LWN.net Logo

Inducing others into the trap

Inducing others into the trap

Posted Mar 3, 2010 13:37 UTC (Wed) by malor (subscriber, #2973)
In reply to: Inducing others into the trap by Janne
Parent article: Linux-2.6.33-libre released

How does Regular Linux limit my freedoms, whereas Linux-libre does not? Seriously? And before you start telling me about the ability to fix the code myself etc., I will remind you again: I'm no programmer. I could not make "tiny improvements here and there" since I'm not a programmer.

To add to what lxoliva said... you're thinking of yourself as a single entity. "It doesn't affect me directly, so why should I care?" But modern operating systems and applications are ridiculously complex entities, with codebases so large that individual programmers struggle to keep up with just one major program. Even the best programmers in the world, whether they're in Free software or proprietary, are dependent on the work of others. And if you're not a programmer yourself, you're even more dependent on them.

So, when those programmers tell you that they can make your life better if they're allowed to completely understand hardware, and fix bugs and introduce new features in the code that runs that hardware, you should pay attention. Any given device with open firmware will be improved by that openness. Whatever functions it may or may not have, open code makes the possibility of new or repaired functionality possible, even if the manufacturer has lost interest in the product. Manufacturers who erect barriers to that kind of control over your hardware are using their control over that code to try to extract more money out of "the market", ie, you. It may be a limitation you're willing to accept, if their proprietary software is good enough, but you put yourself into a subservient position by doing so.

You don't have to do that; you don't have to be subservient. And even if you personally would never change a firmware, there's thousands of people who will, and will happily share their improvement with you, often for free, since it costs them so little to give you a copy of their work.

If you're a Linux user, it should be pretty apparent by now what an advantage Free software can be for you, giving you as much control over your software environment as you choose to exercise. Pushing that freedom down into the firmware is an important next step to really owning your computing environment, in being able to use your general-purpose computing devices for whatever you wish. There's no reason to have to put on shackles to to use a device, and the linux-libre project is an attempt to entirely remove those shackles, both on you and on everyone that contributes to your chosen ecosystem.

Now, myself, I probably won't run this kernel, but I'm glad it exists. In fact, I hope the project eventually obsoletes itself. Just like Free software was so important to giving you choices about what you do with your operating system and applications, Free firmware gives you the same choices about your hardware. If a device has a feature, you can't be artificially excluded from that feature because you didn't pay a high enough price, or because the manufacturer would prefer to sell you something new instead.

Marketers hate that idea, because they really love being able to sell the same code and hardware at multiple different price points, and force product churn by selling you a new product to do something your old product was perfectly capable of doing. Anything that marketers hate should be something of interest to you, because it's probably a net positive in your life.


(Log in to post comments)

Inducing others into the trap

Posted Mar 3, 2010 14:14 UTC (Wed) by Janne (guest, #40891) [Link]

"So, when those programmers tell you that they can make your life better if they're allowed to completely understand hardware, and fix bugs and introduce new features in the code that runs that hardware, you should pay attention."

Sure. But this project does not help achieve that. All it does is that it removed a bunch of non-hackable code from the kernel. That code is still unhackable, regardless of whether it's in the kernel or not.

"You don't have to do that; you don't have to be subservient. And even if you personally would never change a firmware, there's thousands of people who will, and will happily share their improvement with you, often for free, since it costs them so little to give you a copy of their work."

Yep. But this project does not do that. Why is it that you think that thanks to this project, we will magically get open firmwares and the like? This project simply removed the binary-firmwares from the Kernel.

"If you're a Linux user, it should be pretty apparent by now what an advantage Free software can be for you, giving you as much control over your software environment as you choose to exercise."

Sure, but my ability to take advantage of that control is very limited. Like I said elsewhere, my main computer is a Mac, a proprietary OS. Yet that closedness has never harmed me in any shape or form. And the fact is that even though MacOS is closed, my user-enjoyment and productivity has gone up.

And if you are about to say that I'm "subservient" to Apple or something like that.... Well, go right ahead. You would be wrong, but you are entitled to your opinion. I view computers first and foremost as tools, and I want to use a computer that gives me maximum amount of satisfaction. And that computer happens to be a Mac running OS X. Is it stupid for me choose it over Linux? And I was 100% free to make that choice, no-one forced me.

"There's no reason to have to put on shackles to to use a device, and the linux-libre project is an attempt to entirely remove those shackles, both on you and on everyone that contributes to your chosen ecosystem."

That sounds all fine and dandy, "removing shackles". But what it gives in return is non-functioning computer. Is it really about "removing shackles" if you end up with non-working hardware? That seems like ultimate shackles to me. You can tell me about the benefits of free software while I stare at the computer that does not work. So the benefit is that it turns working computer in to non-working computer?

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm a big supporter of GPL, free software and open source. I just don't understand what this project hopes to accomplish. I would understand if they somehow tried to turn that non-hackable code in to free, hackable code. But that's not what they are doing, they are just removing it.

Roadmap to freedom

Posted Mar 4, 2010 6:58 UTC (Thu) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702) [Link]

As I wrote in the first thread way above, the greatest relevance of this project is not in the bits, but rather in the awareness. It's a matter of social mechanics.

If you already made the mistake of buying a computer that will only function if you feed it wiht your non-Free Software and your freedom, now you'll know that you and everyone else is missing essential freedoms and everything else this entails, including the benefits of a community helping improve the functioning of the device. (if you've ever found any program that does absolutely everything you want, everything you'll ever want, and do that just the perfect way for you, you may throw the first rock)

And then, once you know it, since you value freedom and the benefits it brings with it, you'll avoid making the same mistake next time.

The more people do that, the more pressure we, the community you and I are part of, will be making for vendors to respect us and our freedom. Pressure that matters for them, because, remember, we won't be making the same mistakes again, i.e., as you put it, we'll be voting with our wallets, not buying from vendors who treat us like dirt, which is something the announcement goes into as well.

Under this kind of pressure, the vendors might choose to continue down that path, and sell less and less, or do the little work it takes to respect our freedom, in which case they will sell to happy customers.

And it doesn't matter much how long the chain of distribution is. If we make pressure on those who want to sell to us, they will take care of transferring the pressure to their suppliers, and so on, until it gets to whoever can set the bits Free. And, if they don't, their direct customer will just pick another supplier: they won't keep on buying stuff that their own customers are not willing to buy.

That's the path set to recover freedom for all, so that we can all benefit. Refraining from giving positive feedback to the misbehavior is key, and awareness is key to accomplish that, and avoiding trivial and transparent functioning of devices that take your freedom away is key to raise awareness. This is how Linux-libre accomplishes that. See?, it's not that hard to understand.

Sure, it's a plan that requires cooperation from lots of people, it at times even requires making some sacrifices, but small ones, compared with what we have to gain if we succeed, and even smaller ones compared with sacrifices made for freedom throughout history.

Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds