Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Jean Louis]

* Yasuaki Kudo  [2022-05-17 16:53]:
> So far, here is my own explanation of the apparent contradiction, based on 
> the comments from people who kindly participated in our discussion:
> 
> - GNU Emacs runs on Windows, a proprietary system.  That's great
> - because it can be used as an opportunity to invite people to the
> - world of Free Software.

I do not see it that way. 

GNU Emacs runs on Windows as it is useful for Windows users. But would
it run exclusively on Windows, it would not be supported by GNU
project.

> - Guix runs on Linux, the unabridged with all the proprietary bits
> - and pieces for the video card, wifi and all.  The same comment as
> - above... does not apply?  Because if it runs on unmodified Linux
> - and people choose to do so, it hurts the project of promoting Free
> - Software!

Guix runs on Linux-libre which is different kernel version than
mainsteram Linux kernel. 

Guix is project for fully free software distribution. That is purpose
of it. The purpose is not to run on proprietary systems or using
proprietary blobs. That is why in Guix community 

Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Alexandre Oliva]

Hello, Yasuaki,

On May 16, 2022, Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:

> The contradiction I see is that:

> * Emacs runs on Windows.  Instructions and reasons are stated clearly (as you 
> quoted) 

> * Guix OS technically runs on Linux (not just LibreLinux).  However,
> it is not "advertised" (the verb seemingly preferred by the community)
> and even the discussion thereof is shunned.

> So I am still left wondering 

I don't think the situations are similar.

Say you have MS-Windows installed on your computer, and you wish to run
GNU Emacs.  You can install GNU Emacs built for MS-Windows, and it will
work.  I doubt you'd install MS-Windows just so that you could run GNU
Emacs on your computer.  For this reason alone, you'd be better off
installing GNU/Linux rather than MS-Windows.  So it's not like GNU
Emacs would induce you to install a proprietary operating system even if
it explicitly mentions support for it.

Contrast that with a scenario in which you wish to run Guix OS.  Whether
you already have the non-Free kernel Linux installed on that computer is
irrelevant: Guix OS's installer will install a kernel afresh.  If you
configure it to install a non-Free kernel, that's non-Free Software
you're installing on your computer.  If Guix OS's documentation were to
tell you about this possibility, and tell you how to do it, it would be
effectively encouraging and inducing you and countless other users to
install non-Free Software that was not present on their computers
before, and that would be getting installed because of the wish to run
Guix OS on those computers.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, happy hackerhttps://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
   Free Software Activist   GNU Toolchain Engineer
Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice
but very few check the facts.  Ask me about 

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

I mentioned something similar in a Guix mailing list but my opinion is this, 
quoting what I heard from someone else:

Ideas divide us but necessity unites us.

If Free Software is indeed indispensable (which I think it is), then we do 
everything to fulfill it.   I understand now that there are both optimists and 
pessimists regarding the mixed usage (and we haven't even talked about the 
hardware itself?) of Free and Non-Free.  I am definately an optimist here but 
Is it possible to put these ideas aside as a matter of academic interest for 
those who have the time?

Ironically as it may be, where there is an overwhelming majority of pessimists, 
the optimists who wish to openly discuss how to mix free and non-free are 
forced to create a separate community (which will welcome everyone, including 
the pessimists).

-Yasu


> On May 18, 2022, at 00:38, Andrew Yu via libreplanet-discuss 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hey Greg, I really disagree on this issue ...
> 
> It is really easy, when a user requests for help using nonfree drivers
> in Guix, to warn them about the dangers.  This ensures that users are
> indeed informed, and would seek hardware that works well with fully free
> software in the future if they care (well, if we can't make them care
> there isn't much we can do in any case).
> 
> Users generally need a soft transition.  Although in the best case we
> would expressly and directly get a user to switch to something fully
> free, many are incapable of transitioning at such immediacy.  Many
> people's jobs require nonfree software, and "get a better job" and/or
> activism against such requirements, though nice, are hard and take a lot
> of effort.  Before these are met, it is much better for the user to be
> on a mostly free system with minimal nonfree software than a mostly
> nonfree system with minimal free software.  The same goes for firmware,
> though finding hardware that works well with free software is indeed
> generally easier than getting rid of bad work/government requirements.
> In any case, using nonfree software/firmware on an otherwise free system
> is in my opinion much preferred to using a nonfree system.
> 
> Although, I believe that "Emacs on Windows" and "Nonfree firmware in
> Guix" should indeed be treated similarly and be kept sepeate from the
> core community as it's not our core mission.
> 
> -a (stealing greg-style signatures)
> ___
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss


signature.asc
Description: Binary data
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Andrew Yu via libreplanet-discuss]

Hey Greg, I really disagree on this issue ...

It is really easy, when a user requests for help using nonfree drivers
in Guix, to warn them about the dangers.  This ensures that users are
indeed informed, and would seek hardware that works well with fully free
software in the future if they care (well, if we can't make them care
there isn't much we can do in any case).

Users generally need a soft transition.  Although in the best case we
would expressly and directly get a user to switch to something fully
free, many are incapable of transitioning at such immediacy.  Many
people's jobs require nonfree software, and "get a better job" and/or
activism against such requirements, though nice, are hard and take a lot
of effort.  Before these are met, it is much better for the user to be
on a mostly free system with minimal nonfree software than a mostly
nonfree system with minimal free software.  The same goes for firmware,
though finding hardware that works well with free software is indeed
generally easier than getting rid of bad work/government requirements.
In any case, using nonfree software/firmware on an otherwise free system
is in my opinion much preferred to using a nonfree system.

Although, I believe that "Emacs on Windows" and "Nonfree firmware in
Guix" should indeed be treated similarly and be kept sepeate from the
core community as it's not our core mission.

-a (stealing greg-style signatures)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Greg Farough]

On Tue, May 17 2022, Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:

> So far, here is my own explanation of the apparent contradiction,
> based on the comments from people who kindly participated in our
> discussion:
>
> - GNU Emacs runs on Windows, a proprietary system. That's great
> because it can be used as an opportunity to invite people to the world
> of Free Software.
>
> - Guix runs on Linux, the unabridged with all the proprietary bits and
> pieces for the video card, wifi and all. The same comment as above...
> does not apply? Because if it runs on unmodified Linux and people
> choose to do so, it hurts the project of promoting Free Software!

I think one important distinction between the first case and the
second one is that Windows is unambiguously nonfree; there's no room
for the user to misunderstand that they're on a free operating system.
They can get their first taste of freedom on a nonfree operating
system, and then choose to move to a free one.

Plenty of users wrongfully assume that they're running a (fully) free
system when they're using a distro like Ubuntu, when they're in fact
not. Guix and the other FSDG distros having that policy helps raise
awareness about that, and raise awareness about the problem of nonfree
firmware generally.

This article[1] has a little more context on how a specific event or
community could present the issue of nonfree firmware to the user,
allowing them to make an informed decision. But we ourselves shouldn't
do that, as free software activists, as people (rightly) see us as
"holding the line" when it comes to the free software philosophy. 

-g

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/install-fest-devil.html

-- 
Greg Farough // Campaigns Manager
Free Software Foundation

Join the FSF and help us defend software freedom: https://my.fsf.org


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

No, not at all, the whole point is to gather perspectives  (positions, stance, 
"attitudes", whatever the appropriate noun) from various existing Free Software 
projects and hopefully, see the light.  A comparative study, not particularly 
about Guix.  (Although I was originally surprised and frustrated there).


> If you have particular software problem then please write to their
> authors or support groups of that particular software.
> 
> If you have some problem with Guix, write to Guix people on IRC or
> mailing list.
> 
> -- 
> Jean
> 
> Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
> https://www.fsf.org/campaigns
> 
> In support of Richard M. Stallman
> https://stallmansupport.org/

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Jean Louis]

* Yasuaki Kudo  [2022-05-17 16:32]:
> Hi,
> 
> I just wanted to follow up that I meant to ask:
>  
> - Endorsing Free Software to be available on non-free systems, so as
> - long as it is understood that it is an invitation to the fully
> - Free System, not just partial - is this stance well shared among
> - the members and participants of FSF/GNU projects?  Or is it the
> - case that Richard Stallman is rather uniquely more generous than
> - others?

When free software is created it normally does fit into various
standards and various operating systems, and free software may run on
many versions of Windows, UNIX, and UNIX-licensed proprietary systems,
not only on FreeBSD and BSD versions of UNIX, not only on Linux based
systems, and so on.

Users are supported in running free software no matter what underlying
operating system is.

If software runs exclusively on proprietary system, then such IMHO is
not endorsed by GNU Project. You got it right.

Maybe you should find appropriate mailing list on GNU project, as
Libreplanet is FSF's mailing list:

GNU Mailing Lists
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/

Maybe GNU Misc Discuss is for that question more appropriate.



Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

Sorry I have point this out...  you see, your comments are adding examples of 
how proprietary systems can be harmful...  But this in no way changes the 
nature of contradiction (using Emacs and Guix as convenient subjects for 
comparison) I have been mentioning, the main part of my question.

-Yasu

PS
* I think the pros and cons of using proprietary systems are well understood, 
perhaps, especially amongst the subscribers of this mailing list.

* It is worthy of mentioning as well, that the security argument may not be so 
convincing.  If there is a nasty security bug in the hardware and the immediate 
fix comes from the manufacturer in a proprietary BLOB?

> On May 17, 2022, at 22:48, lkcl  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:51 PM Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:
> 
>> - Guix runs on Linux, the unabridged with all the proprietary bits and 
>> pieces for the video card, wifi and all.  The same comment as above... does 
>> not apply?  Because if it runs on unmodified Linux and people choose to do 
>> so, it hurts the project of promoting Free Software!
> 
> the exclusion of proprietary WIFI drivers does not make any sense until you
> see these:
> 
> * 
> https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/84142/breaking-news/broadcom-wifi-driver-flaws.html
> * https://thehackernews.com/2017/04/broadcom-wifi-hack.html
> * 
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2021/09/18/apple-iphone-warning-security-wifi-ssid-new-iphone-hack/
> 
> which exposed LITERALLY BILLIONS of people to drive-by exploits
> 
> in that context, how is placing the exact same proprietary drivers onto
> a system *in any way* helping to promote Ethical Software principles?
> 
> it's the total opposite, isn't it? it's directly exposing users to
> harm, isn't it?
> 
> not only that, but it also risks the actual developers from being hit with
> a Class Action Lawsuit precisely because they exposed users to harm,
> isn't it?
> 
> debian makes the compromise that they put all the "nonfree" parts
> into a special repository "nonfree".  you have to *actively* choose
> whether to use that.
> 
> ubuntu says "yeah f*** that, we're just gonna expose users to harm
> because it's convenient"
> 
> GNU says "ultimately, if the user really wants to use nonfree parts
> that's entirely their choice, but we're not going to help them in any
> way to do so".
> 
> you *can* take an entirely Libre system and make it non-Libre.
> it's software, after all.  you have that choice.
> 
> l.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Jean Louis]

* Yasuaki Kudo  [2022-05-17 16:27]:
> Hi Jean!
> 
> So my original question of the seemingly different attitudes toward making it 
> clear and easy for people who want to run Free on Non-Free on (or with) 
> software remains, and I am excited to get more clarification!
> 
> > You seem to have an opinion that community should talk about
> > proprietary software even if it is exclusively not about proprietary
> > software. Why do you have that urge to enforce a subject which is
> > clearly not the goal of the community?
> 
> I think a little more nuanced description is in order.   So there are GNU 
> projects that do mention (talk about) proprietary systems such as Windows, 
> make it available on them, and so on, as we have seen in responses.
> 
> Now, people from such projects that make the software available on 
> proprietary systems - are they "enforcing a subject which is not the goal of 
> the community?"
> 
> Might it be the case that Guix community will happily discuss how to enable 
> the 'careless Linux' (if I may say so, instead of 'regular', for that with 
> proprietary BLOBs), so as long as there are periodic notices, enticing them 
> to find the Free alternatives?

If you have particular software problem then please write to their
authors or support groups of that particular software.

If you have some problem with Guix, write to Guix people on IRC or
mailing list.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[lkcl]

On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:51 PM Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:

> - Guix runs on Linux, the unabridged with all the proprietary bits and pieces 
> for the video card, wifi and all.  The same comment as above... does not 
> apply?  Because if it runs on unmodified Linux and people choose to do so, it 
> hurts the project of promoting Free Software!

the exclusion of proprietary WIFI drivers does not make any sense until you
see these:

* 
https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/84142/breaking-news/broadcom-wifi-driver-flaws.html
* https://thehackernews.com/2017/04/broadcom-wifi-hack.html
* 
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2021/09/18/apple-iphone-warning-security-wifi-ssid-new-iphone-hack/

which exposed LITERALLY BILLIONS of people to drive-by exploits

in that context, how is placing the exact same proprietary drivers onto
a system *in any way* helping to promote Ethical Software principles?

it's the total opposite, isn't it? it's directly exposing users to
harm, isn't it?

not only that, but it also risks the actual developers from being hit with
a Class Action Lawsuit precisely because they exposed users to harm,
isn't it?

debian makes the compromise that they put all the "nonfree" parts
into a special repository "nonfree".  you have to *actively* choose
whether to use that.

ubuntu says "yeah f*** that, we're just gonna expose users to harm
because it's convenient"

GNU says "ultimately, if the user really wants to use nonfree parts
that's entirely their choice, but we're not going to help them in any
way to do so".

you *can* take an entirely Libre system and make it non-Libre.
it's software, after all.  you have that choice.

l.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

So far, here is my own explanation of the apparent contradiction, based on the 
comments from people who kindly participated in our discussion:

- GNU Emacs runs on Windows, a proprietary system.  That's great because it can 
be used as an opportunity to invite people to the world of Free Software.

- Guix runs on Linux, the unabridged with all the proprietary bits and pieces 
for the video card, wifi and all.  The same comment as above... does not apply? 
 Because if it runs on unmodified Linux and people choose to do so, it hurts 
the project of promoting Free Software!

So the contradiction can be explained by the former based on Optimism and the 
latter, Pessimism?

-Yasu







> On May 17, 2022, at 21:05, lkcl  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 11:38 AM Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I just wanted to follow up that I meant to ask:
>> 
>> - Endorsing Free Software to be available on non-free systems,
>> so as long as it is understood that it is an invitation to the fully Free
>> System, not just partial -
>> is this stance well shared among the members and participants of FSF/GNU 
>> projects?
>>  Or is it the case that Richard Stallman is rather uniquely more generous 
>> than others?
> 
> i cannot speak for others - including Dr Stallman - only observe how
> others behave.  and i am having difficulty parsing what you wrote.
> 
> bottom line is that:
> 
>   causing harm to Free Software should be the driving principle of
> actions to avoid
> 
> from there it should be pretty obvious that *each individual person
> and their actions*
> can be guaged as to whether it is good - or bad - for Free Software.
> 
> you do not need me, or anyone else, to tell you that.
> 
> a "stance" is also completely irrelevant to that, and i do not believe it to
> be helpful or useful to consider "stances".
> 
> there is the GNU Maintainers documentation, there is the FSF documentation
> you and everyone else is entirely at liberty to choose *for yourself* whether 
> to
> use it as a guide to your actions - or not.
> 
> l.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Jean Louis]

* Yasuaki Kudo  [2022-05-15 19:57]:
> Having said this, I see that GNU Emacs works on Microsoft Windows??
> How in the world is this done if the GNU's attitude is absolute zero
> tolerance of anything Proprietary?

Not only GNU Emacs works on proprietary systems, I would say that so
much of free software can run on proprietary systems. There is nothing
in particular on GNU Emacs that we shall mention it in the relation
that it runs on proprietary systems.

> I wish to leave my sincere comment that in no way I am trying to
> create a hostile conversation - I just want to know the dynamics of
> these seemingly contradictory outcomes.   For example, is Emacs for
> Windows indeed developed by a parallel, non-GNU-aligned community?

In GNU development it does not matter if developers are using
proprietary systems neither GNU as project is enforcing developers not
to use proprietary systems. 

What matters is that free software is created.

Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

Hi,

I just wanted to follow up that I meant to ask:
 
- Endorsing Free Software to be available on non-free systems, so as long as it 
is understood that it is an invitation to the fully Free System, not just 
partial - is this stance well shared among the members and participants of 
FSF/GNU projects?  Or is it the case that Richard Stallman is rather uniquely 
more generous than others?

Sorry I should have been clearer.

-Yasu

> On May 17, 2022, at 18:54, lkcl  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 2:00 AM Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:
>> 
>> If this is the case, a few more follow-up questions:
>> 
>> - Is this attitude widely shared among the participants of FSF or GNU 
>> projects?
> 
> "attitude" is a very strong / loaded word, it is making me hesitate to answer
> "yes or no".
> 
> there is a goal: that goal is the combination of Ethical behaviour and
> principles
> applied to Software usage and development.
> 
> the *advice* of - or more like the documentation behind - the GNU Project
> and of the Free Software Foundation (which is very different from an 
> *attitude*)
> is to promote that combination of Ethical behaviour and principles as applied
> to Software usage and development.
> 
> people can have a "bad" or a "good" attitude whilst also still respecting
> (or disrespecting) those principles.  i've seen that happen.
> 
>> - Are there GNU projects other than Guix, in which helping people with 
>> special
>> needs for their proprietary systems, by purposefully discussing and sharing 
>> the
>> knowhow, is shunned - perhaps with some of the participants even declaring
>> to leave the project unless it is? 
> 
> Dr Stallman's perspective is amazingly clear and very respectful.
> what i have seen him do is to make it clear what the goal of the
> GNU Project is (to promote the combination of Ethical behaviour
> in the form of Software), and to *very respectfully* redirect anyone
> wishing to *disregard* or undermine that goal to move their discussion
> elsewhere.
> 
> in the version of the GNU Maintainers documentation that i was
> helping to edit, it gives advice here on how to respectfully deal with
> this situation.  it does *NOT* imply "go be a complete dickhead and
> smash people's opinions into the floor because they want to use
> nonfree software" because by doing so you are, yourself, basically
> being a dickhead and undermining Free Software as a result.
> 
> in circumstances where people are being dickheads, chances are high
> that anyone who left, and then had their system hacked (or it becomes
> unstable / unusable) because they used nonfree software, would go,
> 
>"shit, i should have listened to those people who told me of the
> consequences  of using nonfree software..."
> 
> at which point there are *two* possible paths for the thoughts in their
> head:
> 
>1) "... but they were such disrespectful dickheads that i am
> never going back even though it would be beneficial for me"
> 
> or:
> 
>2) "... and they were so respectful i think i'll go back sheepishly
> because from their behaviour when i *wasn't* listening to them,
> i have confidence that they won't attack me or try to undermine
>me"
> 
> you see how that works?
> 
> l.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[lkcl]

On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 2:00 AM Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:
>
> If this is the case, a few more follow-up questions:
>
> - Is this attitude widely shared among the participants of FSF or GNU 
> projects?

"attitude" is a very strong / loaded word, it is making me hesitate to answer
"yes or no".

there is a goal: that goal is the combination of Ethical behaviour and
principles
applied to Software usage and development.

the *advice* of - or more like the documentation behind - the GNU Project
and of the Free Software Foundation (which is very different from an *attitude*)
is to promote that combination of Ethical behaviour and principles as applied
to Software usage and development.

people can have a "bad" or a "good" attitude whilst also still respecting
(or disrespecting) those principles.  i've seen that happen.

> - Are there GNU projects other than Guix, in which helping people with special
> needs for their proprietary systems, by purposefully discussing and sharing 
> the
> knowhow, is shunned - perhaps with some of the participants even declaring
> to leave the project unless it is? 

Dr Stallman's perspective is amazingly clear and very respectful.
what i have seen him do is to make it clear what the goal of the
GNU Project is (to promote the combination of Ethical behaviour
in the form of Software), and to *very respectfully* redirect anyone
wishing to *disregard* or undermine that goal to move their discussion
elsewhere.

in the version of the GNU Maintainers documentation that i was
helping to edit, it gives advice here on how to respectfully deal with
this situation.  it does *NOT* imply "go be a complete dickhead and
smash people's opinions into the floor because they want to use
nonfree software" because by doing so you are, yourself, basically
being a dickhead and undermining Free Software as a result.

in circumstances where people are being dickheads, chances are high
that anyone who left, and then had their system hacked (or it becomes
unstable / unusable) because they used nonfree software, would go,

"shit, i should have listened to those people who told me of the
 consequences  of using nonfree software..."

at which point there are *two* possible paths for the thoughts in their
head:

1) "... but they were such disrespectful dickheads that i am
 never going back even though it would be beneficial for me"

or:

2) "... and they were so respectful i think i'll go back sheepishly
 because from their behaviour when i *wasn't* listening to them,
 i have confidence that they won't attack me or try to undermine
me"

you see how that works?

l.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[lkcl]

On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 11:38 AM Yasuaki Kudo  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to follow up that I meant to ask:
>
> - Endorsing Free Software to be available on non-free systems,
> so as long as it is understood that it is an invitation to the fully Free
> System, not just partial -
> is this stance well shared among the members and participants of FSF/GNU 
> projects?
>   Or is it the case that Richard Stallman is rather uniquely more generous 
> than others?

i cannot speak for others - including Dr Stallman - only observe how
others behave.  and i am having difficulty parsing what you wrote.

bottom line is that:

   causing harm to Free Software should be the driving principle of
actions to avoid

from there it should be pretty obvious that *each individual person
and their actions*
can be guaged as to whether it is good - or bad - for Free Software.

you do not need me, or anyone else, to tell you that.

a "stance" is also completely irrelevant to that, and i do not believe it to
be helpful or useful to consider "stances".

there is the GNU Maintainers documentation, there is the FSF documentation
you and everyone else is entirely at liberty to choose *for yourself* whether to
use it as a guide to your actions - or not.

l.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

Hi Jean!

So my original question of the seemingly different attitudes toward making it 
clear and easy for people who want to run Free on Non-Free on (or with) 
software remains, and I am excited to get more clarification!

> You seem to have an opinion that community should talk about
> proprietary software even if it is exclusively not about proprietary
> software. Why do you have that urge to enforce a subject which is
> clearly not the goal of the community?

I think a little more nuanced description is in order.   So there are GNU 
projects that do mention (talk about) proprietary systems such as Windows, make 
it available on them, and so on, as we have seen in responses.

Now, people from such projects that make the software available on proprietary 
systems - are they "enforcing a subject which is not the goal of the community?"

Might it be the case that Guix community will happily discuss how to enable the 
'careless Linux' (if I may say so, instead of 'regular', for that with 
proprietary BLOBs), so as long as there are periodic notices, enticing them to 
find the Free alternatives?

-Yasu
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Jean Louis]

* Yasuaki Kudo  [2022-05-16 15:49]:
> Hi Andrew!
> 
> > Can you elaborate on what technical knowhow is related to nonfree
> > software in Guix?
> > 
> Oh this is quite simple - 
> When someone installs a Guix OS, there is a high chance that vital components 
> of the computer won't work (unless "work" includes severely hampered 
> performance)
> 
> And the chances are, all one needs to do to obtain the hardware
> manufacture's native performance is do is to use the regular Linux
> kernel package, with none the "de-blobbing" of LinuxLibre.  (Aside
> from asking the manufacturer to provide the Free Software-based
> compilation mechanism for the required BLOB, something that may take
> many years, or forever)

The mainstream Linux kernel is non-free software. Recommendation of
non-free software on Libreplanet mailing list is not wanted. We are
here with reason to find solutions so that people may use fully free
software.

Me as free software user often decide to purchase such hardware for
which free software exists. I may not use the built-in  wireless
device on a notebook computer, I could replace it or use the USB
dongle.

> To use the regular Linux, all that's needed is to tweak the
> configuration of the Guix system.   When people new to the system
> post questions along this line, on the Guix Help mailing list, the
> typical response is either via a direct personal email or some
> suggestions, short of the direct answer.

You call it "regular" Linux like Linux-libre would not be "regular"
kernel. That is not correct IMHO, as this mailing list and Libreplanet
is all about free software, and not non-free software. Mainstream
Linux kernel is non-free software and thus cannot be for us "regular"
one, as it does not provide freedom.

> When, out of frustration, one directly answers, he is greeted with
> notices around this being a GNU mailing list and such matters are
> not to be discussed.

Which is exactly right. In GNU project, neither in FSF, neither in
Libreplanet, we do not drive people to proprietary software.

We are here to discuss about freedom for users. We do not discuss how
to subjugate users, neither encourage that.

> * Guix OS technically runs on Linux (not just LibreLinux).
> * However, it is not "advertised" (the verb seemingly preferred by
> * the community) and even the discussion thereof is shunned.

While your expression is true, it does not give enough information to
make it understandable.

Discussion of "Linux" as kernel is not shunned. What is shunned is
discussion of driving users to proprietary software. GNU Guix is free
software project. It is not a proprietary software project. Those
users are creating a system that is free software.

When you enter into any community first you should learn what is that
community about. They are talking about subject A and not about
subject B. There are different communities about subject B.

That community does not want to talk about B is because of their
fundamental agreemenet -- it is all about free software and not
proprietary software.

You seem to have an opinion that community should talk about
proprietary software even if it is exclusively not about proprietary
software. Why do you have that urge to enforce a subject which is
clearly not the goal of the community?

Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[andrew via libreplanet-discuss]

I agree that having Windows and macOS Emacs is weird, they should indeed
be handled differently


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[andrew via libreplanet-discuss]

On 22/05/17 09:51AM, Jean Louis replies to Yasuki Kudo:
> You seem to have an opinion that community should talk about
> proprietary software even if it is exclusively not about proprietary
> software. Why do you have that urge to enforce a subject which is
> clearly not the goal of the community?

I believe that they're asking whether it is approprieate to support
users who, for whatever the reason is as it might be their job or their
hardware, cannot use fully free software.  My thoughts are that
yes indeed sometimes it is impossible to transition these users directly
to fully free software (which is a wanted ultimate outcome) and in these
cases minimal required nonfree software may be plausible, but these
discussions are *not* for the GNU Guix project because it isn't a core
part of its mission (a nice *free* operating system with a beautiful
functional package manager), they're for those communities where people
are actively helping the transition (for people to use less proprietary
software and eventually fully free software).


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

If this is the case, a few more follow-up questions:

- Is this attitude widely shared among the participants of FSF or GNU projects?

- Are there GNU projects other than Guix, in which helping people with special 
needs for their proprietary systems, by purposefully discussing and sharing the 
knowhow, is shunned - perhaps with some of the participants even declaring to 
leave the project unless it is? 

-Yasu


> On May 17, 2022, at 03:27, lkcl  wrote:
> 
>    (apologies i am using a really quirky libre mail client, this might not
>   go as expected)
>>   On 22/05/16 06:10PM, Yasuaki Kudo wrote:
>> * Emacs runs on Windows. Instructions and reasons are stated clearly
>> (as you quoted)
>   a couple months back i helped Dr Stallman review the gnu maintenance
>   docs, and it answers this question.
>   * software that runs on both free and nonfree OSes is advised as
>   perfectly fine i.e. the fact that the software being developed is
>   "Libre" is the priority.
>   * software that ONLY runs on nonfree OSes or where the functionality is
>   damaged, DRM'd, relying on nonfree networked or paywalled logins or
>   proprietary services, or where that functionality is just plain
>   nonexistent on the free OS is NOT fine.
>   basically anything that encourages or entices people to *remain* on the
>   nonfree OS (because of missing or degraded functionality if the Libre
>   Software is run on a Free OS) is not in the least bit okay.
>   but if people choose (or have no choice but) to use a nonfree OS,
>   that's not your problem, at least they are using Libre Software.
>   a good example there would be VLC which i have installed on every
>   device in the house, some of which was bought against my advice and
>   without my consent or knowledge [with my money].
>   at least using VLC on those devices does not result in files being
>   deleted.
>   l.
> ___
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[lkcl]

   (apologies i am using a really quirky libre mail client, this might not
   go as expected)
   On 22/05/16 06:10PM, Yasuaki Kudo wrote:
   > * Emacs runs on Windows. Instructions and reasons are stated clearly
   > (as you quoted)
   a couple months back i helped Dr Stallman review the gnu maintenance
   docs, and it answers this question.
   * software that runs on both free and nonfree OSes is advised as
   perfectly fine i.e. the fact that the software being developed is
   "Libre" is the priority.
   * software that ONLY runs on nonfree OSes or where the functionality is
   damaged, DRM'd, relying on nonfree networked or paywalled logins or
   proprietary services, or where that functionality is just plain
   nonexistent on the free OS is NOT fine.
   basically anything that encourages or entices people to *remain* on the
   nonfree OS (because of missing or degraded functionality if the Libre
   Software is run on a Free OS) is not in the least bit okay.
   but if people choose (or have no choice but) to use a nonfree OS,
   that's not your problem, at least they are using Libre Software.
   a good example there would be VLC which i have installed on every
   device in the house, some of which was bought against my advice and
   without my consent or knowledge [with my money].
   at least using VLC on those devices does not result in files being
   deleted.
   l.
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

Now I think it is becoming clear that the main point of my question is indeed 
this seeming contradiction:

>> * Emacs runs on Windows.  Instructions and reasons are stated clearly
>> (as you quoted) 
> 
> Which I am indeed questioning why it is handled by GNU, too.
> 
>> * Guix OS technically runs on normal, unqualified Linux Kernel (not just 
>> Linux-Libre).   However,
>> it is not "advertised" (the verb seemingly preferred by the community)
>> and even the discussion thereof is shunned.

-Yasu

PS1
Thank you for technical corrections.  (To move away from Linux-Libre, all 
that's needed [as you mentioned, nonguix, for example] is a config change 
though - I know it because I practice it myself)

PS2
Regarding the technical wording of what is Linux, I have seen so many people 
going into various details of what it means   But I still think, albeit without 
much understanding of the technicalities, the basic fact of the matter is:

- Linux-Libre exists so that unaccountable (meaning no source code, not Free 
Software) binary drivers are removed

- Linux, as opposed to above, does include (although there might be further 
technical delineations of how driver files are packaged and given names) the 
Blob drivers
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[andrew via libreplanet-discuss]

On 22/05/16 06:10PM, Yasuaki Kudo wrote:
> Oh this is quite simple - When someone installs a Guix OS, there is a
> high chance that vital components of the computer won't work (unless
> "work" includes severely hampered performance)
>
> And the chances are, all one needs to do to obtain the hardware
> manufacture's native performance is do is to use the regular Linux
> kernel package, with none the "de-blobbing" of LinuxLibre.  (Aside
> from asking the manufacturer to provide the Free Software-based
> compilation mechanism for the required BLOB, something that may take
> many years, or forever)

This is really the job of nonguix, and their mailing lists if any (I
don't personally use nonguix so I can't tell).

Note that "regular Linux" in theory doesn't contain nonfree software
either- the nonfree software has been moved to linux-firmware.

Do note that nonfree firmware or other nonfree code linked again Linux
or specifically designed to work with Linux is a violation of Linux's
license, GNU GPL version 2 (only).

> To use the regular Linux, all that's needed is to tweak the
> configuration of the Guix system.   When people new to the system post
> questions along this line, on the Guix Help mailing list, the typical
> response is either via a direct personal email or some suggestions,
> short of the direct answer.

No, it isn't, you'd also need linux-firmware as explained.

> When, out of frustration, one directly answers, he is greeted with
> notices around this being a GNU mailing list and such matters are not
> to be discussed.

I do believe that the GNU Guix mailing list should be oriented towards
the Guix system itself and not compatibility with nonfree hardware,
though that may be a goal of people introducing users so that they would
eventually fully free systems.  Nonguix is such a community.

> The contradiction I see is that:

> * Emacs runs on Windows.  Instructions and reasons are stated clearly
> (as you quoted) 

Which I am indeed questioning why it is handled by GNU, too.

> * Guix OS technically runs on Linux (not just LibreLinux).   However,
> it is not "advertised" (the verb seemingly preferred by the community)
> and even the discussion thereof is shunned.

(1) it's called linux-libre
(2) no linux-firmware -> free

--
Andrew Yu
https://www.anrewyu.org/

Free Computing, not just Free Software! 


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[Yasuaki Kudo]

Hi Andrew!

> Can you elaborate on what technical knowhow is related to nonfree
> software in Guix?
> 
Oh this is quite simple - 
When someone installs a Guix OS, there is a high chance that vital components 
of the computer won't work (unless "work" includes severely hampered 
performance)

And the chances are, all one needs to do to obtain the hardware manufacture's 
native performance is do is to use the regular Linux kernel package, with none 
the "de-blobbing" of LinuxLibre.  (Aside from asking the manufacturer to 
provide the Free Software-based compilation mechanism for the required BLOB, 
something that may take many years, or forever)

To use the regular Linux, all that's needed is to tweak the configuration of 
the Guix system.   When people new to the system post questions along this 
line, on the Guix Help mailing list, the typical response is either via a 
direct personal email or some suggestions, short of the direct answer.

When, out of frustration, one directly answers, he is greeted with notices 
around this being a GNU mailing list and such matters are not to be discussed.

The contradiction I see is that:

* Emacs runs on Windows.  Instructions and reasons are stated clearly (as you 
quoted) 

* Guix OS technically runs on Linux (not just LibreLinux).   However, it is not 
"advertised" (the verb seemingly preferred by the community) and even the 
discussion thereof is shunned.

So I am still left wondering 

-Yasu



>> We can always establish parallel communities and go it alone but it
>> still leaves the commutation rift between the parallel and the
>> original teams, sifting the efficient development for desired
>> features.
> Typically the people in the "parallel" communities also contribute back
> to us, and the only main difference is they're (hopefully pragmatically)
> enabling use of nonfree software; These people are welcome to take i.e.
> general Guix knowledge and questions to the primary lists and leave
> nonfree stuff on their lists (which are of less value to here anyways).
> 
>> Having said this, I see that GNU Emacs works on Microsoft Windows??
>> How in the world is this done if the GNU's attitude is absolute zero
>> tolerance of anything Proprietary?
> Having nonfree software in an otherwise free operating system isn't the
> same as porting free software to nonfree operating systems.  (There are
> people who could elaborate better than me on this issue.)
> 
> Quoting Emacs's Website:
>> The purpose of the GNU system is to give users the freedom that
>> proprietary software takes away from its users. Proprietary operating
>> systems (like other proprietary programs) are an injustice, and we aim
>> for a world in which they do not exist.
>> 
>> To improve the use of proprietary systems is a misguided goal. Our aim,
>> rather, is to eliminate them. We include support for some proprietary
>> systems in GNU Emacs in the hope that running Emacs on them will give
>> users a taste of freedom and thus lead them to free themselves.
> 
> ... which should explain it with fair clarity.
> 
>> I wish to leave my sincere comment that in no way I am trying to
>> create a hostile conversation - I just want to know the dynamics of
>> these seemingly contradictory outcomes.   For example, is Emacs for
>> Windows indeed developed by a parallel, non-GNU-aligned community?
> In most circumstances we assume discussion to be of kind origin, which I
> indeed believe you are.
> 
> --
> Andrew Yu
> https://wew.andrewyu.org/
> ___
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Question of Aiding and Abetting Proprietary (or non-free) Software in GNU projects

[andrew via libreplanet-discuss]

On 22/05/15 11:25AM, Yasuaki Kudo wrote:
> While I really like and use GNU Guix as my primary Linux OS
The term "Linux OS" is a bit confusing to me, "Linux-based OS" would
make more sense as Linux is literally a kernel :)

> the integration of 'Proprietary' (as far as I know, even the regular
> Linux Kernel package with proprietary device drivers is considered
> proprietary - so Guix comes with LibreLinux) is considered so
> distasteful and against the protocol, thus the technical knowhow
> cannot be discussed in the mailing lists for Guix.
Can you elaborate on what technical knowhow is related to nonfree
software in Guix?

> We can always establish parallel communities and go it alone but it
> still leaves the commutation rift between the parallel and the
> original teams, sifting the efficient development for desired
> features.
Typically the people in the "parallel" communities also contribute back
to us, and the only main difference is they're (hopefully pragmatically)
enabling use of nonfree software; These people are welcome to take i.e.
general Guix knowledge and questions to the primary lists and leave
nonfree stuff on their lists (which are of less value to here anyways).

> Having said this, I see that GNU Emacs works on Microsoft Windows??
> How in the world is this done if the GNU's attitude is absolute zero
> tolerance of anything Proprietary?
Having nonfree software in an otherwise free operating system isn't the
same as porting free software to nonfree operating systems.  (There are
people who could elaborate better than me on this issue.)

Quoting Emacs's Website:
> The purpose of the GNU system is to give users the freedom that
> proprietary software takes away from its users. Proprietary operating
> systems (like other proprietary programs) are an injustice, and we aim
> for a world in which they do not exist.
> 
> To improve the use of proprietary systems is a misguided goal. Our aim,
> rather, is to eliminate them. We include support for some proprietary
> systems in GNU Emacs in the hope that running Emacs on them will give
> users a taste of freedom and thus lead them to free themselves.

... which should explain it with fair clarity.

> I wish to leave my sincere comment that in no way I am trying to
> create a hostile conversation - I just want to know the dynamics of
> these seemingly contradictory outcomes.   For example, is Emacs for
> Windows indeed developed by a parallel, non-GNU-aligned community?
In most circumstances we assume discussion to be of kind origin, which I
indeed believe you are.

--
Andrew Yu
https://wew.andrewyu.org/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss