First, thanks for pointing us to these articles and social media post. I
find it very interesting to read the views of people working on this
stuff (the people most knowledgeable on the details of the
implementation). And thanks for assembling the computers and selling
them to us all with free software throughout.
I concur with another poster criticizing the use of "open source" in
these articles as that movement would never pursue software freedom. As
much as I think it's good to bring news of the issues underlying this
discussion to the masses (just as all sorts of laptops are sold to
ordinary computer users), it is worth noting that both IDGConnect.com
and PCWorld.com's articles get this important information wrong -- the
latter referring to "ideologically pure" laptop development without
explaining what the salient ideology is, nor telling readers that the
open source movement's ideology is quite radically different from the
free software movement's ideology. After all, these two ideologies reach
radically different results: It's not the OSI or any other "open source"
group that put together the Respects Your Freedom campaign.
I figure that the lack of explication on this point is also why these
organizations don't give GNU a share of the credit for GNU/Linux
(instead calling an operating system "Linux" when that's really a
kernel). Really, they are siding with "open source" because that
movement's ideology is compatible with proprietary software (which is
what they report on most of the time they report on software). They
certainly aren't going to mount a full-throated and widely-repeated
defense of software freedom; that would get in the way of their
full-throated and widely-repeated defense of user subjugation via
proprietary software.
ch...@thinkpenguin.com wrote:
While that is true, it's misleading, in that it's not any better
than what we've already got from a free software stand point.
I concur; if all I wanted was a laptop to run free software on and I was
okay with hardware I could never fully control, inspect, or reprogram
(nor hire anyone to do this on my behalf), a Librem laptop would be no
better (certainly not better enough to justify its price and
crowdfunding-based payment).
But this leads me to wonder: Is there an architecture on which one could
have a laptop (complete with the physical camera/mic switch) that used
some CPU, BIOS, and other hardware that would simultaneously make good
on the freedom promises Librem can't deliver while offering modern
laptop niceties (such as a high ceiling on RAM, 15" or larger LCD
monitor, SSD, gigabit ethernet jack, and USB3) in order to compare
reasonably well with modern 64-bit Intel-compatible laptops?
Nothing in the FSF's RYF hardware certification requirements
(http://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/criteria) requires
Intel-compatibility.
If so, perhaps that is a laptop worth investing time and money in. I
won't buy a Librem given the freedom problem they face, but I view Todd
Weaver's leadership as a detail; I'm judging this on the specs of what
is delivered to the end-user.
