3 ms·

I love Guix and GuixSD and would like to move to it as my main OS, but I dislike that they actively censor information on how to run a custom kernel and get set

by gkya 8y ago

I love Guix and GuixSD and would like to move to it as my main OS, but I dislike that they actively censor information on how to run a custom kernel and get set up on a machine where some drivers linux-libre removes are required. I understand that they don't want to distribute those stuff and that's fine, but not everybody can buy new hardware and especially any hardware easily. This is extremism for me (banning official information, not the offending drivers), it's distasteful and discourages me.

rekado 8y ago
This is not censorship. We just don't want the #guix IRC channel or the project's mailing lists to recommend ways to use proprietary software. People are welcome to use non-project channels to discuss proprietary software.
- michaelmrose 8y ago
  So you have scatter information about how to actually make guix useful to a large number of users who over 13 different platforms that people use and hope users can use google search to reassemble said info. This is inefficient and poorly considered. When my family got their first modern computer in my teens it ran windows. When we bought a better one so I could explore computer animation it ran windows. My first computer I paid for dual booted linux/windows. My computers now exclusively run linux. I switched to free software because it was better ideologically but more importantly because I can presently use it to accomplish my goals. Dual booting is surely inferior to just running free software from a software freedom standpoint but if I couldn't dual boot I might not have bothered at all. Making nonfree sofware require an affirmative act beyond apt-install foo is a good step deleting all info from the official platform is unreasonable.
  - mikegerwitz 8y ago
    For more information, see the GNU Coding Standards: https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#References https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#References In particular: > A GNU program should not recommend, promote, or grant legitimacy to the use of any non-free program. Proprietary software is a social and ethical problem, and our aim is to put an end to that problem. We can’t stop some people from writing proprietary programs, or stop other people from using them, but we can and should refuse to advertise them to new potential customers, or to give the public the idea that their existence is ethical. Excluding material isn't censorship---GNU stands by its principles. You wouldn't expect a vegan organization to advertise means of obtaining meat, for example.
    - rekado 8y ago
      I'd like to add that using proprietary software is not an act that deserves condemnation, it's not a moral failing or something like that. The GNU project opposes proprietary software as it is considered a social and ethical problem. Although I advise against it, you are free to use proprietary software for whatever reason (including possibly ethical or financial reasons) --- there are no mechanisms in place to prevent you from doing that in Guix (and the fact that Linux libre cannot load certain user-supplied firmware is a bug). As a project, however, we do not recommend the use of proprietary software and don't provide a platform for advice on how to replace free parts of Guix with non-free software. The use of proprietary software becomes an ethical problem when network effects are in place. Otherwise, it is the mechanisms of proprietary software itself that we object to, for example the barriers it poses to helping friends or neighbours and the way it gives developers control over the users.
  - enriquto 8y ago
    > (...) deleting all info from the official platform is unreasonable. There's many linux distributions and packaging systems where you can easily download proprietary drivers. It's nice that there exists at least one with a firm commitment to free software. Notice that you can still install proprietary software on top of Guix; they just prefer not to promote it via the official communication channels. That's perfectly reasonable.
- gkya 8y ago
  It's not "software" in that it's not something I choose to use. It's firmware, which is code that I have to use. Also, even if you do not agree with the above statement, the kernel is unique enough to be granted an exception. If I can't get say sublime text or some proprietary decoder from the repos, that's a tiny annoyance; but if my screen gets funny colours or if I cannot connect to the wireless, that makes it unusable for me. And at that point you're effectively barring me from using free software (but with the exception of a couple blobs that I can totally live with given the status quo), not helping me adopt it. Yes Debian is not as cool (I really like Guix and GuixSD), but at least they are not impeding my day-to-day needs because of extremist morals. When I asked on the official mailing list for help and was told kindly to f off, that makes me sour enough to say meh, I can use a relatively less interesting distro if it has a better, unconditionally helpful community. Edit: also it's totally censorship to ban people from saying things they do know and could say.

by gkya 8y ago

rekado 8y ago

This is not censorship. We just don't want the #guix IRC channel or the project's mailing lists to recommend ways to use proprietary software. People are welcome to use non-project channels to discuss proprietary software.

michaelmrose 8y ago
So you have scatter information about how to actually make guix useful to a large number of users who over 13 different platforms that people use and hope users can use google search to reassemble said info. This is inefficient and poorly considered. When my family got their first modern computer in my teens it ran windows. When we bought a better one so I could explore computer animation it ran windows. My first computer I paid for dual booted linux/windows. My computers now exclusively run linux. I switched to free software because it was better ideologically but more importantly because I can presently use it to accomplish my goals. Dual booting is surely inferior to just running free software from a software freedom standpoint but if I couldn't dual boot I might not have bothered at all. Making nonfree sofware require an affirmative act beyond apt-install foo is a good step deleting all info from the official platform is unreasonable.
- mikegerwitz 8y ago
  For more information, see the GNU Coding Standards: https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#References https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#References In particular: > A GNU program should not recommend, promote, or grant legitimacy to the use of any non-free program. Proprietary software is a social and ethical problem, and our aim is to put an end to that problem. We can’t stop some people from writing proprietary programs, or stop other people from using them, but we can and should refuse to advertise them to new potential customers, or to give the public the idea that their existence is ethical. Excluding material isn't censorship---GNU stands by its principles. You wouldn't expect a vegan organization to advertise means of obtaining meat, for example.
  - rekado 8y ago
    I'd like to add that using proprietary software is not an act that deserves condemnation, it's not a moral failing or something like that. The GNU project opposes proprietary software as it is considered a social and ethical problem. Although I advise against it, you are free to use proprietary software for whatever reason (including possibly ethical or financial reasons) --- there are no mechanisms in place to prevent you from doing that in Guix (and the fact that Linux libre cannot load certain user-supplied firmware is a bug). As a project, however, we do not recommend the use of proprietary software and don't provide a platform for advice on how to replace free parts of Guix with non-free software. The use of proprietary software becomes an ethical problem when network effects are in place. Otherwise, it is the mechanisms of proprietary software itself that we object to, for example the barriers it poses to helping friends or neighbours and the way it gives developers control over the users.
- enriquto 8y ago
  > (...) deleting all info from the official platform is unreasonable. There's many linux distributions and packaging systems where you can easily download proprietary drivers. It's nice that there exists at least one with a firm commitment to free software. Notice that you can still install proprietary software on top of Guix; they just prefer not to promote it via the official communication channels. That's perfectly reasonable.
gkya 8y ago
It's not "software" in that it's not something I choose to use. It's firmware, which is code that I have to use. Also, even if you do not agree with the above statement, the kernel is unique enough to be granted an exception. If I can't get say sublime text or some proprietary decoder from the repos, that's a tiny annoyance; but if my screen gets funny colours or if I cannot connect to the wireless, that makes it unusable for me. And at that point you're effectively barring me from using free software (but with the exception of a couple blobs that I can totally live with given the status quo), not helping me adopt it. Yes Debian is not as cool (I really like Guix and GuixSD), but at least they are not impeding my day-to-day needs because of extremist morals. When I asked on the official mailing list for help and was told kindly to f off, that makes me sour enough to say meh, I can use a relatively less interesting distro if it has a better, unconditionally helpful community. Edit: also it's totally censorship to ban people from saying things they do know and could say.