4 ms·

The FSF opposes nonfree i.e. proprietary software. JavaScript is fine if properly licensed: https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/free-your-javascript https://w

The FSF opposes nonfree i.e. proprietary software. JavaScript is fine if properly licensed: https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/free-your-javascript https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/free-your-javascript Just like any other software.

thriftwy 4y ago
I wonder what FSF thinks of PDF.
- eesmith 4y ago
  Why do you think there is an issue? The FSF - and Stallman! - publish PDF documents. At https://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/2020-mar-jun.html&term=pdf&type=norm&case=0 https://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/202... you can see Stallman uses xournal to fill in a PDF form.
  - thriftwy 4y ago
    PDF is a programming language, or at least PostScript is. I wonder if Stallman will refuse to open a random PS file?
    - pama 4y ago
      At worst, postscript can crash your printer or take up a lot of cpu. There are no networking libraries or access to system stuff for postscript. So it should be safe for all practical purposes assuming you don’t care about the possible inconveniences that any Turing complete language can provide. This is a very different concern than executing random JavaScript.
      - thriftwy 4y ago
        I can't imagine why you would not be able to run site JavaScript in sandboxed manner (it already is) - just throw in some additional limitations and you are done. This will break JS on some sites but not all of them, but that is apparently not sufficient for Stallman & co.
        pama 4y ago
        The reason you can’t do it is because JavaScript is Turing complete (like postscript, but unlike HTML) and JS needs to load from the network. This does not happen with postscript. There is no comparison to postscript that is meaningful in my mind.
        thriftwy 4y ago
        I don't see why you cannot realistically pin JS loads from network to make them deterministic.
        pama 4y ago
        It is not the determinism that’s a concern. JavaScript can test the capabilities of your machine and then create a new connection to transmit its results back to another computer. Even in the hypothetical scenario when you are only allowed to download messages and not upload messages, things are hard: because you have a fully programmable language at your disposal, you can create a system to transmit information by a sequence of reads with JavaScript. So the only safe way is to pre-download everything, then turn off the network and only then evaluate JavaScript in an environment without network or storage. FSF is not against such a mode of operation, but it becomes cumbersome for most people. And as the development of browsers consolidates, the fraction of the web that can be used in that way (for those who want to be super careful) becomes smaller.
    - eesmith 4y ago
      I don't think there's any doubt that Postscript would have the same copyright and software freedom issues as Javascript. I myself have written a GUI Postscript program for NeWS. So yes, of course Stallman would have objections to some Postscript files.
  - Kwpolska 4y ago
    I wouldn’t be surprised if RMS said “I don’t file tax returns, because I would have to either (a) use nonfree online filing software, (b) use nonfree PDF technologies (since the US Form 1040 features XFA forms, and Wikipedia says the are nonfree [0]), or (c) hire an accountant, but they would also be using nonfree software, and the IRS is using proprietary software to process the tax returns anyway, so therefore I am not filing them”. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFA
    - eesmith 4y ago
      The link I gave described that exact topic. Stallman wrote: "I do not submit my tax returns on line because it requires nonfree software. I use xournal to write my data on the PDF form, and print that. As I have no printer, I will visit a copying store to do the printing." Note that the copying store will be using a printer with nonfree software. Thus, your (a) is correct, your (b) appears to be incorrect as Stallman was doing this 3 years ago, and your (c) is incorrect as Stallman doesn't have that objection. We futher know (c) is incorrect because Stallman at https://stallman.org/rms-lifestyle.html https://stallman.org/rms-lifestyle.html write that he will use someone else's cell phone, even though it it not free. Regarding (b), I can't tell if the 1040 at https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf uses XFA forms ("deprecated in PDF 2.0", in 2017), but it appears to work in Firefox, which I believe is using free software. Even if it does, you can order the forms at https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/forms-and-publications-by-us-mail https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/forms-and-publications-by-us-... or visit a post office or library (see https://www.irs.com/en/articles/local-irs-tax-forms https://www.irs.com/en/articles/local-irs-tax-forms ). These do not require using software, so I don't see why you conclude that Stallman would have a free software objection to filing taxes at all.
      - Kwpolska 4y ago
        When you open the form linked, SumatraPDF will warn that “The document uses unsupported features (XFA) and might not render properly”, and it cannot fill out the form. Perhaps it’s not XFA specifically, but some other strange technology. I did see that note about how Stallman does his taxes. But if Stallman has a sectarian objection to basic things like using a cell phone, or to even more basic non-tech things like personal hygiene, an objection to taxes wouldn’t seem far-fetched to me.

thriftwy 4y ago

I wonder what FSF thinks of PDF.

eesmith 4y ago
Why do you think there is an issue? The FSF - and Stallman! - publish PDF documents. At https://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/2020-mar-jun.html&term=pdf&type=norm&case=0 https://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/202... you can see Stallman uses xournal to fill in a PDF form.
- thriftwy 4y ago
  PDF is a programming language, or at least PostScript is. I wonder if Stallman will refuse to open a random PS file?
  - pama 4y ago
    At worst, postscript can crash your printer or take up a lot of cpu. There are no networking libraries or access to system stuff for postscript. So it should be safe for all practical purposes assuming you don’t care about the possible inconveniences that any Turing complete language can provide. This is a very different concern than executing random JavaScript.
    - thriftwy 4y ago
      I can't imagine why you would not be able to run site JavaScript in sandboxed manner (it already is) - just throw in some additional limitations and you are done. This will break JS on some sites but not all of them, but that is apparently not sufficient for Stallman & co.
      - pama 4y ago
        The reason you can’t do it is because JavaScript is Turing complete (like postscript, but unlike HTML) and JS needs to load from the network. This does not happen with postscript. There is no comparison to postscript that is meaningful in my mind.
        thriftwy 4y ago
        I don't see why you cannot realistically pin JS loads from network to make them deterministic.
        pama 4y ago
        It is not the determinism that’s a concern. JavaScript can test the capabilities of your machine and then create a new connection to transmit its results back to another computer. Even in the hypothetical scenario when you are only allowed to download messages and not upload messages, things are hard: because you have a fully programmable language at your disposal, you can create a system to transmit information by a sequence of reads with JavaScript. So the only safe way is to pre-download everything, then turn off the network and only then evaluate JavaScript in an environment without network or storage. FSF is not against such a mode of operation, but it becomes cumbersome for most people. And as the development of browsers consolidates, the fraction of the web that can be used in that way (for those who want to be super careful) becomes smaller.
  - eesmith 4y ago
    I don't think there's any doubt that Postscript would have the same copyright and software freedom issues as Javascript. I myself have written a GUI Postscript program for NeWS. So yes, of course Stallman would have objections to some Postscript files.
- Kwpolska 4y ago
  I wouldn’t be surprised if RMS said “I don’t file tax returns, because I would have to either (a) use nonfree online filing software, (b) use nonfree PDF technologies (since the US Form 1040 features XFA forms, and Wikipedia says the are nonfree [0]), or (c) hire an accountant, but they would also be using nonfree software, and the IRS is using proprietary software to process the tax returns anyway, so therefore I am not filing them”. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFA
  - eesmith 4y ago
    The link I gave described that exact topic. Stallman wrote: "I do not submit my tax returns on line because it requires nonfree software. I use xournal to write my data on the PDF form, and print that. As I have no printer, I will visit a copying store to do the printing." Note that the copying store will be using a printer with nonfree software. Thus, your (a) is correct, your (b) appears to be incorrect as Stallman was doing this 3 years ago, and your (c) is incorrect as Stallman doesn't have that objection. We futher know (c) is incorrect because Stallman at https://stallman.org/rms-lifestyle.html https://stallman.org/rms-lifestyle.html write that he will use someone else's cell phone, even though it it not free. Regarding (b), I can't tell if the 1040 at https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf uses XFA forms ("deprecated in PDF 2.0", in 2017), but it appears to work in Firefox, which I believe is using free software. Even if it does, you can order the forms at https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/forms-and-publications-by-us-mail https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/forms-and-publications-by-us-... or visit a post office or library (see https://www.irs.com/en/articles/local-irs-tax-forms https://www.irs.com/en/articles/local-irs-tax-forms ). These do not require using software, so I don't see why you conclude that Stallman would have a free software objection to filing taxes at all.
    - Kwpolska 4y ago
      When you open the form linked, SumatraPDF will warn that “The document uses unsupported features (XFA) and might not render properly”, and it cannot fill out the form. Perhaps it’s not XFA specifically, but some other strange technology. I did see that note about how Stallman does his taxes. But if Stallman has a sectarian objection to basic things like using a cell phone, or to even more basic non-tech things like personal hygiene, an objection to taxes wouldn’t seem far-fetched to me.