5 ms·

Being unable to connect to the Internet or any network due to a lack of WiFi support is a strong privacy and security protection mechanism indeed. And the free

Being unable to connect to the Internet or any network due to a lack of WiFi support is a strong privacy and security protection mechanism indeed. And the freedom is provided by removing your choice to use nonfree WiFi drivers. Leaving that decision to you with a warning of its implications (ala Debian) is not really freedom because you'll make the wrong choice. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of FOSS, but not of doublespeak.

jancsika 6y ago
> Leaving that decision to you with a warning of its implications (ala Debian) is not really freedom because you'll make the wrong choice. This is context dependent. Suppose I'm changing an existing laptop from Windows 10 to Debian for a user. Suppose I must install WiFi to convince the user the machine it as all useful. Suppose if I fail to get the machine to work, the user will eventually go out and get another Windows 10 machine. In this case the right choice is to install from nonfree. It's a compromise, sure, but it's clearly less bad than the alternatives and leads to significantly more freedom than the user had before. To not leave room in your philosophy for these cases-- and there are many-- is to create unnecessary rifts among allies. You're doing it right now by implying that Debian proponents aren't True Scotsman due to the existence of nonfree.
risho 6y ago
I feel like I must be misreading something, because your second paragraph appears to me to be the doublespeak you claim to dislike. The problem with "free software" fundamentalists is they care more about the freedom of the software than the freedom of the user. Part of free choice from a user perspective is the freedom to run proprietary blobs. Also when it comes to freedom to run or not run proprietary software there is no such thing as a wrong choice, just a personal choice. I would prefer you not force your freedom on me, so that I can be free to do as I please.
- piaste 6y ago
  > I feel like I must be misreading something, because your second paragraph appears to me to be the doublespeak you claim to dislike. GP's first two paragraphs are very clear irony.
- fsflover 6y ago
  > The problem with "free software" fundamentalists is they care more about the freedom of the software than the freedom of the user. Part of free choice from a user perspective is the freedom to run proprietary blobs. No one is removing the freedom to use blobs. You can use them on PureOS, too (and I did). The difference is you will not run into proprietary software by mistake (which is possible on Debian). > Also when it comes to freedom to run or not run proprietary software there is no such thing as a wrong choice, just a personal choice. Most users never heard about free software and do not make a choice, just use whatever is installed. This is exactly how you make a wrong choice: unknowingly.
  - Throwaway1771 6y ago
    The labelling should be improved to educate the user more. That's it. What you're discussing is really the level of convenience, and what that does to influence user behavior.
opan 6y ago
You can change out the internal WLAN card in a lot of laptops, or get a USB version with free drivers. It's a very realistic option. You just have to be more careful when picking your hardware, since many chip makers don't release free drivers.
maqp 6y ago
If there only was a list of chipsets with open source drivers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_wireless_drivers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_wire...

jancsika 6y ago

> Leaving that decision to you with a warning of its implications (ala Debian) is not really freedom because you'll make the wrong choice. This is context dependent. Suppose I'm changing an existing laptop from Windows 10 to Debian for a user. Suppose I must install WiFi to convince the user the machine it as all useful. Suppose if I fail to get the machine to work, the user will eventually go out and get another Windows 10 machine. In this case the right choice is to install from nonfree. It's a compromise, sure, but it's clearly less bad than the alternatives and leads to significantly more freedom than the user had before. To not leave room in your philosophy for these cases-- and there are many-- is to create unnecessary rifts among allies. You're doing it right now by implying that Debian proponents aren't True Scotsman due to the existence of nonfree.

risho 6y ago

I feel like I must be misreading something, because your second paragraph appears to me to be the doublespeak you claim to dislike. The problem with "free software" fundamentalists is they care more about the freedom of the software than the freedom of the user. Part of free choice from a user perspective is the freedom to run proprietary blobs. Also when it comes to freedom to run or not run proprietary software there is no such thing as a wrong choice, just a personal choice. I would prefer you not force your freedom on me, so that I can be free to do as I please.

piaste 6y ago
> I feel like I must be misreading something, because your second paragraph appears to me to be the doublespeak you claim to dislike. GP's first two paragraphs are very clear irony.
fsflover 6y ago
> The problem with "free software" fundamentalists is they care more about the freedom of the software than the freedom of the user. Part of free choice from a user perspective is the freedom to run proprietary blobs. No one is removing the freedom to use blobs. You can use them on PureOS, too (and I did). The difference is you will not run into proprietary software by mistake (which is possible on Debian). > Also when it comes to freedom to run or not run proprietary software there is no such thing as a wrong choice, just a personal choice. Most users never heard about free software and do not make a choice, just use whatever is installed. This is exactly how you make a wrong choice: unknowingly.
- Throwaway1771 6y ago
  The labelling should be improved to educate the user more. That's it. What you're discussing is really the level of convenience, and what that does to influence user behavior.

opan 6y ago

You can change out the internal WLAN card in a lot of laptops, or get a USB version with free drivers. It's a very realistic option. You just have to be more careful when picking your hardware, since many chip makers don't release free drivers.

maqp 6y ago

If there only was a list of chipsets with open source drivers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_wireless_drivers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_wire...