4 ms·

FSF announces criteria for hardware endorsement program "Respects Your Freedom"

29 points by ZeroMinx 16y ago

davidw 16y ago
I'd be happy with a certification that something runs without proprietary drivers.
- gaius 16y ago
  RMS uses a Lemote Yeeloong laptop for that very reason. Of course it's made in a sweatshop but hey, software freedom trumps human rights any day of the week, right? Right?
  - Symmetry 16y ago
    Human rights? Working in a sweatshop beats being a farmer, which is what workers in those sweatshops would be doing if they weren't employed there or in places like them.
    - gaius 16y ago
      It probably beats being a subsistence farmer but farmers as a profession are often wealthy - look at France.
      - wwortiz 16y ago
        I really don't think anyone in china is going to be more wealthy if they choose farming over sweatshop work.
        gaius 16y ago
        Possibly not, but shopping there is still perpetuating the sweatshop system. Why not buy a laptop made in Taiwan or South Korea where the people are free?
        Symmetry 16y ago
        Because its usually better to give your money to someone who's desperately poor than to someone who's moderately poor, even if you give less money in the first case than in the second? If you're arguing that South Korea and Taiwan are politically free and that its better to give money to democracies thats understandable. But its pernicious to think that giving a desperately poor person something which is far less than you could give makes you morally responsible for their plight, causing you to avoid helping them at all. South Korea and Taiwan clawed their way up to being only sort of poor through working in sweatshops (and before them Japan did too), the sweatshop system is something we should actually be encouraging in the short term while we work on improving infrastructure and education in poor countries. EDITED: 'if' to 'is'
        gaius 16y ago
        Because you aren't giving your money to that person - you're giving it to "the system" which says, "hmm, this sweatshop business is great, let's go on doing that!".
        Symmetry 16y ago
        You're anthropomorphizing here horribly. There's no entity called "The Sweatshop business" that sits around with an evil expression on his face plotting on how to make more sweatshops and taking my money, the system in only an abstraction for the wide variety of people, workers and capitalists, each with their own goals and desires that when taken together produce the things that we call sweatshops. This is important because if you are lazy and rely on anthropological reasoning ("I'm the sweatshop system, of course I want more sweatshops") you won't be able to make correct predictions about how the world will change in response to your actions. Yes my money goes to a person. I hand off my money to the clerk at the store and then it travels around and eventually some of it goes to the suppliers of raw materials, some of it goes into the pockets of the capitalists who provided the funding, and some of it goes to pay the wages of yonder sweatshops workers.
        16y ago
  - callumjones 16y ago
    And by god is it ugly.
  - wmf 16y ago
    Aren't all laptops made in "sweatshops"? Also, there are plenty of activists talking about worker rights but few talking about software freedom, so RMS is probably better off doing what he's doing.
macrael 16y ago
Are the FSF's endorsements really worth anything? How many people on HN are using an FSF endorsed linux distro? The full list is here: http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html Spoiler: Ubuntu, Fedora, and Debian aren't on it. What's the point of having such lists if they don't appear to exert any pressure on entities to change? (The aformentioned distributions seem in no hurry to move to compliance.)
- tjr 16y ago
  What kind of pressure do you think they should exert? They worked with Debian for years, but ultimately Debian didn't quite agree with their vision for total software freedom.
  - macrael 16y ago
    They don't actually weild any power with which they could apply pressure, so its a bit of a moot point. I guess I was calling their purpose, as expressed by their completely ignored list, into question. I know people say that there is value in RMS being out there campaigining for our freedoms, but, again, with this list as evidence, it seems like no one takes him seriously. The distributions doing the most to bring free software to the public are censured by the FSF instead of being embraced. Obviously, this isn't entirely fair, and the FSF is very supportive to those popular distributions an supportive of your use of any free software. But this new list seems destined to be as useless as the first.
- SkyMarshal 16y ago
  "The desire to own a computer or device and have full control over it, to know that you are not being spied on or tracked, to run any software you wish without asking permission, and to share with friends without worrying about Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)..." Yes, it's valuable to me, especially with the development of TPM hardware. I'd be greatful for trusted source like FSF to pre-screen hardware for those criteria so I don't have to dig through tech specs on Newegg, Amazon, and obfuscated manufacturer's websites trying to find it myself.
tzs 16y ago
This will have little or no impact, as pretty much the only hardware vendors that will be interested are those whose hardware is of no interest to Windows or Mac users. Why? Because of requirements like these: Any product-related materials that mention the FSF endorsement must not also carry endorsements or badges related to proprietary software, such as "Works with Windows" or "Made for Mac" badges, because these would give an appearance of legitimacy to those products, and may make users think the product requires them. However, we don't object to clear factual statements informing the user that the product also works with specific proprietary operating systems. and The seller must use FSF approved terminology for the FSF's activities and work, in all statements and publications relating to the product. This includes product packaging, and manuals, web pages, marketing materials, and interviews about the product. Specifically, the seller must use the term "GNU/Linux" for any reference to an entire operating system which includes GNU and Linux, and not mislead with "Linux" or "Linux-based system" or "a system with the Linux kernel". And the seller must talk about "free software" more prominently than "open source."

29 points by ZeroMinx 16y ago

davidw 16y ago

I'd be happy with a certification that something runs without proprietary drivers.

gaius 16y ago
RMS uses a Lemote Yeeloong laptop for that very reason. Of course it's made in a sweatshop but hey, software freedom trumps human rights any day of the week, right? Right?
- Symmetry 16y ago
  Human rights? Working in a sweatshop beats being a farmer, which is what workers in those sweatshops would be doing if they weren't employed there or in places like them.
  - gaius 16y ago
    It probably beats being a subsistence farmer but farmers as a profession are often wealthy - look at France.
    - wwortiz 16y ago
      I really don't think anyone in china is going to be more wealthy if they choose farming over sweatshop work.
      - gaius 16y ago
        Possibly not, but shopping there is still perpetuating the sweatshop system. Why not buy a laptop made in Taiwan or South Korea where the people are free?
        Symmetry 16y ago
        Because its usually better to give your money to someone who's desperately poor than to someone who's moderately poor, even if you give less money in the first case than in the second? If you're arguing that South Korea and Taiwan are politically free and that its better to give money to democracies thats understandable. But its pernicious to think that giving a desperately poor person something which is far less than you could give makes you morally responsible for their plight, causing you to avoid helping them at all. South Korea and Taiwan clawed their way up to being only sort of poor through working in sweatshops (and before them Japan did too), the sweatshop system is something we should actually be encouraging in the short term while we work on improving infrastructure and education in poor countries. EDITED: 'if' to 'is'
        gaius 16y ago
        Because you aren't giving your money to that person - you're giving it to "the system" which says, "hmm, this sweatshop business is great, let's go on doing that!".
        Symmetry 16y ago
        You're anthropomorphizing here horribly. There's no entity called "The Sweatshop business" that sits around with an evil expression on his face plotting on how to make more sweatshops and taking my money, the system in only an abstraction for the wide variety of people, workers and capitalists, each with their own goals and desires that when taken together produce the things that we call sweatshops. This is important because if you are lazy and rely on anthropological reasoning ("I'm the sweatshop system, of course I want more sweatshops") you won't be able to make correct predictions about how the world will change in response to your actions. Yes my money goes to a person. I hand off my money to the clerk at the store and then it travels around and eventually some of it goes to the suppliers of raw materials, some of it goes into the pockets of the capitalists who provided the funding, and some of it goes to pay the wages of yonder sweatshops workers.
        16y ago
- callumjones 16y ago
  And by god is it ugly.
- wmf 16y ago
  Aren't all laptops made in "sweatshops"? Also, there are plenty of activists talking about worker rights but few talking about software freedom, so RMS is probably better off doing what he's doing.

macrael 16y ago

Are the FSF's endorsements really worth anything? How many people on HN are using an FSF endorsed linux distro? The full list is here: http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html Spoiler: Ubuntu, Fedora, and Debian aren't on it. What's the point of having such lists if they don't appear to exert any pressure on entities to change? (The aformentioned distributions seem in no hurry to move to compliance.)

tjr 16y ago
What kind of pressure do you think they should exert? They worked with Debian for years, but ultimately Debian didn't quite agree with their vision for total software freedom.
- macrael 16y ago
  They don't actually weild any power with which they could apply pressure, so its a bit of a moot point. I guess I was calling their purpose, as expressed by their completely ignored list, into question. I know people say that there is value in RMS being out there campaigining for our freedoms, but, again, with this list as evidence, it seems like no one takes him seriously. The distributions doing the most to bring free software to the public are censured by the FSF instead of being embraced. Obviously, this isn't entirely fair, and the FSF is very supportive to those popular distributions an supportive of your use of any free software. But this new list seems destined to be as useless as the first.
SkyMarshal 16y ago
"The desire to own a computer or device and have full control over it, to know that you are not being spied on or tracked, to run any software you wish without asking permission, and to share with friends without worrying about Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)..." Yes, it's valuable to me, especially with the development of TPM hardware. I'd be greatful for trusted source like FSF to pre-screen hardware for those criteria so I don't have to dig through tech specs on Newegg, Amazon, and obfuscated manufacturer's websites trying to find it myself.

tzs 16y ago

This will have little or no impact, as pretty much the only hardware vendors that will be interested are those whose hardware is of no interest to Windows or Mac users. Why? Because of requirements like these: Any product-related materials that mention the FSF endorsement must not also carry endorsements or badges related to proprietary software, such as "Works with Windows" or "Made for Mac" badges, because these would give an appearance of legitimacy to those products, and may make users think the product requires them. However, we don't object to clear factual statements informing the user that the product also works with specific proprietary operating systems. and The seller must use FSF approved terminology for the FSF's activities and work, in all statements and publications relating to the product. This includes product packaging, and manuals, web pages, marketing materials, and interviews about the product. Specifically, the seller must use the term "GNU/Linux" for any reference to an entire operating system which includes GNU and Linux, and not mislead with "Linux" or "Linux-based system" or "a system with the Linux kernel". And the seller must talk about "free software" more prominently than "open source."