Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Android without Google

[Thomas Harding]

[top-posting]

I no almost all that information. What I complain on is:

* this is not centralized nor hosted by FSF (while it supports and 
advertises on
H-node, and ported its hardware database to that last org.)

* there is no counter-advertising from FSF (unbiased information 
campaigns on each
hardware) which would address end-users and IT-managers (mostly same 
persons)
rebelliousness, forcing hardware manufacturers to change their policy.

Obviously, an extended search allows any person aware enough of non-free 
kernel blobs,
non-free drivers and not disclosed hardware specs to find wanted 
information (provided
there were no "silent changes").

The problem is in lacking "l'effet de masse" (mass effect?): if most of 
consumers ask for
something and refuses to buy what they refuse (such as "unlikely" 
disclose their privacy),
then vendors will have to change their policy.

Lobbying may work on politicians[1], advertising (seems to) work on masses.

"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present 
controls the past".
/George Orwell, 1984/

It seems a key feature for large companies to -- hopefully just -- 
control the present, a key
goal for large companies to control the future, and now for last 
especially a feature of one
company (over 1280 days, it seems only 1 site provides Usenet searches: 
What about
over writings. Also what about UEFI or other future "innovations" will 
(dis)allows, especially
if they are "closed source" ?).

Their weapon is advertising, on "company voice" basis.

The response would be advertising (on free speech basis), needing for a 
central reference
point anyone can easily find (and for example pick up ads to stick 
anywhere), even if anyone
*must* differs on on some points.

[1] software patents are /again/ on discussion at European parliament. 
This could occurs
enlistment of numerous software patents which were not allowed "as is".

Le 09/10/2012 20:37, Michał Masłowski a écrit :
> > So a beginning of solution would be a device list,
> > preferably hosted by FSF,
> > enlisting what hardware does not requires kernel blobs,
> > and what hardware requires /some blobs/, in such case for which
> > chip/functionality.
> Replicant has such information for supported phones, h-node.org provides
> data on devices working without nonfree software (i.e. with what's
> included in Trisquel or other FSF-listed distros).
>
> > Obviously, such a list would need fine-grained hardware versions *and*
> > revisions list,
> > because of silent changes (eg, a mainboard is launched fully Free
> > Software compliant,
> > then revision N comes with a chip (NIC, ...) needing kernel blob or,
> > at worse, a closed
> > driver.
> Seen this on h-node.org for wifi cards.  (Motherboards are not listed
> there.)
[...]
> > What I don't understand is: why FSF strongly disagree and recommends
> > not to use
> > kernel blobs, and on the other hand does not provides any mean to get
> > rid of.
> They support Linux-libre, distros containing it, list vendors providing
> systems working with free software and support h-node.org.