Re: [libreplanet-discuss] To be FSF member to have a voice? Does anyone listen?

uiding the FSF on the right path and to not pressure for him to be president again. [1]: https://www.fsf.org/associate/benefits [2]: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/LibrePlanet:Conference/2019/sunday_members_lunch -- Patrick "P. J." McDermott: http://www.pehjota.net/ Lead Developer, Prot

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] a) Manufacturer b) Model desktop computer meeting many rms ideals out of the box?

el and c) computer setup Richard > Stallman is using now? A Lenovo ThinkPad T400s running libreboot. -- Patrick McDermott, CEO Libiquity Putting customers in control of high-quality technologies https://www.libiquity.com/ ___ libreplanet-discuss maili

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] FSF should defend RMS and reject his resignation!

e free software community is now split into warring factions, and 2. That some will now take a logical leap from the misunderstandings to accuse the free software community of "defending Epstein" and such. Let's focus on solving what we can. -- Patrick "P. J."

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Is Stallman nuts?

On 2019-09-16 at 09:54, Caleb Herbert wrote: > On 09/16/2019 06:54 AM, Patrick 'P. J.' McDermott wrote: > > Reportedly though, Stallman's views "changed significantly" > > by 2016 [6], and he confirmed on Saturday that "personal conversations >

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Is Stallman nuts?

eptember_2019_(Statements_about_Epstein) [5]: https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29 [6]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] libreboot workshop at libreplanet 2018

On 2018-03-21 at 01:31, Leah Rowe wrote: > Please confirm via reply on this list, if you're willing to commit to > this. I'll be at the conference, and I've packed some equipment. Look for me [1] in a gray Libiquity polo shirt. [1]: http://www.libiquity.com/media/images/

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] The state of Libre Hardware

We can solve this by learning how to share the land and tools needed to make all we need. The GNU GPL speaks of User Freedom, but this is only for bits. Sharing space and atoms seems impossible, but really it isn't. Once we find a better way to share the Means of Production in the physical realm

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

's time to read the real thing. I stand corrected, thanks-Patrick

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

downloaded for free on Ebay for real money. We have to provide our code to sources upstream but I believe we can charge for this and the price could be unreasonable. -Patrick

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

*Von:* Patrick *An:* Fabio Pesari ; libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org *Gesendet:* 18:11 Sonntag, 5.Juni 2016 *Betreff:* Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement. Could we not do the same as the proprietary people and sue those who move GPL code out of the control area(whatever th

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

On 06/05/2016 11:55 AM, Fabio Pesari wrote: Patrick, I see your point, but then I have this question: if those companies don't care about the terms of the GPL, why would they care if they are banned from using the software altogether? They would use it anyway. If you couldn't bring the

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

On 06/05/2016 12:04 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote: On 05/06/16 17:46, Patrick wrote: On 06/05/2016 11:16 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote: On 05/06/16 16:57, Patrick wrote: Hi Everyone This is a horrible post and will probably trigger some very negative reactions. I am trying to help and I am being honest

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

On 06/05/2016 11:55 AM, Fabio Pesari wrote: Patrick, I see your point, but then I have this question: if those companies don't care about the terms of the GPL, why would they care if they are banned from using the software altogether? They would use it anyway. If you couldn't bring the

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

to do the right thing and turn the other cheek? Haven't people been trying to do this for 2000 years? The GPL is sounding more like a religion and less like a license to base a business on. Sorry again for being mean-Patrick

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

On 06/05/2016 11:16 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote: On 05/06/16 16:57, Patrick wrote: Hi Everyone This is a horrible post and will probably trigger some very negative reactions. I am trying to help and I am being honest so please don't get too angry at me. I've tinkered with the BSD w

[libreplanet-discuss] suggestion/help. GPL enforcement.

distributed GPL code outside of the enforcement territory, this would preclude the distribution of GPL code over public FTP and such. Does anyone see my point? Is there anything that can be done so that I don't have to license code under the GPL and in doing so cast it into the Public Domain? -Patrick

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] What is ThinkPenguin?

On 2016-05-27 07:02 AM, Patrick wrote: Hi Chris Your getting beat up on the libreplanet-discuss list. Maybe you should subscribe and post-Patrick I'm not surprised. :( Feel free to forward this: It's easy to complain and much harder to fix the problems at hand. I've been w

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] What is ThinkPenguin?

Chris is on the Trisquel list all the time helping others. Isn't this just silly in-fighting? Is it worth criticizing people who sell computers with closed source firmware when there is so very little to choose from otherwise? I love GPL but I hate the snobbery. Why not spend time promoting th

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Mapping the patterns of the GNU GPL Onto the Material World

> if the product were a power wheelchair, > which has both hardware and software, comes in > a variety of sizes, and has a cushion by a different > vendor which may not be open, how would things work > with what you propose? Think of the extreme limitations of the GNU project when it first began.

[libreplanet-discuss] Mapping the patterns of the GNU GPL Onto the Material World

gain freedom in the Material Realm by gaining access to the Material Means of Production. Sincerely, Patrick Anderson

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free movie database?

hoose to store those blocks? I think a better answer could be revolutionary. Sincerely, Patrick

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fwd: The FSF Allows No Derivatives]

According to those who would apply the GNU GPL to software and ND to opinion, I wonder which license I should (ideally) use to write software that expresses opinion. On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote: > > > On 05/27/2015 07:48 AM, Yoni Rabkin wrote: >> choosing to make personal

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Software freedom is the only viable business model.

> give the binaries for free but > charge $millions for the code No, but the inverse might be more realistic than it might at first seem. Give the code away for gratis, but charge for the binaries. I've seen this approach more than once (though I don't remember those projects right now), usually

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Truly decentralized/federated software development platforms?

e can discuss it here: http://imputedproduction.blog.com/2011/05/20/longer-explanation Sincerely, Patrick Anderson Economic Systems Engineer http://CrossCrowdPredictiveProduction.github.io

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Truly decentralized/federated software development platforms?

o not discuss it here, I will start a thread in the next couple days about that approach which requires a minimum size and complexity to host the housing and food and hospitals needed for us to have a decent standard of living. Sincerely, Patrick Anderson

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Amusing Free Software Story

likely even create a certain amount of curiosity. As it is, we are trying to call a rose a cabbage and wondering why nobody gets it... Sincerely, Patrick Anderson Economic Systems Engineer http://CrossCrowdPredictiveProduction.github.io

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] support me

I have some made some very important discoveries about how to organize production so we can safely scale while still retaining User Freedom in the physical realm. I would really appreciate being a part of a team working toward that goal. Sincerely, Patrick Anderson

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] support me

nt to replace gmail or facebook, etc., we will need to pay for physical sources. If you are interested in my answers to these questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Patrick Anderson

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Software freedom is the only viable business model.

n. I find it very difficult to relay this information because it is usually considered off-topic, so I am hesitant to just blurt it out immediately. Let me know if this is the right list to discuss such an approach, or maybe point me to the right place otherwise. Sincerely, Patrick Anderson Econom

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Libre Mobile

Here's a beautiful attempt to cobble something together with off-the-shelf parts. David Mellis - DIY Phone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sju_rtH5UY4 and https://github.com/damellis/cellphone2­ Combined with the work by http://TheFNF.org we are moving toward more user-owned communication and so

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Libre Mobile

need according to the amount of ownership we have. Since the price we pay as consumers is simply the costs we pay as owners, there will be no profit and no taxes on the missing transaction. Sincerely, Patrick Anderson http://ImputedProduction.BlogSpot.com

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Google to drop XMPP entirely

> > > stop depending on Google services step by step. > > I wonder how people can do this without running their own server. Many ISP connections do not allow you to run exposed servers. May people cannot handle the complexity of managing servers. Is there any other way?

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] My Analysis of Multimedia Codecs supported by various portable MP3 & Vorbis players, including smart-phones

We absolutely refuse to organize to co-own the hardware for our mutual benefit, and so must always put ourselves at risk of those who *do* own the hardware. We will forever cower and beg and cry and plead those property owners until we, the users are finally willing to accept the risks of ownershi

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free Software CD for Windows?

I use the ARPA account at http://freeshell.org which is a one-time fee of $36, but may not be enough storage and/or bandwidth for your needs... I wish I could find a group interested in defining the meaning of Free as in Freedom hosting, for then we could conqure this issue completely and for all

[libreplanet-discuss] Free as in Freedom Hosting/Cloud_Services

om other email providers and 'social' networking. We cannot just be angry with them because of their size; what *exactly* are they doing or not doing to respect user freedoms? If we can make this list complete, then we can build new hosting providers that align with the mission of the

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free Software CD for Windows?

g a > covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do > so. > [...]" > > So, what you meant by "the license to come to effect" is better > expressed by "to be used to convey covered works", which would imply the >

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free Software CD for Windows?

> See "Network Services Aren't Free or Nonfree; They Raise Other Issues": > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html The document seems to say it is impossible to safely share hardware. But it is not impossible, we just don't yet know how. We will forever be sub

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free Software CD for Windows?

right now... In the end we will need to discover the meaning of "Free as in Freedom" for sharing the costs of *hosting* software. We need a new way to share physical property that preserves user freedoms - a sort of 'PropertyLeft' that co-owners will use property rights to app

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Crowd Funding platform

Thanks for this Ramana. The points in the article are very true. The overall message I receive is "quality is maximized when artisans play for community benefit". We can create a setting where artisans can play all day long without worring about food, shelter and basic health-care. This "Basic

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Steam for Linux

storage or game servers, email, etc. The potential for exploitation and misuse increases as this approach succeeds, and so we also need a legally-binding Social Contract that stops us from turning sour as we grow. I have some very careful ideas about what should be included in the Social Contra

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 34, Issue 11

Hi Luke Thanks for your suggestions on this. Yep, this piece sums up the situation nicely: "seeking to achieve this via a free software license is asking for trouble, not least because you are wandering off of the beaten track of "OSI-approved licenses", and are adding a considerably onerous

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

for taking the time to put together this detailed email. This will take some time to analyze. I really appreciate your time-Patrick

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-04 12:14 PM, Felipe T. R. Tovar wrote: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org Patrick, suppose somebody gets your code and implements improvements on it, and want to be paid for this, you would disallow somebody to charge for their work? By restricting your software to be

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 34, Issue 11

dn't sleep well at all after it. Sorry to everyone I offended, these issue mean so much to me. -Patrick On 12-10-04 07:08 AM, luke.leighton wrote: On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 11:38 AM, wrote: Message: 1 Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 18:11:53 -0400 From: Patrick To: Ted Smith Cc: libr

libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org

Thanks Joel I did not know about this organization, this could be very helpful On 12-10-03 08:26 PM, Joel Kahn wrote: Here is another place where Patrick should consider taking his questions about his software projects: https://schoolforge.net/ The SchoolForge group is not as rigid about the

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

It goes against the mission of this mailing list as an FSF project to help anyone find a license meeting this criteria: Then I give up. But in closing, if you are not making incremental progress towards your goals then you won't reach them. It's sad that BSD is gaining traction. It's much

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 06:00 PM, Mark Holmquist wrote: Also, that CC-NC-* are also not free licenses, so we're back where we started, at an off-topic conversation! :) and your back to throwing anyone who does not meet your exceptions into the street. You're looking down on us a lot--all I'm saying is, w

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 05:59 PM, cryp...@nym.hush.com wrote: I usually din't but I juste have to interact : in case A, do you realise that closing your software will also be a bad things for the parents and children you try to protect ? they will not be allow / able to modify or adapt your soft to their

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 05:50 PM, Ramana Kumar wrote: Another attempt at a summary, and a plea for focussed clarification. Patrick has written/will write two pieces of software, A and B. Patrick's wishes: 1. Users of A do not pay for using it. 2. Users of B know that Patrick wrote B. Patr

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 05:49 PM, Patrick Anderson wrote: Patrick wrote: I want the code to be used by end users in any way except to resell for a profit What do you hope to solve by stopping the resale of software for a profit? How does selling Free Software hurt you or anyone else? Hi Patrick My

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 05:42 PM, Mark Holmquist wrote: The problem is that the CC licences are not intended for use with software. It sounds like they won't hold up in court. Also, that CC-NC-* are also not free licenses, so we're back where we started, at an off-topic conversation! :) and your back to

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

Patrick wrote: > I want the code to be used by end users > in any way except to resell for a profit What do you hope to solve by stopping the resale of software for a profit? How does selling Free Software hurt you or anyone else?

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 05:42 PM, Patrick Anderson wrote: Patrick wrote: I have thought about selling binaries and source without makefiles. I'm confused why you want to distribute the source at all... If you don't want anyone to ever build the project, then what good does the source code do

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 05:40 PM, Patrick Anderson wrote: Patrick wrote: I want to find another licence that provides all possible freedoms for end users but does not open doors of oppression for crooks. Are the distributors crooks only because they are charging money for those copies? What if they give

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

Patrick wrote: > I have thought about selling binaries and > source without makefiles. I'm confused why you want to distribute the source at all... If you don't want anyone to ever build the project, then what good does the source code do for those who receive it?

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

eleased under such a license "proprietary" or "closed source". It's somewhat in between. On 10/03/2012 05:24 PM, Ted Smith wrote: On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 17:13 -0400, Patrick wrote: "This is not a "betrayal of charitable efforts." This is the free software

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

Patrick wrote: > I want to find another licence that provides > all possible freedoms for end users but does > not open doors of oppression for crooks. Are the distributors crooks only because they are charging money for those copies? What if they give your program away without collecting money?

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

And that's why the FSF is a sinking ship http://developers.slashdot.org/story/11/12/17/1735253/gpl-copyleft-use-declining-fast On 12-10-03 05:37 PM, Ted Smith wrote: On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 17:33 -0400, Patrick wrote: Hi Mark, Hi Ted Again this is your with us or against us. Regardle

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

Hi Mark, Hi Ted Again this is your with us or against us. Regardless of the licence, if the code ships with source code am I not somewhere up the ladder from closed source, am I not? Can you not come down from your Ivory tower and help me to find an alternative to closed source software(whic

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 05:20 PM, Patrick Anderson wrote: Obviously many people feel betrayed. Why people choose the GNU GPL if it does not do what they expect? If artisans want their work available under different terms, then why not just choose a different license? If the GNU GPL does not accomplish

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

> Obviously many people feel betrayed. Why people choose the GNU GPL if it does not do what they expect? If artisans want their work available under different terms, then why not just choose a different license? If the GNU GPL does not accomplish your goals, then why not just use some other lice

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 04:43 PM, Rudolf wrote: It seems like you're complaining that you'll have to face competition. Yes it's hard to compete with larger companies but maybe you should cross that bridge when you come to it. This is a hard problem that other projects face as you've pointed out. They s

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

"This is not a "betrayal of charitable efforts." This is the free software culture working as intended." ask the GIMP developers then: "IMPORTANT: GIMP AND OPENSOURCE SCAM ON *EBAY*! " http://gim

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 02:38 PM, Jason Self wrote: Patrick GPL is very wrong for me This isn't actually a GPL issue. Any free software license that you select -- whether it's copyleft or not -- must by definition [1] allow for people to distribute copies for a fee if they want to.

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

On 12-10-03 01:51 PM, Jason Self wrote: Patrick said: Parents of autistic kids are already under enormous stress and most won't end up knowing there was a free as in beer alternative. parisites will swoop in an screw over the parents by sellign them the software. It's good t

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

Hi Rudolf Since you are distributing the code yourself you can offer the binary and sources for free. If a competitor wants to sell your software it is *still* available from your own website. Yes but this is where the advertising dollars matter. If no one knows it originally came from me

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

thing to be done. I want to grant people the right to use it for free and to enforce that in court. I have to take my kids out to the mall but I will respond to emails again soon, thanks for the feedback... BIAB Is it okay if I post my last response to you to the list? On 12-10-03 12:58

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

For the second project I think GPL is the right license: by law anyone using its code or part of the code must show the "based upon $project created by $you" line, also you can get revenue by both selling binaries (with the source attached) and providing support. For the first one GPL is also

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

I just realized that this list seems to be set up so that relies are sent as private messages. i was hoping to keep the discussion on list. I hope you don't mind me posting this Thomas. Well, I'm aware of problem one person has pay for a Dia cdrom copy, and she didn't aware it was avail

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

Hi Michal I think no legal solution will solve this problem completely (e.g. you can buy illegally copied discs with proprietary software). A license that allows selling and requires including appropriate attribution notices could solve that misinformation problem in some cases. You want parent

[libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)

pport, the end users will still know that I was the one that wrote it and i can provide better support for it. If RMS did something like this I think he would be much better off now. Is there any licences that could meet one or more of these objectives? Thanks for reading-Patrick

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] appreciation payment protocol

Patrick Anderson wrote: > Seeing http://bitcoinjs.org creates a vision of micropayments made by > simply allowing the website owner to run a javascript bitcoin miner in your > browser for some amount of time... Or maybe https://github.com/jwhitehorn/jsMiner But probably these are too

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] appreciation payment protocol

Seeing http://bitcoinjs.org creates a vision of micropayments made by simply allowing the website owner to run a javascript bitcoin miner in your browser for some amount of time...

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] appreciation payment protocol

Ramana Kumar wrote: > written to use the data from a server > without storing a local copy. Maybe this is already done in Java?: http://bitcoinj.GoogleCode.com {BitCoinJ implements the "simplified payment verification" mode of Satoshis paper. It does not store a full copy of the block chain, rath

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [fossil-users] [OT] Who's interested in project management & collaboration tools? And...

Mark Holmquist wrote: > there's a dollar amount sitting between binary and source, He is keeping the binaries and source bundled together, but is only distributing those *bundles* to people who pay. To some, the word 'code' is synonymous with 'source', but sometimes programmers (such as Miles) us

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [fossil-users] [OT] Who's interested in project management & collaboration tools? And...

Miles Fidelman wrote: > Pledge $25 or more > Access to software on release date - Hi Miles, Does this option include source-code for that component? If so, then I think I understand the confusion. To some of us, it sounds like you are saying "For $25, the user receives binaries, but not source

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Bryan Baldwin wrote: > it might be a mistake to count on being > about to go all in on law making revolution. I just want to clarify that my approach is not to beg the governments nor the corporations, but to create new corporations that use the legally- biding social contract I sometimes call the

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Robert Martinez wrote: > You're trying to elevate data-transfer services to common infrastructure. If by "common" you mean "government owned", then no, that is not my goal. If by "common" you mean "user owned", then yes, that is my goal. > This is another political question and depends extremel

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Mike Linksvayer wrote: > Where is the repository or wiki with your partially written or > outlined document? Project mailing list? http://libreplanet.org/wiki/General_Public_Law is my latest, very simplified version. More lengthy ideas can read at: http://SocialSufficiencyCoalition.BlogSpot.com h

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Robert Martinez wrote: > Nobody "owns" xmpp, mail, status.net, friendica, ... But corporations own the *physical* network. Who owns and controls the copper or fiber-optics or satellites that those protocols must use? > We can do this in "isolation". If you can do this in isolation, then why ar

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Robert Martinez wrote: > http://freedomboxfoundation.org But who owns the network? We cannot do this in isolation. We must learn to share hardware.

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Ted Smith wrote: > What would you have us do? We must write a "Terms of Operation" analogous to the GNU GPL, but in a form that can be applied to physical property. This Terms of Operation will be a legally-binding "social contract" that hardware co-owners can then choose to apply to some of thei

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Mike Linksvayer wrote: > What stops you? The question is "What stops us?". If it is so easy to share hardware, then why do we continue to grovel before the corporations that continually terrorize us? If it is already understood how this is to be done, then why is it not already done? Cell-phone

[libreplanet-discuss] Free as in Freedom Services

User Freedom requires Free Services. Free Services require we share hardware ownership. We already share with corporations when we use *their* hardware. We, the Users, finally pay for all the costs of that hardware and for all the wages to workers and even more when we pay Profit, but we have no

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Fabian Rodriguez wrote: > using a commercial service where free open > source software is behind all the infrastructure Even if the network service provider uses 100% Free Software, you are still at their mercy when it comes to whether they read your emails and use that data to target advertisemen

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Alternatives to closed, non-free webmail services?

Fabian Rodriguez wrote: > research/reach further freedom. Discovering the solutions to this problem is our next step toward completing the liberation of software and simultaneously in understanding how to host free as in freedom production in the physical realm. But such discussion is usually con

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Gaming Collective: Hosted server

Ted Smith wrote: > Can someone from the FSF comment on whether this is relevant > or not for this list? This topic generates a lot of discussion but (I > would bet money) not any actual activism opportunities for the FSF > or local LibrePlanet groups. Is it because Danny is talking about sharing a

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free as in Freedom Access to Hardware (was: GAMING COLLECTIVE: Anybody play Ryzom?)

will be undefined. And if Users co-own the Means of Production, each group will still fight among themselves about how to control and schedule access to that hardware, but they will not be remote- controlled by absentee-landlords and shareholders who demand Users be subjugated to increase Prof

[libreplanet-discuss] Free as in Freedom Access to Hardware (was: GAMING COLLECTIVE: Anybody play Ryzom?)

wayne, steve wrote: > Is Free as in Freedom access to hardware completely > egalitarian; ie, all users have equal access to that > hardware? What does this mean, exactly? This is a 'core' question. We must use logic to find the answers to such problems instead of relying upon popularity by vote.

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Gaming Collective: Hosted server

Rudolf wrote: > Also are there any legal problems with this? > Like who owns the space? Can we assign the > server to the fsf or the collective to maintain > as long as the costs are covered? I am very interested in hashing-out the complexities of what it takes to share computing resources so they

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Gaming Collective: Hosted server

Danny Piccirillo wrote: > The server space will come from the FSF, > though it would be great to raise money for this. When I proposed the FSF should own hardware to compete with Fakebook and Gmail and github, Richard Stallman replied: >> We handle email only for thousands of people. Gmail is a

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] GAMING COLLECTIVE: Anybody play Ryzom?

Danny Piccirillo wrote: > On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Patrick Anderson wrote: >> >> Is "Free as in Freedom" hosting/subscription outside the LibrePlanet >> agenda? > > > Depends on what you mean by this. Ryzom is fully free software, which > incl

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] GAMING COLLECTIVE: Anybody play Ryzom?

> http://www.ryzom.com/en/ > > For all those that do, we should represent the LibrePlanet Gaming Collective > there! Is "Free as in Freedom" hosting/subscription outside the LibrePlanet agenda? http://www.ryzom.com/en/mmorpg-rpg-mmo-subscription-options.html We refuse to tackle this problem and

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free as in Freedom Network Services [was: Tackling Network Effect]

Michał 'rysiek' Woźniak wrote: > running a (paid-for by the users) service that would > integrate the many different communication and > cloud-based platforms that are Free Software 1.) Will the User/Owners *buy* the hosting, or will they each already own as much as they have paid for

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Vertically Integrated Permaculture Mosaic

John Sullivan wrote: > I see how it's relevant to the concept of freedom, but this list is > specifically for discussions surrounding the LibrePlanet project -- the > Web site, the annual conference, and the network of groups. So let's > keep a narrower focus. > > There is also http://lists.gnu.org

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Vertically Integrated Permaculture Mosaic

Ziv Leyes wrote: > how are you thinking it will be possible to implement those > plans, ideas, etc. in our messy and corrupted society? In small groups that buy and co-own the Means of Production very much like any business or organization, but with the following Terms of Operation as self-enforce

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Vertically Integrated Permaculture Mosaic

Ted Smith wrote: > Yeah, I fail to see the relevance of this to an FSF activism list. This extends User Freedom into the physical realm, where Free Software must always be hosted. This is how we will also regain control of our communication networks, and so stop begging the ISPs and cell-phone pr

[libreplanet-discuss] Vertically Integrated Permaculture Mosaic

This is a short (somewhat incomplete) description of how to proceed. Please ask questions and help me fix what is wrong with the idea. Sincerely, Patrick Anderson http://ImputedProduction.BlogSpot.com

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free as in Freedom Network Services [was: Tackling Network Effect]

> This language is both ageist and sexist. Sorry, I meant non-guru.

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free as in Freedom Network Services [was: Tackling Network Effect]

Niels G. W. Serup wrote: > The best thing would be to promote things like the FreedomBox. The FreedomBox has many fundamental problems. ISPs block ports and disallow you from running servers. You are allowed to use those ports and run servers only if you pay much more and understand how. Grandm

  1   2   >