> It's clear that the original poster is very passionate.
It is impertinent how purism has abused people's lack
of knowledge about how intel cpus require
non free software to work.
>
> * Core Issue : Purism is selling and marketing products as if they did not
> contain proprietary software when
> I agree about liying or misleading. Without ethics nothing works. I am
> talking in general not specific case.
It is shameless how purism
has deceived people.
pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libr
On 3/15/20 3:28 PM, Félicien Pillot wrote:
>
> We are not speaking about software here, are we?
Yes, we are. The software which runs the cpu is
also software.
>
> The computer is actually working with 100% free _software_, including
> drivers and kernel, but it does contain nonfree _firmware_ (B
I agree about liying or misleading. Without ethics nothing works. I am
talking in general not specific case.
El dom., 15 de mar. de 2020, 09:15, a via libreplanet-discuss
<[1]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> escribió:
>>In my opinion moving in one step from all closed sou
I'm sorry but my email client seems to only show the letter A as the author so
I'm going to use OP for original poster.
It's clear that the original poster is very passionate.
I am finding it difficult to parse their emails. I'm not sure if it's the
writing style or what, but to help me try a
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 15:36:45 +0100
txt.f...@txtfile.eu wrote:
> Where does software start and firmware end? Isn't the
> bootloader/BIOS/UEFI also just a piece of software?
I would refer to this statement[0] given by the GNU Project:
"Any software that can be replaced by someone else, the user
FWIW, I find this reply much more useful, thank you.
I think you would do well to clear out the noise and stick to very
pointed, repeated concerns in order to be heard.
The specific points about signed CPUs and about Librem 5 vagueness in
advertising, just state those first and focus on that. It'
On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 19:33:50 +0100
a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> https://web.archive.org/web/20141121173028/http://puri.sm/products/ No
> mention of the fact that all new intel cpus require intel signed
> software to work. No cryptographer believes it is possible to break
> the key.
We are
>>In my opinion moving in one step from all closed source to all open
>>source freedom respecting is very hard or practically impossible. I am
>>happy people are doing steps towards all open source and no hidden
>>stuff. One valid step is modern hardware running open source Operat
On 3/14/20 11:09 AM, a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> On 3/12/20 9:56 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>> Félicien Pillot, 11/03/20 23:05:
>>> What's wrong??
>> ninhar has raised such topics earlier in the Replicant mailing list,
>> see for instance:
>> https://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/replican
On 3/12/20 6:23 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> It would help if you state (or link) the specific concerns about Purism
> separately from the judgments. Surely someone has collected the examples
> so that people can see for themselves. People unfamiliar will not accept
> an unknown source just leveling acc
On 3/14/20 11:04 AM, a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> On 3/11/20 11:10 PM, Lori Nagel via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>>I'm not really sure how Purism is any worse than companies like Think
>>Penguin, or than the machines are any less freedom respecting
No. You are not. Purism is worse
I think that a certification does not need evidence to prove
non-compliance. It needs evidence to prove it complies.
A certification from an organization must never lose the trust people
have about its tight and ongoing certification requirements. Otherwise,
the name of the certification is wor
I second that. There is no conclusive evidence to prove the allegations
I see.
..
On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 22:54, Aaron Wolf <[1]wolft...@riseup.net>
wrote:
It would help if you state (or link) the specific concerns about
Purism
separately from the judgments. Surely som
On 3/12/20 9:56 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Félicien Pillot, 11/03/20 23:05:
>> What's wrong??
>
> ninhar has raised such topics earlier in the Replicant mailing list,
> see for instance:
> https://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/replicant/2019-November/002268.html
>
> "Report from 36C3" is AFAIC
On 3/12/20 6:43 AM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 20:10:09 +0100, a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>> This post is directed at officials from libreplanet
>> and fsf.
>>
>> I wrote this post on trisquel's forum.
>> https://paste.nolsen.xyz/?98e7462461e8a46c#8YchW86Fn3UvkxdHbfN74cVVo
I resend the emails replying to purism why does fsf and libreboot
embrace a misleading company? under the
subject purism why does fsf and libreplanet embrace a misleading company?
That seemed not to work. This is a test email.
pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
On 3/11/20 11:10 PM, Lori Nagel via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>I'm not really sure how Purism is any worse than companies like Think
>Penguin, or than the machines are any less freedom respecting than
>anything else that can run a FSF endorsed distro and coreboot. Even
>some new
On 3/11/20 9:11 PM, Stanisława Pałętka wrote:
> W dniu środa, 11 marca 2020 a via libreplanet-discuss <
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> napisał(a):
>
>> This post is directed at officials from libreplanet
>> and fsf.
>>
>> I wrote this post on trisquel's forum.
>> https://paste.nolsen.xyz/?
On 3/12/20 5:25 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 2020-03-11 14:33, a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>> My post is about getting official comments from
>> libreplanet and fsf. Of course anybody can
>> reply, but I already know how people attempt
>> to defend purism's behavior.
>>
>>
>> On 3/11/20 8:48 PM
On 3/12/20 5:25 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 2020-03-11 14:33, a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>> My post is about getting official comments from
>> libreplanet and fsf. Of course anybody can
>> reply, but I already know how people attempt
>> to defend purism's behavior.
>>
>>
>> On 3/11/20 8:48 PM
On 3/11/20 11:30 PM, Hector Espinoza wrote:
>In my opinion moving in one step from all closed source to all open
>source freedom respecting is very hard or practically impossible. I am
>happy people are doing steps towards all open source and no hidden
>stuff. One valid step is mod
On 3/11/20 10:58 PM, a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>> If I understand correctly...
>>
>> First, you criticise Purism for saying that soon they would be supported
>> by the FSF.
>> Then, you criticise the FSF for having supported Purism soon after that.
>>
>> What's wrong??
>
> I am criticizing
On 3/11/20 10:33 PM, a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> My post is about getting official comments from
> libreplanet and fsf. Of course anybody can
> reply, but I already know how people attempt
> to defend purism's behavior.
>
>
> On 3/11/20 8:48 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> If I understand you corr
On 3/11/20 8:48 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> If I understand you correctly, you believe: Purism marketing talks about
> software freedom and the goal of RYF 100% free hardware, but they don't
> deliver to that level, and they minimize or hide the details. You worry
> that people buy Purism products bel
It would help if you state (or link) the specific concerns about Purism
separately from the judgments. Surely someone has collected the examples
so that people can see for themselves. People unfamiliar will not accept
an unknown source just leveling accusations.
The thread you linked to is more of
This post is directed at officials from libreplanet
and fsf.
I wrote this post on trisquel's forum. Also available on
https://paste.nolsen.xyz/?98e7462461e8a46c#8YchW86Fn3UvkxdHbfN74cVVoYkFqCGWCx2tWVX5uvZJ
https://libreplanet.org/2020/speakers/#2464
https://www.fsf.org/givingguide/v10/
https://tri
27 matches
Mail list logo
