3 ms·
> Dogmatic FSF people think that hardware that has proprietary blobs stored in ROM is "free" Do they? Or do you think you might have exaggerated their position
by exe34 2y ago
> Dogmatic FSF people think that hardware that has proprietary blobs stored in ROM is "free"
Do they? Or do you think you might have exaggerated their position to make your point? I seem to remember they consider it as undesirable but inevitable, whereas passing around non-free code helps to normalize it.
- viraptor 2y agoYes they do. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29286715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29286715
- exe34 2y agoI've read the link from the comment that you refer to: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2018-04/msg00002.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2018-04/msg00002... I don't see where they claim that "proprietary blobs stored in ROM is "free", would you care to point it out please? Or were you referring to the opinion piece in the comment that you link? That does not appear to be the official position of the people doing the actual work.
- RealStickman_ 2y agoHere's a part from the "Respects your Freedom" page. The second paragraph explicitly excludes factory loaded and unupgradeable software from consideration. >All the product software must be free software. The product software includes all software that the seller includes in the product, provides with the product, recommends for use in conjunction with the product, and steers users towards installation in the product. >However, there is one exception for secondary embedded processors. The exception applies to software delivered inside auxiliary and low-level processors and FPGAs, within which software installation is not intended after the user obtains the product. This can include, for instance, microcode inside a processor, firmware built into an I/O device, or the gate pattern of an FPGA. The software in such secondary processors does not count as product software. Source: https://ryf.fsf.org/about/criteria https://ryf.fsf.org/about/criteria
- anthk 2y agoFPGA's are pratically dealt as if the were burned ROMs. There's no easy way to soft-update an FPGA except for expensive tools to do so. Your bare OS can't do that. A vendor can't update an FPGA based hardware at will.
- viraptor 2y agoWhat's incorrect. FP in FPGA stands for field-programmable. That's the big thing about them - you can easily reprogram them after deployment with minimal effort. Also https://github.com/trabucayre/openFPGALoader https://github.com/trabucayre/openFPGALoader
- spookie 2y agoDepends. There are FPGA that can only be programmed once, others a limited amount, and others that have no limit.
- viraptor 2y agoYou mean with blown fuses? Sure, but that's specific implementation's choice, not an FPGA property. You could also make an SSD read-only with enough effort, but that doesn't describe SSDs in general.
- spookie 2y agoI am noting a limitation. Previous claims might've led some thinking this was not the case for all.
- exe34 2y agowhere "minimal effort" might mean soldering wires to a surface mounted chip. for you maybe - my own hands aren't that stable.
- viraptor 2y ago