6 ms·

How do you figure that the free software movement failed? I definitely see a loss of interest these days, but the accomplishments of the last 30 years are enorm

How do you figure that the free software movement failed? I definitely see a loss of interest these days, but the accomplishments of the last 30 years are enormous.

max_ 3y ago
I am referring to "Stallman Compliant" software/hardware. Almost no one besides a small group of fanatics. Used free software. Why isn't there a smartphone that Richard Stallman can use? The reason is because no one built such a phone. People where instead complaining about it. But no one actually thought of a real solution. Besides the fanatical "throw away your phone" that is very impractical for most people today.
- worksonmine 3y ago
  > Why isn't there a smartphone that Richard Stallman can use? > The reason is because no one built such a phone. People where instead complaining about it. Librem and PinePhone exist as Linux phones, then there is GrapheneOS if you want to stay with Android. You can install spyware on it yes, but you don't have to. These are not things you just create over a weekend so there are rough edges yes, but they exist. The problem you're describing is more about demand. Since it is niche corporations are still stuck in the old ways. For example I can't ID myself online without Google Play Services and it disgusts me, government institutions need to get better at supporting a bigger eco-system. People don't care enough to jump through hoops, but that doesn't mean that the solutions don't exist or aren't being worked on.
  - DamnInteresting 3y ago
    Having known people who correspond with Stallman, he would likely reply to this comment with a rant about how you should call it "GNU/Linux" rather than just "Linux", then proceed to ignore the remainder of your points.
    - worksonmine 3y ago
      > then proceed to ignore the remainder of your points As opposed to you, right? :)
  - max_ 3y ago
    >Librem and PinePhone exist as Linux phones, then there is GrapheneOS if you want to stay with Android These are very lazy solutions to the problems technology has today. We need a complete overhaul. Rewrite Operating Systems that satisfy these agendas. There are very many people that care. They just don't have good solutions yet.
    - worksonmine 3y ago
      > These are very lazy solutions to the problems technology has today. We need a complete overhaul. Rewrite Operating Systems that satisfy these agendas. Elaborate please, you can install any distribution you want on the Linux solutions. Have you used one? What are your gripes exactly? Would Stallman (your example) have the same? They are completely fine for my use except banking/identifying myself online. I can use web for banks but not for the 2FA solutions banks in my country use. Graphene however can if I turn on a Google profile. It's not perfect but it works.
      - max_ 3y ago
        Unfortunately I don't have enough time to fully list all the problems we have with modern computer/smartphone technology, But they are just too many. It's not just the about having Linux. There are all kinds of problems around. But here are my main concerns. - The lack of an easy way to know what all programs on your phone are exactly doing; - Sensible application permissions. (I just want to share 1 photo but somehow the application has access to my entire disk/folder?) Projects like Grapheme seem to just lock down the software completely and make it unusable for all kinds of use cases
        worksonmine 3y ago
        You claim that you want solutions for: > - The lack of an easy way to know what all programs on your phone are exactly doing; > - Sensible application permissions. (I just want to share 1 photo but somehow the application has access to my entire disk/folder?) Yet when Graphene (and Flatpak etc) locks everything down and makes dangerous permissions opt-in it's also a problem: > Projects like Grapheme seem to just lock down the software completely and make it unusable for all kinds of use cases If you want per file permissions that can also be implemented with tools that exist today. For the photo example I usually just copy the image rather than uploading from disk, clipboard access however is another security issue. What would a solution you can accept look like? I agree a fresh OS would be nice but there are solutions to every problem you mention. Even old hardware without binaries are possible for the truly paranoid. It's not perfect but you have to be pragmatic. I think I've made my point that free software didn't really fail. Is it perfect? Absolutely not, but neither was electricity in the 1800s or even today. Did electricity fail?
- M95D 3y ago
  Stallman complained about surveillance by mobile phone. No phone that is actually usable as a phone (i.e. connects to the phone network) can be surveillance-free. The SIM card that requires remote downloadable and executable code to run on the phone is a non-removable surveillance risk of any mobile phone. If you separate the phone part form the tablet part, then the phone will need 2 CPUs with 2 OSs and double the power use, double the battery, almost double the size. Then, there is automated surveillance from the cell towers and data nodes (MITM, listening, speech recognition, auto-transcription, keyword analysis, etc.).
  - max_ 3y ago
    My point is that this entire stack of telecommunications needs to be rebuilt. Not just phones. It's very doable. It's just that no one is interested.

How do you figure that the free software movement failed? I definitely see a loss of interest these days, but the accomplishments of the last 30 years are enormous.

max_ 3y ago

I am referring to "Stallman Compliant" software/hardware. Almost no one besides a small group of fanatics. Used free software. Why isn't there a smartphone that Richard Stallman can use? The reason is because no one built such a phone. People where instead complaining about it. But no one actually thought of a real solution. Besides the fanatical "throw away your phone" that is very impractical for most people today.

worksonmine 3y ago
> Why isn't there a smartphone that Richard Stallman can use? > The reason is because no one built such a phone. People where instead complaining about it. Librem and PinePhone exist as Linux phones, then there is GrapheneOS if you want to stay with Android. You can install spyware on it yes, but you don't have to. These are not things you just create over a weekend so there are rough edges yes, but they exist. The problem you're describing is more about demand. Since it is niche corporations are still stuck in the old ways. For example I can't ID myself online without Google Play Services and it disgusts me, government institutions need to get better at supporting a bigger eco-system. People don't care enough to jump through hoops, but that doesn't mean that the solutions don't exist or aren't being worked on.
- DamnInteresting 3y ago
  Having known people who correspond with Stallman, he would likely reply to this comment with a rant about how you should call it "GNU/Linux" rather than just "Linux", then proceed to ignore the remainder of your points.
  - worksonmine 3y ago
    > then proceed to ignore the remainder of your points As opposed to you, right? :)
- max_ 3y ago
  >Librem and PinePhone exist as Linux phones, then there is GrapheneOS if you want to stay with Android These are very lazy solutions to the problems technology has today. We need a complete overhaul. Rewrite Operating Systems that satisfy these agendas. There are very many people that care. They just don't have good solutions yet.
  - worksonmine 3y ago
    > These are very lazy solutions to the problems technology has today. We need a complete overhaul. Rewrite Operating Systems that satisfy these agendas. Elaborate please, you can install any distribution you want on the Linux solutions. Have you used one? What are your gripes exactly? Would Stallman (your example) have the same? They are completely fine for my use except banking/identifying myself online. I can use web for banks but not for the 2FA solutions banks in my country use. Graphene however can if I turn on a Google profile. It's not perfect but it works.
    - max_ 3y ago
      Unfortunately I don't have enough time to fully list all the problems we have with modern computer/smartphone technology, But they are just too many. It's not just the about having Linux. There are all kinds of problems around. But here are my main concerns. - The lack of an easy way to know what all programs on your phone are exactly doing; - Sensible application permissions. (I just want to share 1 photo but somehow the application has access to my entire disk/folder?) Projects like Grapheme seem to just lock down the software completely and make it unusable for all kinds of use cases
      - worksonmine 3y ago
        You claim that you want solutions for: > - The lack of an easy way to know what all programs on your phone are exactly doing; > - Sensible application permissions. (I just want to share 1 photo but somehow the application has access to my entire disk/folder?) Yet when Graphene (and Flatpak etc) locks everything down and makes dangerous permissions opt-in it's also a problem: > Projects like Grapheme seem to just lock down the software completely and make it unusable for all kinds of use cases If you want per file permissions that can also be implemented with tools that exist today. For the photo example I usually just copy the image rather than uploading from disk, clipboard access however is another security issue. What would a solution you can accept look like? I agree a fresh OS would be nice but there are solutions to every problem you mention. Even old hardware without binaries are possible for the truly paranoid. It's not perfect but you have to be pragmatic. I think I've made my point that free software didn't really fail. Is it perfect? Absolutely not, but neither was electricity in the 1800s or even today. Did electricity fail?
M95D 3y ago
Stallman complained about surveillance by mobile phone. No phone that is actually usable as a phone (i.e. connects to the phone network) can be surveillance-free. The SIM card that requires remote downloadable and executable code to run on the phone is a non-removable surveillance risk of any mobile phone. If you separate the phone part form the tablet part, then the phone will need 2 CPUs with 2 OSs and double the power use, double the battery, almost double the size. Then, there is automated surveillance from the cell towers and data nodes (MITM, listening, speech recognition, auto-transcription, keyword analysis, etc.).
- max_ 3y ago
  My point is that this entire stack of telecommunications needs to be rebuilt. Not just phones. It's very doable. It's just that no one is interested.