Re: [GNU-linux-libre] review PureOS ISO

[Francois Téchené]

On 11/10/2016 06:51 PM, Jean Louis wrote:
> 
> To me you sound very reasonable.
> 
> In regards to your website, now the website is promoting both Puri.sm
> and PureOS. And on many pages, you have "alternatives" to proprietary
> software, references to FLOSS and FOSS, and others.
> 
> By having a separate website, with more proper terminology, you are
> quicker to solve the problem that I see. But even that is for me
> "sitting on two chairs". You either promote "open source" or "free
> software" or maybe your people don't quite get the difference. I just
> think it is this later. They have good intentions, but never realized
> that open source is about using the software with sources readable,
> regardless if sources are free of not. You see Debian GNU/Linux is
> FLOSS oriented. They offer "open source" on non-free servers, so one
> can see the sources, but does not get all the freedom.

I understand that the words matter (especially for Open Source) but get
confused with a few of them.

Actually, English is not my 1st language (you may have noticed) so I
don't always get 2nd or 3rd meanings of the words I use.

I come from the world of proprietary software that I used to use
everyday for my Audio/Visual work. When "switching" to free software,
because of ethical reasons that I understood after years (it is never
too late), I had to find a way to produce the same work with free
software. I often use the word "alternative", without negative
connotation to refer 2 applications that have the same purpose. Whether
it is free or not. Final Cut is an alternative to Premiere, just like
Premiere is an alternative to Final Cut. Kdenlive is an alternative to
Pitivi just like Pitivi is an alternative to Kdenlive. Why would talking
about alternatives be such a problem? What other word would you use to
help somebody looking for a free software to replace his restrictive
proprietary one? Is the word "replacement" a better one?

> 
> However, I am not FSF, just someone... Ask the authorities.

I wish to have the point of view of the authorities then.

> 
> Jean Louis
> 
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 05:26:26PM +0100, Francois Téchené wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> My name is François Téchené, I am director of creative at Purism. I am
>> also co-founder of the Ethic Cinema organization (ethiccinema.org) which
>> promotes free cinematographic art.
>>
>> I have been reading through this discussion and I can understand the
>> point of view of the FSF. I can also understand that you don't know who
>> we are and are septic about our true intentions.
>>
>> Here at Purism, we are software freedom supporters and we do share your
>> philosophy. We work every day to promote software freedom and make more
>> people be aware about ethics in the digital world. we are a small
>> company founded by the people through various crowd-foundings.
>>
>> As a company, we also want to exist in the current system. We believe
>> that marginalizing ourselves and our customers by selling computers that
>> are far from matching the average user's expectations in term of speed
>> and ease of use is making the game of those who are working against the
>> ethics, as we would exclude many potential users straight away.
>>
>> In that regard, we are doing our best to make modern computers that are
>> as free as it can be. We have been working very hard in trying to free
>> the BIOS and managed to have the Librem run with a fully free bios for
>> 30 minutes as there is a watchdog in the CPU that powers off the
>> computer if the ME is not there. We have been communicating a lot on
>> this goal and we keep looking for solutions. We are very transparent on
>> this matter and our users are aware of this last step we wish to achieve.
>>
>> However, if it is indeed impossible to free our Intel CPU's we won't
>> give up our goal of fully free hardware. We wish a large audience to
>> support us for our philosophy in the first place. This is a long term
>> plan of course but imagine millions of Librem users having a Librem as
>> an intention to own their computer and get back their digital freedom?
>> It would help us achieve this fully free hardware goal much more easily
>> as it would show that there is a real market for freedom. We are not
>> attached in any way to Intel and this potential market could help the
>> development of a powerful free CPU. Some of them already exist, we just
>> wish to help them. We are planning to make a fully free phone based on
>> that kind of fully free CPU.
>>
>> I know that most people do care about their freedom, I know that this
>> people is the one currently making the biggest concession by giving up
>> their rights to big companies. I also know that we will never be able to
>> target such a market with marginal computers.
>>
>> That being said about the computers we sell, please let us know the
>> exact steps we need to achieve to get endorsed?
>>
>> From my understanding here are the steps :
>>
>> - Disable the ability to use extensions in our version of Firefox
>> (PureBrowser)
>>
>> - Make a website dedicated to PureOS only avoiding any reference to
>> Purism and the Librem.
>>
>> (If you still think that we are promoting evil through our computers and
>> don't think that there are some intermediate steps to get to freedom,
>> then I don't share your point of view but I respect that.)
>>
>> - Remove any FSF forbidden words from the PureOS website.
>>
>> I guess that if the PureOS website has no link to the Purism website and
>> only exposes ISO download as a way to install, you see no objection in
>> having Purism help their users getting to freedom by shipping PureOS
>> pre-installed in their Librem? If you force us using another OS for
>> that, it would be a non-sense IMHO.
>>
>>
>> Do you see anything else?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks a lot for everything you do anyway, I am a true supporter of the FSF.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> On 11/10/2016 01:57 PM, Julie Marchant wrote:
>>> On 11/10/2016 03:34 AM, hellekin wrote:
>>>> As suggested, your best bet now that the whole discussion is ingrained
>>>> with LibreM notebooks, is to find a replacement chip for the BIOS that's
>>>> compatible with Libreboot.  I gather this is not at all possible, and
>>>> you're still working on having the manufacturer free the chip you're
>>>> using.  Good luck with that.
>>>
>>> The idea of getting Intel to free it is impossible. Full explanation here:
>>>
>>> https://libreboot.org/faq/#librem
>>>
>>> The only solution is to decouple PureOS from the sale of the "Librem"
>>> laptops.
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> François Téchené
>>
>> Director of Creative @Purism
>>
> 

-- 
François Téchené

Director of Creative @Purism