Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNU's Linux-Libre 3.15 Kernel Released

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Britoid
    replied
    Originally posted by coder111 View Post
    Ok, I didn't think I'll have to enter into this discussion.
    Because without these ideals, one day you'll wake up in a world where only corporations can develop software (because of patents and other IP laws), and only software developed by corporations can run on computers (because of security), and you are only allowed to do with the computers what is explicitly deemed permissible by the government (because terrorists), and everything is locked down.
    --Coder
    There are some countries, including the UK, that don't allow software patents. I'd rather my computer work than have a computer that does not work. NSA Backdoors are more likely to be in the firmware, where they're harder to discover.


    Stallman is right sometimes, but everyone mostly ignores him (see GNU/Linux controversy). Stallman does not like the "freedom" to call the software what you want.
    Last edited by Britoid; 10 June 2014, 08:11 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vim_User
    replied
    Originally posted by coder111 View Post
    Ok, I didn't think I'll have to enter into this discussion.

    1. Stallman has been right time and time again. A lot of freedoms we used to take for granted have been striped away by the governments and the corporations, and we are in progress of losing more. You don't have to like the guy, but do admit he's right, maybe not always in the practical sense, but he gives right goals to aim for. Look at computing landscape and the internet in the 80s and 90s and compare it to today- in terms of how much control the user has over his own hardware and computing tasks he performs.

    2. Do you know what is in these blobs? How many backdoors by NSA, or chinese, or disgruntled employee of the manufacturer, or anyone else is there? Or how buggy are they and if they'll mess up your system at the worst possible moment.

    3. You want to do something that is not supported by the BLOB- too bad, there's no way to do it. Like run a wireless card in AP mode, or increase transmission power. You can implement that in open-source drivers if there is a need and hardware physically is capable of doing tha

    4. You make the choice. You can have a choice between convenience of having things easy, or between trusting the software you run and having the Freedom to do with the software as you wish, as long as the Freedom is preserved for others as well.

    Of course in real world, there are tradeoffs and most of us choose ease of use and having things work over having everything 100% free. But these goals and ideals are important, and should not be laughed at.

    Because without these ideals, one day you'll wake up in a world where only corporations can develop software (because of patents and other IP laws), and only software developed by corporations can run on computers (because of security), and you are only allowed to do with the computers what is explicitly deemed permissible by the government (because terrorists), and everything is locked down.

    --Coder
    So how is implementing the firmware into a ROM (which according to RMS magically removes the non-free tag) hindering the guys from #2 to have a backdoor in the firmware, or how is it enabling the hardware suddenly to do things not implemented in the firmware (your #3)? And how is having to load a firmware (with the possibility of actually getting bugs in it fixed) instead of having it in a ROM magically give you more control about your machine?

    Leave a comment:


  • coder111
    replied
    Freedom is Important and Needed.

    Ok, I didn't think I'll have to enter into this discussion.

    1. Stallman has been right time and time again. A lot of freedoms we used to take for granted have been striped away by the governments and the corporations, and we are in progress of losing more. You don't have to like the guy, but do admit he's right, maybe not always in the practical sense, but he gives right goals to aim for. Look at computing landscape and the internet in the 80s and 90s and compare it to today- in terms of how much control the user has over his own hardware and computing tasks he performs.

    2. Do you know what is in these blobs? How many backdoors by NSA, or chinese, or disgruntled employee of the manufacturer, or anyone else is there? Or how buggy are they and if they'll mess up your system at the worst possible moment.

    3. You want to do something that is not supported by the BLOB- too bad, there's no way to do it. Like run a wireless card in AP mode, or increase transmission power. You can implement that in open-source drivers if there is a need and hardware physically is capable of doing tha

    4. You make the choice. You can have a choice between convenience of having things easy, or between trusting the software you run and having the Freedom to do with the software as you wish, as long as the Freedom is preserved for others as well.

    Of course in real world, there are tradeoffs and most of us choose ease of use and having things work over having everything 100% free. But these goals and ideals are important, and should not be laughed at.

    Because without these ideals, one day you'll wake up in a world where only corporations can develop software (because of patents and other IP laws), and only software developed by corporations can run on computers (because of security), and you are only allowed to do with the computers what is explicitly deemed permissible by the government (because terrorists), and everything is locked down.

    --Coder

    Leave a comment:


  • Calinou
    replied
    Originally posted by stevenc View Post
    Yes, they're taking away that particular freedom from users. Yes that's irony.

    Leave a comment:


  • ricequackers
    replied
    The purpose of this is to keep Stallman from exploding in rage every time someone dares to charge for their hard work, or simply opt not to tell everyone how it was made.

    Leave a comment:


  • 89c51
    replied
    The FOSS talibans strike back.

    Leave a comment:


  • stevenc
    replied
    Originally posted by Britoid View Post
    That's fine if you don't know the definition of FPS or Wi-Fi.
    I'd suggest an older ATI Radeon card using the free driver, with the non-free microcode running on it. I think that's still as 'free' as the Noveau driver that still has whole chunks of obfuscated source code full of magic constants. And way better than loading a non-free or even binary driver into the kernel. With the open-source radeon driver, Phoronix benchmarks have shown higher in-game FPS than a monitor can display or the human eye can see.

    And for Wi-Fi, there are plenty of free options, you just have to be prepared to buy a few $5 USB or Mini PCI-E devices until you get one having a chipset you want. Some sellers are even savvy enough to tell you the chipset or required Linux driver when buying.

    Leave a comment:


  • dungeon
    replied
    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
    Is it better if i run fglrx on top of that kernel , not sure if that is possibile with libre kernel?
    That is why i don't believe in that story, because if that is true users can run fglrx as well as runing nvidia blob there... that is nonsense for me , they must restrict interfaces those blobs trying to use too .

    Leave a comment:


  • dungeon
    replied
    That kernel is fine but sorry my motherboard is completely unusable without firmwares, for video and net i need radeon and realtek firmware blobs .



    Is it better if i run fglrx on top of that kernel , not sure if that is possibile with libre kernel?
    Last edited by dungeon; 09 June 2014, 04:22 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • aphirst
    replied
    Originally posted by Britoid View Post
    That's fine if you don't know the definition of FPS or Wi-Fi.

    The only person this project benefits is Richard Stallman. The developers running the project could put their time into something more productive.
    With respect, I'm pretty sure that being able to release a kernel package which runs on entirely 100% Free Software exactly fits into the definition of "Productive" as far as the GNU project and the FSF are concerned.

    We don't need to have yet another goddamn thread where we argue about whether only including Freely licensed code constitutes as "removing freedom" from users. That ship set sail more or less last decade.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X