3 ms·

I feel like I'm going to end up being a veritable "hermit in a shack" because I won't tolerate the expectation of serfdom to our feudal hardware manufacturer an

I feel like I'm going to end up being a veritable "hermit in a shack" because I won't tolerate the expectation of serfdom to our feudal hardware manufacturer and software developer overlords.

bitexploder 6y ago
Ultimately we need a world where more than just technologists can run on commodity hardware and free operating systems. Hardware reached a point where most people can do all their computing in cheap hardware and Linux is really quite sufficient for most people, but many small and some medium size issues combine to make it too hard for most folks to embrace.
matheusmoreira 6y ago
Sadly there is currently no hardware equivalent to free software. While anyone with a computer can learn programming and enrich the world by contributing, manufacturing modern hardware takes billions of dollars worth of equipment. We'll always be at the mercy of hardware manufacturers until we can make our own chips at home.
- moring 6y ago
  I would argue that this is only half true. In the strictest sense, yes, we are at the mercy of hardware manufacturers. In practice, however, we can make chips at home, using FPGAs. For example, Lattice ECP5 offers capabilities beyond what can be reasonably expected from true DIY chips, can be programmed using a completely free toolchain, and let you design your hardware as RTL, which gives you all the freedom to build a free hardware layer for your free software stack. RTL designs in particular have a much reduced chance for FPGA-specific "closedness" to leak into the software stack, like it is the case with BLOB-based device drivers. While the designs will be FPGA-specific for performance reasons, they are not forced to be closed-source, nor will the specifics be visible outside the HDL. Again, in the strictest sense, Lattice chips are non-free too and you are at their mercy not to withdraw their support and tell their lawyers to go full nuclear on anyone working on the free toolchain, or free designs for their FPGAs. But then, with true DIY chips, the same could happen to your suppliers for wafers or chemicals. Or just other chipmakers threatening you with a lawsuit. I would definitely prefer "more open", but having to use an FPGA is not something I would consider a show stopper. Whatever holds back free hardware, I don't think this is it.
- jrumbut 6y ago
  Given the complexity and specialization and massive physical plant required for modern hardware manufacturing I just can't get as worked up over their antics like I can with software.

I feel like I'm going to end up being a veritable "hermit in a shack" because I won't tolerate the expectation of serfdom to our feudal hardware manufacturer and software developer overlords.

bitexploder 6y ago

Ultimately we need a world where more than just technologists can run on commodity hardware and free operating systems. Hardware reached a point where most people can do all their computing in cheap hardware and Linux is really quite sufficient for most people, but many small and some medium size issues combine to make it too hard for most folks to embrace.

matheusmoreira 6y ago

Sadly there is currently no hardware equivalent to free software. While anyone with a computer can learn programming and enrich the world by contributing, manufacturing modern hardware takes billions of dollars worth of equipment. We'll always be at the mercy of hardware manufacturers until we can make our own chips at home.

moring 6y ago
I would argue that this is only half true. In the strictest sense, yes, we are at the mercy of hardware manufacturers. In practice, however, we can make chips at home, using FPGAs. For example, Lattice ECP5 offers capabilities beyond what can be reasonably expected from true DIY chips, can be programmed using a completely free toolchain, and let you design your hardware as RTL, which gives you all the freedom to build a free hardware layer for your free software stack. RTL designs in particular have a much reduced chance for FPGA-specific "closedness" to leak into the software stack, like it is the case with BLOB-based device drivers. While the designs will be FPGA-specific for performance reasons, they are not forced to be closed-source, nor will the specifics be visible outside the HDL. Again, in the strictest sense, Lattice chips are non-free too and you are at their mercy not to withdraw their support and tell their lawyers to go full nuclear on anyone working on the free toolchain, or free designs for their FPGAs. But then, with true DIY chips, the same could happen to your suppliers for wafers or chemicals. Or just other chipmakers threatening you with a lawsuit. I would definitely prefer "more open", but having to use an FPGA is not something I would consider a show stopper. Whatever holds back free hardware, I don't think this is it.
jrumbut 6y ago
Given the complexity and specialization and massive physical plant required for modern hardware manufacturing I just can't get as worked up over their antics like I can with software.