5 ms·

The CPU uses proprietary, binary microcode blobs. The graphics chip needs proprietary, binary firmware blobs. The ethernet chip needs proprietary, binary firm

by creshal 11y ago

The CPU uses proprietary, binary microcode blobs. The graphics chip needs proprietary, binary firmware blobs. The ethernet chip needs proprietary, binary firmware blobs. The BIOS is a proprietary, binary firmware blob. "Respects your freedom" my ass. The only difference to a whitebox laptop is marketing. Dell's or Lenovo's linux offerings are just as "free". (And chromebooks with Coreboot are, technically, more free than both.)

dandelion_lover 11y ago
They are not hiding it at all. Their goal is to achieve freedom in each of those components [0]. [0] https://puri.sm/road-to-fsf-ryf-endorsement-and-beyond/ https://puri.sm/road-to-fsf-ryf-endorsement-and-beyond/
- creshal 11y ago
  So they're selling vague promises. Getting everyone to open source their binary blobs (and the Librem has a lot) is highly optimistic at best.
  - dandelion_lover 11y ago
    They are by far the best except for the Ministry of Freedom [0], which sell FSF-certified, but comparably slow laptops. And they admit that as I mentioned above. Only after enough users is involved in freedom seeking, it can be possible to demand large companies to provide something we need. In my opinion, Purism do a lot in this direction. [0] http://minifree.org/ http://minifree.org/
    - madez 11y ago
      What things did they do beside marketing? What was achieved?
      - dandelion_lover 11y ago
        I am not sure whether you consider this marketing, but for me important things are (0) demonstrating the interest of customers in freedom, (1) explaining what's wrong with "ordinary" laptops to the public; increasing awareness in the media [0], and (2) working closely with QubesOS to make this system work on their laptops. Hardware switches are also very good. And yes, it might be a scam. But might be not. [0] (1) is being already done by FSF, but to me it looks like it's not enough.
  - chrsw 11y ago
    You're right, Purism doesn't offer anything no one else offers at the moment. It looks like they're trying to grow a customer base then use that base as leverage when it comes time to negotiate with OEMs over features, open docs, open firmware, etc. Since they're not at all transparent on the details about how they will actually achieve true Freedom on modern hardware, and since modern hardware IP is deeply entangled in patent and licensing issues, it's reasonable to be high skeptical of what's going on here. Then again it can all be a scam which would render anything I just said irrelevant anyway.
nextos 11y ago
Actually, a RockChip based Chromebook like C201 is completely free except for the 3D acceleration. Not even CPU microcodes. And it's dirty cheap. I wonder why Purism didn't simply commission such a machine with the right 3D chip instead of going with a non-free and expensive option. I would also love similar initiatives in the mobile space, but I reckon it is more challenging. Neo900 and Pyra are kind of cool though. And I'm hoping Jolla open sources Sailfish OS later this month or early new year.
- creshal 11y ago
  > I wonder why Purism didn't simply commission such a machine with the right 3D chip instead of going with a non-free and expensive option. Because they can sell the "expensive" option (which, for the OEM itself, isn't even too expensive) at a much higher premium. > I would also love similar initiatives in the mobile space, but I reckon it is more challenging. In the mobile space it would be an even bigger exercise in futility: There is no, and will never be, a baseband chip with a free firmware. The FCC made that pretty clear back in the OpenMoko days – use our NSA-approved proprietary blob or you'll never sell in the developed world.
  - rtpg 11y ago
    what's the story on OpenMoko? I have a hard time seeing the FCC directly saying something like that, and google isn't showing anything...
    - ansible 11y ago
      That was an attempt at a Linux-based phone before Android. It is very old (close to 10 years?).
      - rtpg 11y ago
        Was more wondering about the accusation that the FCC shot down the effort. Google seems to show that it launched something, can't find any trace of controversy
nickpsecurity 11y ago
Open a few side windows, add one to basement, drill a tunnel to basement, balsawood for backdoor, ladder to hole in roof, and... now with brand new locks on front door. Shit, security and freedom have never been better. Sign me up!
yuhong 11y ago
And the microcode is built into the CPU so skipping microcode updates would be useless.

by creshal 11y ago

dandelion_lover 11y ago

They are not hiding it at all. Their goal is to achieve freedom in each of those components [0]. [0] https://puri.sm/road-to-fsf-ryf-endorsement-and-beyond/ https://puri.sm/road-to-fsf-ryf-endorsement-and-beyond/

creshal 11y ago
So they're selling vague promises. Getting everyone to open source their binary blobs (and the Librem has a lot) is highly optimistic at best.
- dandelion_lover 11y ago
  They are by far the best except for the Ministry of Freedom [0], which sell FSF-certified, but comparably slow laptops. And they admit that as I mentioned above. Only after enough users is involved in freedom seeking, it can be possible to demand large companies to provide something we need. In my opinion, Purism do a lot in this direction. [0] http://minifree.org/ http://minifree.org/
  - madez 11y ago
    What things did they do beside marketing? What was achieved?
    - dandelion_lover 11y ago
      I am not sure whether you consider this marketing, but for me important things are (0) demonstrating the interest of customers in freedom, (1) explaining what's wrong with "ordinary" laptops to the public; increasing awareness in the media [0], and (2) working closely with QubesOS to make this system work on their laptops. Hardware switches are also very good. And yes, it might be a scam. But might be not. [0] (1) is being already done by FSF, but to me it looks like it's not enough.
- chrsw 11y ago
  You're right, Purism doesn't offer anything no one else offers at the moment. It looks like they're trying to grow a customer base then use that base as leverage when it comes time to negotiate with OEMs over features, open docs, open firmware, etc. Since they're not at all transparent on the details about how they will actually achieve true Freedom on modern hardware, and since modern hardware IP is deeply entangled in patent and licensing issues, it's reasonable to be high skeptical of what's going on here. Then again it can all be a scam which would render anything I just said irrelevant anyway.

nextos 11y ago

Actually, a RockChip based Chromebook like C201 is completely free except for the 3D acceleration. Not even CPU microcodes. And it's dirty cheap. I wonder why Purism didn't simply commission such a machine with the right 3D chip instead of going with a non-free and expensive option. I would also love similar initiatives in the mobile space, but I reckon it is more challenging. Neo900 and Pyra are kind of cool though. And I'm hoping Jolla open sources Sailfish OS later this month or early new year.

creshal 11y ago
> I wonder why Purism didn't simply commission such a machine with the right 3D chip instead of going with a non-free and expensive option. Because they can sell the "expensive" option (which, for the OEM itself, isn't even too expensive) at a much higher premium. > I would also love similar initiatives in the mobile space, but I reckon it is more challenging. In the mobile space it would be an even bigger exercise in futility: There is no, and will never be, a baseband chip with a free firmware. The FCC made that pretty clear back in the OpenMoko days – use our NSA-approved proprietary blob or you'll never sell in the developed world.
- rtpg 11y ago
  what's the story on OpenMoko? I have a hard time seeing the FCC directly saying something like that, and google isn't showing anything...
  - ansible 11y ago
    That was an attempt at a Linux-based phone before Android. It is very old (close to 10 years?).
    - rtpg 11y ago
      Was more wondering about the accusation that the FCC shot down the effort. Google seems to show that it launched something, can't find any trace of controversy

nickpsecurity 11y ago

Open a few side windows, add one to basement, drill a tunnel to basement, balsawood for backdoor, ladder to hole in roof, and... now with brand new locks on front door. Shit, security and freedom have never been better. Sign me up!

yuhong 11y ago

And the microcode is built into the CPU so skipping microcode updates would be useless.