11 ms·
No, locking down stuff like that is not 'freedom' in his (and mine) book. Locking down a device so that the _owner_ of said device cannot mess with it as he lik
by darklajid 15y ago
No, locking down stuff like that is not 'freedom' in his (and mine) book. Locking down a device so that the _owner_ of said device cannot mess with it as he likes after paying you is not related to freedom. It removes freedom.
- Tichy 15y agoYes, but it is not Android doing the locking down, it is individual vendors. So Android is not to blame for that. Edit: so your complaint is that Android id not on the GPL? Or why the downvotes? Indeed, the GPL would be more free in a way, more restricted in another way.
- pornel 15y ago> Indeed, the GPL would be more free in a way, more restricted in another way True, and RMS is concerned with freedom for end-users above freedom for phone vendors and network operators. GPL v3 with anti-tivoisation clauses seem to be exactly designed to disallow "malicious" firmware some Android phones have.
- Tichy 15y agoSure, but Google never claimed to be on the GPL.