Richard Stallman Gnu Fsf compliant respective Mint?

Chat about anything related to Linux Mint
linuxtothebone
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:42 pm

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by linuxtothebone » Wed May 29, 2019 10:23 am

Thank you Everybody
mediclaser wrote:
Mon May 27, 2019 2:17 pm
How about Debian (the official version)? Since there is Debian version which includes "non-free" software, I've been in the impression that the official version is compliant to the principle of FSF. Is that correct?
Yes it appears you are correct. Debian can be considered FSF compliant if you do only have the Main sources enabled in the Package manager. https://h-node.org/. Official Debian distro removes non free 'blobs' from its kernel. https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html
lsemmens wrote:
Tue May 28, 2019 12:46 am
The issue may not be so much the software being compliant, but the hardware! Until that is truly free - in the open source sense, then software must, of necessity address those closed ecosystems.
Yes the hardware is difficult to do something about at this point. It appears Libreboot https://libreboot.org/ and H-Node https://h-node.org are working on solutions.
michael louwe wrote:
Tue May 28, 2019 2:55 am
P S - It is dishonesty for some Linux distros to use the Linux kernel that has non-free software but refuse to use non-free multi-media codecs, Wifi drivers, graphics drivers and other non-free 3rd-party software that have been freely licensed to Linux, eg LM 18 and later. LM 17 and earlier installed such non-free 3rd-party software by default.
I value my autonomy, I used to be under the impression that autonomy could be retained by using linux, it is clear this was a misconception. thankfully there is a standard that does provide clarity on the issue, in the form of the FSF and GNU philosophy and idealogy. Wether it is intentional dishonesty or not I would say many people are likely to be mislead by the "Linux Open Source Movement" and think they are afforded immunity from exploitation by using "Linux"

Portreve wrote:
Tue May 28, 2019 7:32 pm
Well, you can try out PureOS, which is a FSF-endorsed GNU+Linux distro.

P.S.: Richard Stallman is my homeboy. I'm 100% on board with his vision of software and, for that matter, humanity and governance.
This is good advice, I want to do the best I can given the current landscape. Stallmans values are really of advocacy to us humans.
Dot_mdb wrote:
Tue May 28, 2019 11:27 pm
Computers are tools. You use tools to get work done. I think it is possible to get too philosophical about the whole thing.
I agree, though if the tool is getting work done and exploiting or putting you or others at risk without your fully informed consent, Its a pretty sh!t tool in my opinion.

So at this point it seems that I should switch distros to trisquel, pure os, debian (main SS). Which may not be a big deal or it might be a pain in the ass. Cinnamon is a pretty usable environment for getting other folks on board.

There is also on the periphary somewhere the GNU Hurd project that may solve the issues with non free code that Linux kernel has

Libreboot+GNU-Hurd+Non Sh!t O/S looks like a winning combination really
Last edited by linuxtothebone on Wed May 29, 2019 6:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dot_mdb
Level 2
Level 2
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:16 pm

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by Dot_mdb » Wed May 29, 2019 12:05 pm

I've seen some Stallman interviews and visited his website. He is a very bright guy and maybe even a genius. But he is far out in left field. The world can't operate as we know it using his model. There has to be a certain level of trust. Even players like Google and Microsoft where there is a lot of scepticism are not likely to do something to actually hurt the people they depend on for business. They may push the envelope but their self interest should keep them from stepping over the line. And of course, they are open about what they are doing or it is obvious to most. So in the end there is a certain amount of risk in every endeavor. We accept that and in return we get much faster software development and improvement.

Bill

User avatar
michael louwe
Level 10
Level 10
Posts: 3163
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 11:18 pm

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by michael louwe » Wed May 29, 2019 12:28 pm

smurphos wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 2:15 am
In 17.x the Mint team had to produce separate ISOs sans non-free codecs for OEM's to use to preinstall Mint on machines for sale. Why? Because in some jurisdictions selling machines with these non-free codecs pre-installed would leave the OEM liable to litigation and/or license fees.
.
The French VLC media player uses non-free codecs and claimed that French Law does not recognize non-free software patents. .......
https://www.zdnet.com/article/if-vlc-ca ... microsoft/

LM 18/19 has VLC preinstalled. Outside of France, if the Linux OEMs installed VLC together with LM 18.x/19.x on their new machines that are to be sold to the public, aren't the OEMs also liable to be sued by the non-free codec patent-owners.? Eg the Linux "OEM", ThinkPenguin, is based in USA.

gm10
Level 17
Level 17
Posts: 7456
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:11 pm

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by gm10 » Wed May 29, 2019 12:34 pm

michael louwe wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 12:28 pm
LM 18/19 has VLC preinstalled.
No, it doesn't, for exactly that reason. Also you forgot to mention Windows in that post. You're slipping. :lol:
Tune up your LM 19.x: ppa:gm10/linuxmint-tools

User avatar
michael louwe
Level 10
Level 10
Posts: 3163
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 11:18 pm

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by michael louwe » Wed May 29, 2019 1:42 pm

linuxtothebone wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 10:23 am
I would say many people are likely to be mislead by the "Linux Open Source Movement" and think they are afforded immunity from exploitation by using "Linux"
.
From FSF: ....... free software means users have the four essential freedoms: (0) to run the program, (1) to study and change the program in source code form, (2) to redistribute exact copies, and (3) to distribute modified versions.

There is usually no money to be made in free/libre software except for public donations, mostly = free/libre software are mostly free of charge to the users. This is also the achilles heel of free/libre software, ie some Linux software/app developers are afraid that their hardworked software/apps will be hijacked by others and converted into non-free software/apps that will make millions or billions of US$ = so, they purposely refrain from developing very good, user-friendly and fully-GUI-based software/apps like those available from non-free M$-Windows and Apple-MacOS. Hence, certain common consumer software/apps are sorely lacking in Linux, eg software/apps for System Imaging, OCR(optical character recognition), Screen Video Recording, DVD-ripping/burning, etc. Even if there are Linux software/apps alternatives available, they are often not as good as those for Windows and MacOS.
....... It's even worse for business software/apps, ie near zero Linux presence, because to develop business software/apps often requires a lot of money/costs, many developers and long group work-hours. The banking/finance, retail, health, building, manufacturing and airline/shipping industries are practically void of Linux software/apps.

Google-Android, Red Hat-RHEL, Canonical-Ubuntu, etc use trademark laws to try to protect their hardworked free/libre GNU/Linux software/OS from being hijacked and exploited by others or by johnny-come-lately's(= "newbie" Linux developers). In effect, these GNU/Linux software have become non-free software, eg software users cannot freely redistribute RHEL and Android. Hence, the US ban on Huawei stops Huawei from continuing to use Google-Android.

This world runs on money and money lubricates the engines of this world. All I can say is that pure free/libre GNU/Linux OS or software or apps cannot run successfully in this world.

User avatar
Portreve
Level 7
Level 7
Posts: 1848
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:03 am
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by Portreve » Wed May 29, 2019 4:35 pm

All libre licensed software is copyrighted. If said code is appropriated for use in someone else's program which is proprietary, the libre license under which the code is distributed should, I would think, provide a means of taking the offender down.

Yes, it's true the only form the offending program would be publicly available in is as a compiled binary, and that in and if itself doesn't give one a good means of determining what the source code was. However, if the program's code was with stealing, then probably (though not guaranteed) the best thing is to compete against the stolen product by improving it and marketing or to take away as much commercial business from the thief as possible.
I have to leave so I can get home by the time I arrive.

Presently rocking LinuxMint 19.1 Cinnamon.

Remember to mark your fixed problem [SOLVED].

User avatar
zcot
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:08 pm

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by zcot » Wed May 29, 2019 10:51 pm

It seems like the majority of the "non-free" stuff is more about the protection and harboring of a specific oem product uniqueness.

linuxtothebone wrote:
Mon May 27, 2019 9:44 pm
Is it really that difficult to replace the mint kernel?
btw, Mint isn't doing kernels. They are coming downstream from Ubuntu. It's all really done at the top of the stream at the kernel organization.

I think we could be pretty sure there's not some unknown willy nilly compromised stuff going on with kernels. -code "phoning home" and such. any "non-free" would be in use for functionality and honoring legality things. -not so much "oh here's a bunch of unknown code that's probably stealing and spying on us".


The stuff has been said already, but it's down to the real points of it. "non-free" does not automatically mean our freedom is gone, given up, and that we are now subject to monitoring and external control. Although it could be debated that Stallman's definition of "free" is gone, sure, but even in cases there is source code available if you want to twist it and share it, but the limitation of what else you can do with it is there.

The capitalism thing. There doesn't have to be anything wrong with that. Some companies make some unique hardware, algorithm, or technic, and like to keep it that way and have patents in place and mainly more than anything might not want you open-sourcing the stuff. It doesn't have to be related to someone stealing information or spying on us or something.

Taking a look at codecs. There's actually a good bit of "niceness" from some patent holders basically saying as long as you don't ruin our ability to profit from our works of our capitalistic ventures then we'll allow you to use various things in some limited specific ways without it being a problem. Kudos!

Honestly there's just plenty of cases where stuff can/should not be "free". My opinion anyway at this point, otherwise we couldn't be where we are. We would be in serious "black market" circles right now.


Actually a lot of the companies and organizations are playing nice, which is really great!, I think. -just not exactly "Stallman's nice".

User avatar
smurphos
Level 11
Level 11
Posts: 3732
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 12:18 am
Location: Britisher
Contact:

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by smurphos » Thu May 30, 2019 12:30 am

michael louwe wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 1:42 pm
This is also the achilles heel of free/libre software, ie some Linux software/app developers are afraid that their hardworked software/apps will be hijacked by others and converted into non-free software/apps
The GPL specifically prohibits that, or more correctly specifies that the freedom to redistribute code (modified or not) is attached to the condition that your redistributed version must also offer the same freedoms, i.e also be licensed under the GPL and the the source code made available. Sure infringements and reluctant compliance are common (the GPL effectively covers the reluctant compliance scenarios), but Court led enforcement does happen.
For custom Nemo actions, useful scripts for the Cinnamon desktop, and Cinnamox themes visit my Github pages.

ZakGordon
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 11:07 am

Re: Richard Stallman Gnu Fsf compliant respective Mint?

Post by ZakGordon » Thu May 30, 2019 3:49 am

I'll just chime in with a general consideration.

We are not 'free' using technology today, and can not be. Most people under 40 have a 'smart phone' of some kind and all of them send your data out (you might be able to stop some of them from doing that, but it isn't easy). All computer hardware in the modern era will do the same kind of thing. The data sent will vary from device to device, but in this post 9/11 world, have no illusions that your State is not able to know whom you are, where you are and whom you meet up with.

That is just the landscape we live in and your particular constitutions or charters of democracy have not stopped this reality. So the point is you can only be 'free' so much when using technology. To be 'truly' free you need to not use technology, that is the only way to be certain currently.
Laptop overheating issues? Check links below:
TLP
itsfoss guide
If none of the above fixes the issue, moving from Cinnamon to XFCE will.

User avatar
michael louwe
Level 10
Level 10
Posts: 3163
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 11:18 pm

Re: Richard Stallman Gnu Fsf compliant respective Mint?

Post by michael louwe » Thu May 30, 2019 4:43 am

smurphos wrote:
Thu May 30, 2019 12:30 am
The GPL specifically prohibits that, or more correctly specifies that the freedom to redistribute code (modified or not) is attached to the condition that your redistributed version must also offer the same freedoms, i.e also be licensed under the GPL and the the source code made available. Sure infringements and reluctant compliance are common (the GPL effectively covers the reluctant compliance scenarios), but Court led enforcement does happen.
.
Like I said, free/libre software licensed under GPL are often turned into non-free software via superceding trademark licensing laws, eg the Android Open Source Project has given rise to the trademarked Google-Android, the open-source Chromium Project has given rise to the trademarked Google-Chrome, the open-source Mozilla Project has given rise to the trademarked Firefox browser, the open-source Fedora and CentOS Projects have given rise to the trademarked RedHat-RHEL, the FSF-sponsored open-source Debian Project has given rise to the trademarked Canonical-Ubuntu and Linux Mint, etc. Trademark laws are like loopholes in the GPL
.......Presently, Android, Chrome, Firefox, Ubuntu and Linux Mint are being licensed out to the OEMs and users by the trademark owners for free. This can be legally changed by the trademark owners at any time in the future, eg start charging license fees or subscriptions when their software have gained mass market share in the world.(cf: non-free Zorin OS Ultimate and Codeweaver's Crossover for Linux)

All this trademarking of free/libre GNU/Linux software into non-free software sounds quite dishonest. IOW, the major Linux developers should just drop all the dishonest Richard Stallman bullsheet and fully adopt non-free software or the for-profit philosophy, as has been long practiced by the successful and profit-making hardware OEMs(= Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Broadcom, Realtek, etc), Apple, M$, Google, RedHat, etc.
....... Maybe, all contributing Linux developers should receive some shares in the various open-source projects, eg those who have contributed to the AOSP will get some share dividends from Google-Android revenue.(also, no more free/libre Android forks allowed)

Albert Einstein: ... “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.”
Last edited by michael louwe on Thu May 30, 2019 7:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MurphCID
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 841
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 10:29 pm

Re: Richard Stallman Gnu Fsf compliant respective Mint?

Post by MurphCID » Thu May 30, 2019 6:45 am

linuxtothebone wrote:
Mon May 27, 2019 8:19 am
Hi there

Does anyone know if a fsf qualifying version of mint can be achieved?

I joined Linux based on the philosophies of the fsf long before I even knew about the organisation.

I really enjoy mint and have used it exclusively as my go to for about ten years or more.

If it would be possible to have a version that embodies these standards that would be excellent. As time Goes by the violation of our freedoms in the digital realm are abundantly clear.

Surely we all want freedom... True freedom to express and develop true human potential.

I see this as a step toward that goal.

If this hasn't been a suggested request before in the mint community maybe this could prompt such.

Also I would like to thank Clement Lefebvre for all the hard work and congratulate on the success of furthering the Linux user base

Peace
I think the only Linux that is compliant might be Slackware??

jglen490
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 526
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 9:57 pm

Re: Richard Stallman Gnu Fsf compliant respective Mint?

Post by jglen490 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:20 pm

Richard Stallman is a brilliant, hard-working, and visionary human being. He has a very specific view of the world, and in many respects that view is conflicted.

Linux is as much about freedom as is GNU. You are free to construct your own GNU or your own Linux, or your combination of GNU/Linux. You are free to ignore him, ignore GNU, ignore Linux, and anything else you choose to ignore. Sometimes things are "free as in beer" - whatever that means - and sometimes you are free as in choice to approach your view of the world as you see fit.

Either way, Richard is right/wrong/indifferent and you are free to make up your own mind what to believe. And that changes nothing about Mint, *buntu, Arch, and a host of other choices. And like him, we are human, in all our brilliance and faults.

I still have scars from the Slackware of 25 years ago, and it drove me to find a few different BSDs and a Linux that did not demand minimalism and other imposed un-free rules.

The imposition of compliance is in conflict with the acceptance of freedom.
I feel more like I do than I did when I got here.
Toshiba A135-S2386, Intel T2080, ATI Radeon® Xpress 200M Chipset, 2GB RAM, 500GB

User avatar
MadmanRB
Level 2
Level 2
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 6:28 pm

Re: Richard Stallman Gnu Fsf compliant respective Mint?

Post by MadmanRB » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:26 pm

For me being total FSF compliant is a lesson in pain.
Granted in general I make sure that my hardware is linux compliant but that doesnt mean every device I own is FSF compliant and yes i can make compromises especially in matters of what that hardware can do for me.
I own a nvidia card, they only really work with proprietary drivers but I only have a nvidia card as at this point and time nvidia cards are mostly better then AMD when you reach a certain price point.
I actually game you see, and yes I still use windows.
this is not a crime
I built this machine for gaming and as it stands while i was willing to go AMD for my CPU (and lets be fair they are very open source friendly) for my GPU i elected to go nvidia.
Will i go AMD for my GPU in the future?
Yes probably but not yet as i imagine the upcoming AMD navi will have its snags in linux so yeah i will probably own my nvidia card for a bit until the proper drivers (free or otherwise) are supported on linux.
The same thing kind of goes for my printer situation.
I replaced my HP printer with a canon printer as well frankly.... HP sucks these days, their printers have decreased in quality in recent years especially if you are on a budget like i often am.
So as i linux user i had a tough decision.
I could have gone epson but lets not forget they dropped the ball on linux support in recent years.
Brother printers? Hit and miss from the research i read with their linux support.
Lexmark no longer makes affordable printers for the home user so no spending $300 on a printer for me
Xerox? no, again expensive if you want colour printing.
Panasonic? Office printers
Kodak? expensive
So yeah.... cannon it is, when epson now has zero linux support and HP makes crappy printers Canon it is.
So yeah no holy chariot worthy of RMS but to heck with that as I rather it work period open source or not.

User avatar
Portreve
Level 7
Level 7
Posts: 1848
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:03 am
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Richard Stallman Gnu Fsf compliant respective Mint?

Post by Portreve » Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:13 pm

My use case for technology is very different from MadmanRB's.

I'm not a gamer, and I never have been. Do I play games at all? Yes. Do I ever play anything requiring 3D acceleration? Yes. However, every once in a great while when I install Myth 2, or Diablo (original, tyvm) any hardware you like will handle them.

My 99% use case for my computer consists of:
• web-related activities
• LibreOffice
• GIMP
• Scribus
• watching movies
• listening to music
• sound editing
I have to leave so I can get home by the time I arrive.

Presently rocking LinuxMint 19.1 Cinnamon.

Remember to mark your fixed problem [SOLVED].

Rocky Bennett
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 465
Joined: Tue May 12, 2015 6:22 pm

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by Rocky Bennett » Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:56 am

Portreve wrote:
Tue May 28, 2019 7:32 pm
Well, you can try out PureOS, which is a FSF-endorsed GNU+Linux distro.

I wanted to try it myself but it appears it's got issues with support for UEFI, which basically rules it out for use on my MacBook Pro.

There's a line from the movie Bulletproof Monk: “Water which is too pure has no fish.”

The problem generally is most hardware is not so star-spangled awesome that a purely "free software" distro will fully support it. So, good luck with your quest, but I would suggest striking a more realistic balance: stick with strictly libre end-user software and libre software for as much of the installed OS as possible, and bow to the needs of the situation for those bits of hardware you can't support any other way.

P.S.: Richard Stallman is my homeboy. I'm 100% on board with his vision of software and, for that matter, humanity and governance.


I love that last line. I would love to use it as my tag line in the various computer forums that I visit.

User avatar
Portreve
Level 7
Level 7
Posts: 1848
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:03 am
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Richard Stallnman Gnu Fsf compliant respective mint?

Post by Portreve » Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:19 pm

Rocky Bennett wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:56 am
I love that last line. I would love to use it as my tag line in the various computer forums that I visit.
I assume you're referring to:
Portreve wrote:
Tue May 28, 2019 7:32 pm
Richard Stallman is my homeboy. I'm 100% on board with his vision of software and, for that matter, humanity and governance.
I "get" the fact that there's many kinds of software extant for which there aren't any libre equivalents or replacements. And, so while I would not refuse, for example, to get an ultrasound or an echo cardiogram because the software on the cart is all strictly proprietary, if the opportunity came in the future to pick a doctor using said type of software as libre vs. proprietary, all things being equal I would make that choice. One can only assume in such matters even Richard Stallman wouldn't throw his life away like some ideology-dependent moron refusing a blood transfusion because it's against their religion's dogma.
I have to leave so I can get home by the time I arrive.

Presently rocking LinuxMint 19.1 Cinnamon.

Remember to mark your fixed problem [SOLVED].

Post Reply

Return to “Chat about Linux Mint”