ~ Tobias Geerinckx-Rice [2019-10-01 23:23 +0200]: > I'm happy to announce that REUSE has been packaged for GNU > Guix[0], a distribution-independent functional package manager. > > Unprivileged users on any system with Guix installed can now > install REUSE with: > > $ guix install reuse How awesome, thank you! This has been added to the README: https://git.fsfe.org/reuse/tool I've never used Guix before, and a quick test in a test environment wasn't successful, but the package looks good. Perhaps others can test and give feedback? Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join pgp0H8cJB1b7G.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Anyone at BalCCon?
Hi Nikos, Please excuse the delayed reply, I just came back from vacation. ~ Nikos Roussos [2019-08-18 12:31 +0200]: >> I thought about offering an FSFE space but would >>love to share this joy and responsibility with other Free Software >>enthusiasts. >> >>So, anyone in? :) > > What do you have in mind? :) Cool that you will be there! > This would be my first BalCCon, so not familiar with logistics, but > does it make sense to pick a day and offer a space for self-organized > sessions, like CCC? I am afraid that we are a bit too late for that already, but it indeed is a nice idea to make a Free Software track next year! BalCCon already has an assembly area which basically is just a larger space within the conference center. So booths would consist of a table and some decoration, just like at other conferences. We could also think of offering some small merchandise, especially if we were more than 2 persons. Would you be in? Then I can ask for a place, send the stuff to Serbia, and announce it. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Anyone at BalCCon?
Hi all, Does anyone of you consider going to BalCCon, a conference about Free Software and IT security in Novi Sad, Serbia? It's going to take place on 13-15 September. https://2k19.balccon.org This will be the second time I will attend, and I liked its cosy style and friendly audience. There also is an area for groups and projects to present themselves. I thought about offering an FSFE space but would love to share this joy and responsibility with other Free Software enthusiasts. So, anyone in? :) Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: REUSE 3.0 released: tutorial, FAQ, and helper tool
~ Carmen Bianca Bakker [2019-08-08 12:48 +0200]: > There is no current plan to package for Debian, though I have desired > to get this done at some point. The problem is that I do not understand > Debian packaging in the slightest. I do maintain the Fedora package, > but it's a little out-of-date because of a missing dependency in the > 0.4.X release. FWIW, since today there is a AUR package for the Arch Linux users [^1]. Created by me, so no guarantee at all - feedback is welcome of course :) If somebody wants to help with packaging the tool for other distributions, please reach out to us. We will be happy to support you! Best, Max [^1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/reuse/ -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join pgpZAK0f6pWlV.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
REUSE 3.0 released: tutorial, FAQ, and helper tool
Hi all, Today, we released the official release of REUSE 3.0 which contains many exciting improvements. REUSE helps developers to declare copyright and licensing of their projects. The new version makes it easier than ever to follow the best practices for Free Software projects. https://reuse.software REUSE 3.0 is accompanied by a brand new tutorial and FAQ. The latest version of the REUSE helper tool will make it much easier for developers to get their repositories REUSE compliant, and can be included in numerous CI/CD workflows. For some more background information, please find the full announcement here: https://fsfe.org/news/2019/news-20190807-01.html I am looking forward to your feedback! Please consider making your software projects REUSE compliant, and let us know how it worked. Feel free to join the mailing list to get in touch with us and other REUSE adopters [^1]. Best, Max [^1]: https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/reuse -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Euro Elections and fsfe
Hi all, ~ Vitaly Repin [2019-05-28 09:44 +0200]: > I believe constructive work with any MEPs is possible in order to influence > them on the FSFE agenda. > Regardless of the political movement they belong to. Strong assiociation > with any political movement > (eurosceptics, liberals, social democrats etc) is a mistake in my opinion. As Florian already wrote, that is why the FSFE does not align with any political party or movement but stays independent. Our mission is to foster Free Software and user freedom, not judging the European Union as a whole. > I would like to put this idea even further. Why can't FSFE monitor how > each and every MEP voted for the matters regarding free software > dyring the current and previous election term and present this statistics > at FSFE web site (searchable web pages + json/xml)? Actually, we thought about that before this year's elections but decided against it. The simple reason was that there hasn't been any vote on a pure Free Software topic [^1]. Free Software politics on EU level often took place within the EU Commission (which we cannot vote for) and other bodies apart from the parliament, or in guidelines and declarations that don't require a vote but set important cornerstones for future legislation. However, with the "Public Money? Public Code!" campaign we strive to push the new parliament to create positive legislation, and we will reach out to interesting MEPs soon to inform them about Free Software and to find out how they think and act. Let's see how we can engage the Free Software community and the general public in this activity. If you have any ideas, please let us know! Best, Max [^1]: If the Copyright Directive comes up in your mind: FS has been a small detail in it and with an exception pro FS. How to judge that in a way that it becomes clear how the MEPs think about FS? -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
German cabaret artist Prayon donates prize money to FSFE
Dear all, A few days ago, Christine Prayon, German political satirist, was awarded a prize by the city of Munich. She donated the prize money to the FSFE because of our engagement for a Free Software strategy in the city. The video of her speech (11:00 min, German) is online now: https://fsfe.org/news/2019/news-20190515-02.html Unfortunately, due to unexpected technical difficulties, the quality is not as good as intended and we had to make a few cuts, but it should be fine enough to enjoy the funny performance. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Highlights of #ILoveFS day 2019
Dear all, "The Free Software community at its best" – that's how 14 February 2019 could be described. Hundreds of posts in blogs and social media, beautiful custom artwork, handsome pictures and interesting events. And all that in order to thank Free Software contributors for their outstanding work to maintain and extend our freedoms. It took us a while to select a few of the many highlights we saw during the day. Read our report to get an impression of what happened that day: https://fsfe.org/news/2019/news-20190329-01.html I hope you enjoyed this day as much as we did. If you feel that we forgot some special highlight (which we surely did considering the amount), please share it with us. And please remember: Thanking Free Software contributors like developers, translators, artists or testers is possible throughout the whole year :) Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Protect freedom on radio devices: raise your voice today!
Hi all, There is a EU directive which may make it impossible to install custom software on your radio devices, e.g. routers, mobile phones, or embedded devices. You can help convince the European Commission to limit the number of device categories this affects, but the period is ending this Monday. It is not hard to participate. I've just published a blog post summarising the topic (long version here [^1]) and providing basic arguments that you can reuse: https://blog.mehl.mx/2019/protect-freedom-on-radio-devices-raise-your-voice-today/ Please spend a few minutes to make your point by Monday. We need to show the Commission that there are people who actually care for user freedom on their devices, and who want to control their technology. Thanks for raising your voice! Best, Max [^1]: https://fsfe.org/activities/radiodirective/ -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Public Money Public Code: a good policy for FSFE and other non-profits?
# Daniel Pocock [2018-06-16 09:50 +0200]: > Some organizations even generate these reports (or the skeleton of the > report) automatically, extracting a list of all known MAC addresses from > their switches and access points, installing management agents on every > host with a function to detect all installed binaries and also observing > all network connections and correlating them back to the respective > binaries. Such data could be cross referenced with checksums of trusted > binaries and the data could be annotated on a wiki page. Could you please name an example? I wonder whether such organisations also install video cameras, hidden microphones and tap work phones to micro-control everything. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact & information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter to enable our work: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Public Money Public Code: a good policy for FSFE and other, non-profits?
First of all, I fully accept your position although I don't agree to it and its reasoning. # Mat Witts [2018-06-14 10:35 +0200]: > For me, I think until the FSFE abandons what seems to me to resemble a > kind of 'watered-down' market-led ideology at the highest level and > fully adopts a more appropriate political philosophy and (as > importantly), culture - I predict many years of in-fighting, confusion, > missed opportunities and personal hurt ahead for all involved at that > level of organization? I think the FSFE doesn't have *one* ideology. We are an organisation with as many ideologies as people being part of it. And isn't this the great thing about Free Software? It has benefits for so many areas and political standpoints, from philosophical, political, ethical, commercial, environmental, educational and many more points of views. But it all comes down to the four freedoms! It's completely natural that in an NGO with so many people involved and our long history, we have disagreement when it comes to our position on certain issues, e.g. the evaluation of the current economical system and how certain tech companies behave. But that's OK, and the bandwidth of our activities and campaigns represents this diversity. Forcing everyone to agree on the one and only ideology would surely create more fights and demotivation. If you feel that another organisation (who I guarantee to have similar internal conflicts :P) fit your standpoint better, please support them. But I think to know even more people who value the diversity and tolerance of viewpoints the FSFE offers. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact & information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter to enable our work: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: Public Money Public Code: a good policy for FSFE and other non-profits?
# Paul Boddie [2018-06-12 21:53 +0200]: > I was surprised that Daniel's motion to document the FSFE's proprietary > dependencies, and to describe ways of eliminating them, was so strongly > opposed. Is it because admitting such dependencies is embarrassing? Or are > there other reasons why no-one else was willing to support it? I was at the said GA meeting and we discussed a while about it. I'm quite sure Daniel received a more detailed explanation with the reasons stated but I don't find it in my archive any more, and my memories aren't complete any more. IIRC, the members brought up two main reasons: 1. Which scope should the list of proprietary software in organisation have? Only the OS and applications on our computers and servers? Or does it extend to the landline phones we use? The tax software of our external accountants? The software temporary freelancers like our designers use? Switches in datacenters our servers are located in? Some of the mentioned components will certainly be driven by non-free software. 2. Obviously, we try to use as much Free Software as possible, but unfortunately we cannot avoid all of it, especially on devices and in circumstances we don't a full access to. Does creating such a huge list benefit our work to promote Free Software, or would this create an enormous, ongoing burden for our volunteers and teams, demotivating them because they can't do much about many of those issues? Because of the unclear scope, and because most believed that the limited advantages of such a project don't outweigh the clear downsides, the GA decided to not adopt this motion. Disclaimer: all only from the top of my head and IMHO, not speaking for the whole GA. In my personal opinion, in the FSFE we should trust our people – those deeply caring about Free Software and often spending their free time – that they don't deliberately use proprietary software for essential parts of their FSFE work if there is any better solution. Imposing such a motion on them would create more frustration and distraction from our actual goal than it would bring any positive effect. If you think that we urgently need such a list of proprietary dependencies, please try to figure out a balanced definition and think of the work involved for different parts of the FSFE. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact & information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter to enable our work: https://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Call for Participation: FSFE track during LSM/RMLL 2018 in Strasbourg
Hi all, This is to let you know that the Call for Participation for the FSFE's dedicated track during RMLL/LSM 2018 in Strasbourg, France, has opened. We are looking forward to interesting presentations, workshop proposals, and your participation in France's largest Free Software event. Please read more about the CfP and the programme in our dedicated news item: <https://fsfe.org/news/2018/news-20180322-01.html> If you have any questions regarding the conference, please write them to cont...@fsfe.org so we don't miss them. Looking forward to meet you in Strasbourg! Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other: https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
Re: subdomains for testing things
# Daniel Pocock [2018-02-08 11:00 +0100]: There is a distinction between people volunteering to maintain a service and the association choosing to rely on a service. This is particularly important in cases where two services do something similar (e.g. Discourse acts as an alternative to the existing Mailman service). If half the group uses one service and half the group uses the other, you split the organization or you double the amount of effort required to community. Metcalfe's law[1] comes to mind. I have to disagree in this case, with the positive experiences from the Git service [^1] in mind. Neither Discourse nor Gitea are/were officially planned to act as a replacement for any service. Git was something a few community members have wished for, and Björn and me just set it up. We were happy that it didn't entail any huge bureaucrazy [sic], we were able to make some tests right away, and to invite some people to give us feedback. That way we experienced that Gitea can also act as a replacement for SVN in the future and fits nicely in some workflows of our organisation. To make it official, we just had to announce it, no domain change, no votes of huge groups. Discourse could work similarly. It has been set up by a group of volunteers and we gave them a free hand. Later it might serve as a communication platform for a specific campaign or activity, and if we will make good experiences, other groups and parts of the organisation might think about picking it up for their activities, potentially now as an "official" service. There is no need that we *now* think about replacing the GA mailing list. In my experience, bureaucracy frustrates volunteers for very good reasons. Let them define a subdomain name, let them hack around, give them some freedom – if such a service ever is ready for organisation-wide usage, we can still think about the details. But devaluate their service by putting a "test" in the domain name would demotivate me as a service maintainer and user at the same time. And, once again, your proposal solves a non-problem in my opinion. hellekin found harsh words to express his feelings, but his problem wasn't that the service implied to be official but that he didn't know about it. Best, Max [^1]: git.fsfe.org -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: forums, mailing lists and other tools
# hellekin [2018-02-01 11:05 +0100]: On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 07:26:42AM +0100, Florian Snow wrote: This may have been mentioned before, but there is a Discourse instance at community.fsfe.org. Hmmm, no there is not, only a broken page. Anyway, if it existed when I proposed my services last year, nobody mentioned it. If it is more recent I find it surprising and upsetting that I have to learn it from the general discussion list. FSFE's community outreach has been, in my experience, suboptimal -- a cool-down euphemism for catastrophic. The Discourse instance, which I think I've explained multiple times on this list, has been set up by volunteers. It is still in a testing status so it's rather senseless for the FSFE to promote it. Of course you are invited to help them [^1] and help the FSFE and its community to try new communication tools. Best, Max [^1]: https://git.fsfe.org/fsfe-system-hackers/community -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Apply for membership and meet us at FOSDEM
Disclaimer: I am an FSFE employee. # Daniel Pocock [2018-02-01 18:16 +0100]: On 01/02/18 17:16, Florian Snow wrote: Werner Koch <w...@gnupg.org> writes: I personally see a lot of problems that employees of the FSFE are also members _and_ that they make up a large part of the membership. Would you care to elaborate a little bit on this point? I am curious about it. It is quite simple to explain: - the funds from fellowship/supporters pay the salaries and other major expenses (over 50% of the budget comes from fellowship/supporter donations) Ok, so people working and caring for the FSFE have no right to contribute to the organisation's mid- and long-term strategy? Do you want to keep out input from people working day-to-day for the FSFE? Do you see a threat in them being members? Please keep in mind that there's no automatism for employees to become GA members. They have to apply and convince the GA of their motivation just like any other person. - but the fellowship/supporters only have 2 votes in the GA (and none after the change), although some GA members are also fellowship/supporter members too The current system has many more flaws, for example that the Fellowship representatives don't represent the non-paying volunteers, and that the voter turnout often is below 20%. That's why we discuss better solutions to grant membership to interested people but this process needs time. So as many others wrote here: no need to rush things. If procedures for becoming a member change (this is still not decided), they will be more open and transparent. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: breaking bad habits like Doodle and Facebook with plugins?
Hi Michael, # M [2018-01-17 20:50 +0100]: Instead of "punishing" people for using these services it would probably be better to encourage the usage of alternatives. My opinion exactly. I'd be really interested if you knew any seriously recommendable alternatives to Doodle. There is Dudle [1] which looks promising, but its usability is pretty horrid and comes nowhere near Doodle, and sadly feature requests do not seem to get integrated. Yes, I've been using Framadate lately. I'm not sure which features it's lacking in comparison to Doodle but it does everything I need for scheduling meetings and executing smaller polls: https://framadate.org/ Git: https://git.framasoft.org/framasoft/framadate Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: forums, mailing lists and other tools
# Daniel Pocock [2018-01-16 13:43 +0100]: Discourse is somewhat overwork as we would have to patch various parts of it to either remove JS or free/libreate it. Would packaging the Discourse JavaScript into Debian satisfy those concerns? Is there enough interest in this topic to start building a wiki page about it? I want to highlight that some volunteers are already experimenting with a Discourse instance for FSFE, mainly Nikos IIRC (in Cc). Please join them if you want to support them in their work. https://git.fsfe.org/fsfe-system-hackers/community Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: model for local groups
# Daniel Pocock [2018-01-14 00:50 +0100]: Have these issues been discussed in other regions before? Could be, as some other groups have similar geographic circumstances. You may want to ask on our coordinators' mailing list [1]. Best, Max [1] https://wiki.fsfe.org/Teams/Coordinators -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Shouldn't we try to give a boost to the PMPC campaign?
Hi all, # Matthias Kirschner [2017-12-15 14:27 +0100]: But for the future we have the following ideas: * We plan to have different categories (local, national, international organisations/companies/public administrations) so we can display the signing organisations differently on the website, or when we contact politicians in certain areas. I just created an issue for the PMPC website covering this idea because it seems to be the right time to tackle this. Organising the different non-individual entities will make it much easier for us to add companies, small local organisations, and public administrations. This is something we didn't have the time for back then: https://git.fsfe.org/pmpc/website/issues/208 Please share your thoughts in the issue, and if you have time over the festive season I'd love to receive Pull Requests for the different sub-issues. If you struggle with certain Hugo-related problems please feel free to contact me and I'll be happy to help :) Best, Max @all: Thanks for sharing your feedback about PMPC! -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Updates on policy goal "Consumer rights and device sovereignty"?
Hi Giovanni,
Thanks for your interesting question.
# Giovanni Biscuolo [2017-12-05 12:28 +0100]:
please are there any updates about the 2014-2019 policy goal "Consumer
rights and device sovereignty" and in general about all 2014-2019 policy
goals https://fsfe.org/activities/policy/eu/policy-goals.html ?
Here are just a few pointer for first reads, please feel free to ask if
you have further questions or want to have more info on specific issues:
* Regarding device sovereignty we are constantly working on the Radio
Lockdown Directive [1] which is endangering the users' freedom to load
software on their radio-capable devices. There will be an update on
fsfe.org with the latest proceedings in a few days.
* In Germany, we had a huge success with enabling consumers to use their
own routers and modems to access the internet which wasn't legally
guaranteed before [2].
* DRM ("Digital Restriction Management") still is a huge issue for us
although there is no actual movement on the EU level in this regard.
* Within the Commission's Digital Single Market strategy there's lots of
issues which require our attention, and Polina Malaja, our Policy
Analyst, is doing a great job defending users' rights. Our comments on
DSM [3] from 2015 might give you good pointers to further readings
* Mostly all our policy work aims to protect (Free Software) users'
interests. Here's the latest news from this working area: [4]
By the way, with our recently launched "Public Money, Public Code" [5]
campaign we've also drawn some attention by politicians in the whole EU.
With freeing publicly financed software we hope to secure citizens'
personal data on a large scale.
Best,
Max
[1] https://fsfe.org/activities/radiodirective/
[2] https://fsfe.org/news/2016/news-20160725-01.html
[3] https://fsfe.org/news/2015/news-20151104-01.html
[4] https://fsfe.org/tags/tagged-policy.html
[5] https://publiccode.eu/
--
Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe
Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl
Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate
pgpQKL9ip8LZz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: "Joining" vs "becoming a supporter"
# Daniel Pocock [2017-12-01 13:27 +0100]: https://fsfe.org/fellowship/ams/join.php?ams=join and that page has "join" in the URL and it doesn't provide any link to the /contribute page Yeah, the /join pages lack a lot of useful information, features, and links. This is because it is built on our old Account Management System which is hard to maintain, not translatable, and tricky to integrate with our normal web pages. However, we are working on improving the situation by shifting to a whole new AMS. This will also make it much easier to choose between different options, e.g. becoming a volunteer or contributing in other ways. Please read the AMS Hackers' wiki page for more info: https://wiki.fsfe.org/Teams/Ams-Hackers Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: CPU as a service // MINIX in Intel ME
Hi Timothy, # Timothy Pearson [2017-11-29 20:25 +0100]: Yes, I agree. The question is, in a society where any new features / ways of doing things are expected at no cost or well below the real cost of creating things, how does society as a whole move away from the resultant need to "monetise" the resulting products in unethical ways? No answer to your question but some additional thoughts: If you were talking only about web services, I'd understand. But in other areas technical products sometimes are obviously overpriced and people seem to tolerate, understand and/or even respect that. Examples: Apple products or some popular proprietary software like MS Office or Adobe stuff. The only difference to the "no-cost" web services like social networks is that they are paid by the users' data and privacy – hard to quantify but I'd say this is overpriced, too. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Program Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
German Datacenter Association (was: Re: for FSFE German chapter)
Hi Karsten, # Karsten Dreifus [2017-08-12 09:37 +0200]: Are there any people from FSFE Germany in contact with http://www.germandatacenters.com/de/home/ I am thinking if some aspects of open source, open data initiatives can be put inside these organisations in the beginning? They have founded this since 10 August 2017 in Frankfurt. Related news: https://www.golem.de/news/german-datacenter-association-betreiber-von-rechenzentren-gruenden-lobbygruppe-1708-129450.html Not to my knowledge, at least not officially. But you're right, this may be a good opportunity. I'm forwarding your message to the FSFE's Team Germany [1]. @all: If we wanted to highlight the relevance of Free Software for datacenters, which specific benefits and reasons for supporting FLOSS would you mention? Best, Max [1] https://fsfe.org/de/ -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Is it acceptable to use proprietary software (platforms) to promote software freedom?
# Jonas Oberg [2017-07-26 11:27 +0200]: Good point but not easy to answer. All services can be viewed with a Free Software browser but e.g. Facebook tries to convince you of downloading the non-free Messenger app (you cannot even write FB messages on your mobile browser anymore IIRC). LibreJS may also warn its users with most of these services' sites. Is this already Free Software unfriendly? If there's a way to connect to the service with Free Software and it gives you access to the features the service offers, then that's fine for me, as long as it's not overly burdensome to do so. I know, it's not a black and white :-) You convinced me :) So in this case, the sentence under the social sharing buttons would be: Some services harm your privacy. [Learn more]. Anything to add? If not, I'd make the change soon. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Is it acceptable to use proprietary software (platforms) to promote software freedom?
# mray [2017-07-25 22:36 +0200]: Services that could potentially be harmful aren't the issue. It is about not explicitly stating that we know some of them *are definitively* harmful. Yet all we say is: "Be vigilant, somewhere danger is lurking!" I get your point and start to believe that we could rephrase it to: Some services are Free Software unfriendly and harm your privacy. [Learn more]. While installing these buttons we also thought of somehow marking problematic services. But we felt uncomfortable of defining a measurement for good and bad services, also because we don't have enough information. Doing the right thing and call out the "bad players"would reveal the issue at hand: We literally show alternatives but refuse to give up using the harmful ones. What message does that send? I don't know if I understand you correctly but these are two separate issues: informing the users, and limiting the connection to problematic networks. We don't blame people who use proprietary software or services but they should know about the consequences. And I don't consider these buttons as advertisement for FB or Twitter but for D*, GS, Reddit, and HackerNews mainly – internet users see (privacy-unfriendly) buttons to non-free networks all the time. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate pgpiN2ma5qZMB.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Is it acceptable to use proprietary software (platforms) to promote software freedom?
# mray [2017-07-25 22:02 +0200]: On 25.07.2017 21:44, mray wrote: Reaching people isn't the end goal. Just like market share isn't. We are about freedom. What if I asked FSFE to tweet its take on using twitter? Wouldn' the honest tweet be: "You should not use twitter as it is a walled garden and proprietary software." No doubt, Twitter is a proprietary product, and people shouldn't be forced to use it (if they choose to do so it's their free decision but they should know about the consequences). I hope I never implied that the FSFE might have a different opinion. Turns out I don't have to wait for this as the FSFE website says: "Some services may be Free Software unfriendly and harm your privacy." For reference: this text links to the wiki page <https://wiki.fsfe.org/Advocacy/ProprietaryWebServices> I guess the unfriendly harming refers to twitter and facebook, less to GNUsocial and Diaspora. My impression was there was **no doubt** about harm being done. Aren't we framing it a bit opportunistic here? Good point. While I'm certain that Facebook and Twitter are harmful to its users' privacy, I'm not sure about Reddit or HackerNews. That's why at the top of the wiki page there is: *Attention*: This page is far from perfect and it needs your help to improve it. Furthermore, the lists of alternatives are incomplete probably. So please help us gathering more information about these services. But even if we had more information we could never be sure that using Diaspora or GNU Social doesn't harm a user's privacy because much of it depends on a pod's administrator. And in my opinion, the "may harm" wording provokes some kind of critical thinking: a social network user should never feel too confident, even if an organisation like FSFE told her that service A or B is safe. Would you understand the current wording the same way? If not, what would you propose instead? Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate pgpevVysb0pqo.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Ethical phones
Hi Padraig, # Decarraig [2017-07-17 20:51 +0200]: I have been following various discussions on andr...@lists.fsfe.org and I am wondering if FSFE has any policy on ethical issues with mobile phones e.g. Conflict mining, cobalt mining etc ? No, to my knowledge, we don't have a policy on that. But if we had, it would probably be "The more ethical, the better". We are experts when it comes to ethical software, but I doubt we have enough expertise to evaluate the many granular issues of certain minerals and the often dubious circumstances in which they are produced – not to speak of the labour conditions in which mobile phones are manufactured. This is a field large and complicated enough for dozens of NGOs. However, many of us appreciate initiatives like Fairphone, and we will continue to help them to improve the freedom of their software (and users). Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: The United Nations Prohibits Nuclear Weapons
# willi uebelherr [2017-07-09 05:32 +0200]: Off-Topic? No, i think not. It is. This is a mailing list about Free Software topics, and it's not the first time you've posted obvious off-topic or insulting mails to our lists. Consider this as a last warning before we put you on moderation. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Is it acceptable to use proprietary software (platforms) to promote software freedom?
# jah [2017-06-21 17:46 +0200]: If it is true that humans tend to seek out ideas that confirm their own, then it seems likely FSFE's twitter followers belong to the set of people who do not need convincing to use and further Free Software. As one of the maintainers of the FSFE's Twitter account, I cannot confirm your theory. Our Twitter sphere (direct followers and their followers) may be tech-oriented but by far not only convinced Free Software enthusiasts. Just some groups in our Twitter audience I think we wouldn't reach via GNU Social/Diaspora alone: - tech journalists - politicians concerned about digital politics - supporters and members of other civil organisations covering digital topics but not FS - some people who we won by campaigns about slightly different topics we conducted, e.g. "Document Freedom Day" or "They don't want you to" - random tech people who love some of our promo material (like the nocloud stickers) but don't affiliated with Free Software before Following the various discussions about this for many years, I always come to the same personal conclusions: - Forcing our "followers" to use a proprietary network in order to get our messages is bad. We have to offer Free Software alternatives, if available. - Everything we post via proprietary channels must be available on at least one Free Software channel (except a message is only targeted to users of a certain network, e.g. a call for Facebook users to switch to Diaspora) - Whether or not to use a certain proprietary service has to be decided on an estimation whether a) we can reach more people who we couldn't reach via Free Software alternatives, and b) whether the time/money spent is worth the results. - We have to inform our users about the negative effects of the various proprietary networks, especially those we use – something we already do on fsfe.org by linking to [1] at various occasions. - We shouldn't restrict our volunteers in the tools they want to use to fight for Free Software. If a local group is convinced that it should promote their meetings via Facebook, let them do that as long as they don't promote Facebook as the best or only tool. With the FSFE's Twitter and Facebook presence, I'm positive that all requirements are met. Best, Max [1] https://wiki.fsfe.org/Advocacy/ProprietaryWebServices -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate pgpbzftyROExn.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: UK to "end" encryption?
# Daniel Pocock [2017-05-25 15:55 +0200]: I wonder what this will mean for developers of free software who pass through British airports with software like Tor on their devices? Well, that completely depends on how the possible regulation will look like. Currently, I don't see a realistic way how such backdoors can be included in software and services, especially those who have their headquarters abroad (or nowhere in the case of distributed Free Software projects). "...require big technology and internet companies to break their own security so that messages can be read by intelligence agencies." According to this quote from the source you mentioned it seems the ideas circle more around major web *service companies* (FB, WhatsApp...) and less around said distributed Free Software projects like Tor. And well, that you shouldn't entrust proprietary, US-based providers with your most valuable data should be common sense in the tech community. By the way, I doubt that the UK has enough economic power to enforce such one-sided backdoor obligations outside of the UK. I also doubt that such regulations would be legally feasible in the EU. Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Free Software Foundation Europe - Program Manager Contact and further information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl Private weblog: (blog.mehl.mx) | Private homepage: (mehl.mx) Support advocacy for Free Software: https://fsfe.org/donate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
