251

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

It is for sure time to rethink copyright. And it was time also in the years long before this. But now again three major music-labels go with a lawsuite towards the hosting for youtube-dl named Uberspace (https://uberspace.de/). Besides that youtube-dl has only mail-servers there: The three labels are Sony Entertainment, Warner Music Group and Universal Music. Before going mad about this please rethink your reaction and words. And that's the reasoning why I have started this posting with the sentence about copyright and also included patents for sure. Short named: They are mostly used to have just some power about others. Software is not only protected, in many cases it is in cell locked up and thrown away whenever there is no further interest for. For sure there has to be something people can live with, that is not the question. But again this is a good example how companies don't understand values like ethics and moral. Not understand what freedom should be and also free culture with information.

That's also the point why "free as in freedom" fails at this concurrent point: Too many people fail to see the altruistic nature of free, libre software. Maybe started once that way, but there are enough examples where first project are bought and namerights given away, after that the project turns slowly more into some direction like "open-source" with a growing chance to be completely converted into unfree. And then what? We cannot integrate snort because the rules are not free for example. A good project once, turned into the opposite. You want something? Pay for it. That's the basic ruleset of capitalism. But it is done in every region, also information or culture in general. What now? Do we need a "revolution"? Especially here to remember: Please be careful about words and their power. We need to rethink, we need to show what is okay and what is not.

And this is for sure not okay, in any way. It is time to think about what a "copyrigh" means. What "name-rights" should mean. Remember? Rust is one example from another region: You try to modify it? Remove unfree parts? Not possible because of the licensing. Therefore it is not free, libre software in the basic definition. Clear statemens are needed and this is a clear statement again: Pay for everything, don't ask questions and please throw away thoughts about a free culture. But altruism should be made worthy, and work for altruistic projects like Hyperbola, Parabola or Dragora should be also recognized. It is about everyone to do something about that. And especially again the question on how long you think it is possible to go around unfree services and trying to use them without following their rulesets - that includes also the rulesets of companies mentioned? It is for sure not giving up, when stated: Leave them alone as often as possible. Better to even leave also alternative like Peertube alone. Go for own thoughts, stay focussed and stay clear for principles and values. So taking last but not least following into: I have written clear criticism towards the nature of Copyright and the capitalism without using insults or slur-wordings. It is not needed and only leave a bitter taste. Even though it goes away from the original centre of criticism. Capitalism is nothing good and we need more visions for a better global community where every being has a good living. Sounds utopian for sure, but starting now could end in a distant better future where we would overcome greed and search for power, misusing positions and more.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

252

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

throgh wrote:

You think Microsoft Windows has problems? Okay, name them and stop use claims making irony or fun.

It is proprietary and most part of it is hidden and potentially it can listen to any of your voices or get any of your secret stored in your system. By default, more than 90% of people here in India use Windows for their laptops or desktops.

“The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality .” - Dante Alighieri

So your net effect, my dear throgh is that of acting against free software and to encourage people to use Windows.

Today, the forces which make the rich richer and poor poorer have their roots in computer security. Never has it been more important to work towards abolishing the power of the powerful.

Let's use hyperbola or other libre OSes and strive towards stateless hardware (Rutkowska 2015). Let's use PinePhone and shun Android and iPhone which pretend to be secure.

253

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

sagaracharya wrote:
throgh wrote:

You think Microsoft Windows has problems? Okay, name them and stop use claims making irony or fun.

It is proprietary and most part of it is hidden and potentially it can listen to any of your voices or get any of your secret stored in your system. By default, more than 90% of people here in India use Windows for their laptops or desktops.

“The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality .” - Dante Alighieri

So your net effect, my dear throgh is that of acting against free software and to encourage people to use Windows.

No, exactly the opposite: You have named the correct arguments. I have just mentioned that it is not helpful to use smear-words (there are enough examples out). Just to use real and normal arguments, nothing more and nothing less. You just seem to have not understood: Using smear-words, slurs and insults are immediately used against the idealistic position. Besides: It is not neutrality, it is just the way to get people understanding the problems. You will otherwise create a complete different situation and motivation. You see it at the reaction of some BSD-people. To quote a reaction I have seen more than once:

Linux is for people who hate Windows. The BSDs are for people who like Unix.

You can see especially there a problem: First discussing so much about Windows, Microsoft had done even commercials going themselves against GNU/Linux and free software in general (so I add this to your argument) and now they "love open-source". We have reached especially nothing with slurs and more. And we won't reach out for people: So we better name clear arguments when asked and stay true for clear values. And the named pragmatism of the BSD-area has already given the point Microsoft is using. Wrong for sure, but again: Marketing and illusions. The idealistic approach is something not that deep within from my experience and I have learned from some people using BSD having no problem with unfree software - to add this does not mean I can speak for ALL, just two or three I had learned they think that way back some years ago. But here is the point: Clear naming, clear reasoning.

It is wrong to think using free, libre software make YOU something better and we have enough people thinking that way. It is correct that using free, libre software is good and way better for sure for ALL - seeing the difference. But it should be a right for everyone and also including the duty to understand more from your own system. Otherwise we have the same problem around we have now: More and more people turn only towards pragmatism and forget about idealism. And then the systems owns them, not the opposite. Then systems have not only a toolset-character or something idealistic. Then systems are essential for everything and being absolutely intransparent and nobody has interest to do it other way, even GNU/Linux is turning into that direction because of the wrong focus I have named: People are only playing with their imagined, digital alter-ego, thinking about themselves as so bad cool "hackers" instead of doing that and within they go for others, making fun out of them. First side because they are not that deep into understanding, second side because it is part of the darkest side of us, going in groups and "fighting" each other. But tribal reactions don't help and within they can be also used for more bad as we can see: The marketing now Microsoft is using for example or having talks directly in front of people at Microsoft from FSF-associates. But illusions are keeping people way more, while their knowledge is not used for education and only for own purposes, the mentioned ego. As Charlie Chaplin noted once:

(...) We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. (...)

It is all connected. That's all, my dear sagaracharya! wink
But thanks for asking indirect, so I had a chance to redefine that a bit more. And please do it again everytime, if something is not clear. Ah and to add: I'm not neutral, cannot be and will not be. I'm just for arguments, no insults or slur-phrases. They just bring more problems in and let us forget being focused, mainly playing the ball and the arguments. Do I like "Windows"? For sure not. But stating that from a technical perspective WHY I don't like it, is way more helping than insults or slur-phrases. So I understand your reaction for sure, but as noted at the beginning now: It is meant as opposite, there you can be absolutely sure. I hope that clears up and if not: I'm for sure interested in more details, besides to add ... Windows is more or less installed on the most computer-systems named as all-day-usage desktop-machines. But that does not make any kind of difference in the end as Linux (without GNU) is also installed even on more devices counting in Android. Those arguments I have named last now are not very concrete, just giving in some major parts, but not the details. Besides the question, perhaps for a next posting if others are interested: Android is "Linux" and therefore comparable to "GNU/Linux" or even libre and free? Well, I'd like to give in some doubts about that, dear readers. big_smile

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

254

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Yes, clear reasoning helps very well. But for clear reasoning, most people should understand what computer systems are, and most people don't. Computer is just a tool to do what they want to achieve.

I agree with you on slur words and hate part. People do turn defensive!

I'd love to make Hyperbola so usable that by default people use it. So even though they don't understand what's going on, they're in much better hands. If they want to understand, they can. If not, well, even then, great! It would come by selecting compatible hardware, and making it available for most public easily with the right softwares that would make their work easy!

Today, the forces which make the rich richer and poor poorer have their roots in computer security. Never has it been more important to work towards abolishing the power of the powerful.

Let's use hyperbola or other libre OSes and strive towards stateless hardware (Rutkowska 2015). Let's use PinePhone and shun Android and iPhone which pretend to be secure.

255

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

That would be great for sure. But just to note also: I was even attacked back some years ago in a forum for stating that "free software should be a generic human right, as for also free information and culture". And to note: That is my reasoning until today and will stay that way. But that is the demonstration on how even clear reasoning is even thrown aside from whatever motivation - it was a gaming-forum to note. But well? Let's work onto even utopian ideas, idealism is not bad. Just not to loose the connection to the concurrent state, so we can work onto getting forward. As for sure to repeat: Free, libre software SHOULD BE a human right. Accessing it from every part and on every system, not closing more information. Getting them free, to understand. And yes: People have to understand their system.

A good example is the question if driver-problems on an unfree system can be looked and researched. Just the same as looking for logs under GNU/Linux-libre. Hint: Not that kind of possible! wink

There is a right to know everything from the system you are using, but it is also the personal duty to be informed better. Free software without knowledge sounds nice, but the ending is the same desaster from another perspective. And others can state anything, as long as it is under a free license you get even bloated frameworks and no possibility to review for problems or security-issues.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

256

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

The true computer reviving potential of HyperbolaBSD:OpenBSD running on a 1999 iMac G3
Warning: Nonfree video server
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=rT71HwfiM_A

257

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Thanks for sharing, having a look. smile
Indeed unfree and a good demonstration about concurrent problems back within hardware. The problem itself gotten even worse today.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

258

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Capitalism is a deadly ideology. Turbocapitalism and pure industrial globalization (not meant for global thoughts of just mankind in a whole) are violating rights of all beings and are merely a legitimacy for exploitation greeds. The thought base of crimes against ethics. To think it is in any way "helpful" to get onto that thoughts result just in more cruel deeds being done onto that base. But the same thought is also around when people think all of this can be reworked with "just a slight little revolution". Okay? Take a seat and look for historical events of any "revolution": You'll see that those only leave cruelty, more injustice defined as "correct" because serving some goals. How far people go? Better ask how to stop when others should die or defined as "not worth living".

It is disgusting how near we have come accepting all of this, instead to reflect. The pandemic is just a big showcase and we humans have learned for real nothing when we think to solve something with just some slight numbers of victims, called "collateral damage". The right would be to make failures, but the duty is to learn. So I'll ask: Have we learned? Give in your own answer, because it is up to everyone to change the course for the better. Be a light in dark times, instead to make some "show" do little things, help out, support where you see need. And also support free culture, free information and free soft- / hardware. All of those should be basic human rights!

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

259

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

To underline what we should never accept: On-going and growing complexity. Not done intended, but also a big problem to arise. Free software with so many dependencies keeps on growing to a point when only the longest members know what is deep within. To call this "free" sounds like a bad joke and is the opposite for being believable.

Ignorance admires complexity, while simplicity should be even more relevant to understand digital spheres and keeping the life itself complex and colourful for all beings.

Progress only for the course to have it instead to make all better to be understood, make it easier for people to attend and work with, is nothing we can build on top of. Programs and hardware being that much on the rise now cannot be called tools any longer. They are own problems, with own spheres and caused errors for privacy, security and learning. People gave up onto this, many long ago and just stay being "users" instead to emancipate being more and can handle their data. Trust is a nice concept, but it is just too easy to be broken. Built on top of trust? Sure thing, but also built on more: You need the complete source-code, at best for all. You need to be able to modify the machine running the system at any time: It is your way and decision. Not to be able to do that and calling for example mobile devices with phone capabilities to be "free" is not correct. Many of them are not even near to be like that, in any way. They are a dangerous harm for the climate and environment, for data and privacy. And to mitigate some bad concepts within you have to accept weird and toxic ways, not even near to be called a compromise.

If having the choice to implement something with wrong and complex concepts or leaving it for the better while accepting others never to like that, I think we should accept not implementing interfaces for Bluetooth for example. Insecure and nevertheless useless in the end, adding even more problems instead solving them. Yes, this sounds not like a so-called "modern system", but what makes the wording "modern" in relation to simplicity and especially security? It is a free system, if there is to interest to experience something, everyone is free to implement more and add it for the own system, also to add them into the forum for others to attend. But Hyperbola should make a difference to stay away from harmful interfaces and technologies.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

260 (edited by zapper 2022-02-09 17:44:07)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Tobias, I apologize, I have been too greedy lately...

I have not been thinking clearly, sorry for putting so much pressure on you.

I hope you can forgive me...

I do think some of what I said in regards to uxp on that thread, but just know, I don't mean you any harm... you or Hyperbola.

Anywho, peace man.

Edit: something that isn't my right to talk about yet.

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

261

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

No offense taken and I hope the same for you as I don't want to be harsh in any way. smile But yeah: Everyone has the right to ask and gets a clear statement about what we as team are doing. Because there are two major principles:

1. We are ALL team here and therefore ONE community. There is nothing less to be defined!
2. Clear transparency is base for the communication.

For being believable there is no other way for Hyperbola also following the social contract and therefore need to play the ball. For sure our UXP-applications need a clear further roadmap being made safe or we talk as teamed community about other possibilities to bring simplicity central: Easy to handle, but in the outcome also powerful.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

262

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

We make tools to extend our abilities, our reach and fulfill our aspirations. But we must never let them define us. For if there is no difference between tools and makers, who would be left? Tools need to be free for any understatement, so that all generations can learn from them as without learning there is no creativity. And a world without any creativity is a world without hope. Within our concurrent world there are far too many participants telling us selfish perspectives, but we can do it other ways.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

263

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Imagine a world without free culture and free information: What do you think this world will look alike? A world where not all people have the right for information, where information is only based onto "interests". A world where capitalistic interests decide when a being should know more and what exactly in a point. Everything else? Not needed. In this world we are heading towards dystopian visions explained in books like Brave New World, where progression is not made for all people and just to have more consume. And a point where beings are divided in classes. Yes, this is a harsh vision, inhumane and disgusting. Another warning from another point of view, same as for 1984. But we are now here to come for thoughts, doing correct conclusions out that. Do we need to "fight" some called "evil force"? Please think clearly: This is a faulty perspective. We have to look exactly onto all parts, otherwise we can be guided fast into a false conclusion. So some thoughts:

Do we really need to go even deeper into the worldwide "network"? We have enough proof that information can be misused and we have so much to do with identifying lies and truths even now. Do we really need more of that? Our life depending on the wire and onto progress at all cost? Updates at all costs? Imagine this: The more dependencies into a software, the more problems can be the result. So I could state here and now that even the stated point about many parts of the ecosystem of GNU/Linux are build on top of illusions: Lightweight? Stable? Secure? And why do we think that "rolling release", always "up-to-date" is helping? Helping for what? Also many packages are getting even more dependencies and projects like Hyperbola more problems to remove or resolve them. We should not add those dependencies completely without questioning, without having doubts. That's not helping anyone. Nevertheless when we do that we build on top of "interests". We help others to gain influence.

So who can state that Gnome will be forever oriented on values like freedom and outright help, when corporate interests heading into? Same for KDE and others providing some essential libraries. The warnings from mentioned literature was not completely meant for a "big fight" in the first place. It is meant for self-reflection, about being outright critical about ignorance. Because there is the point: Ignorance is destroying the reflection directly. So when we would enter any kind of dystopian vision getting reality ... we can only address ourselves. There is no one else responsible! The ignorance of society is making it possible to have suffering disappearing (while it is for sure existant), to remove facts and science, just heading towards fast solutions. But those fast solutions (progression at all cost is also one) don't solve anything. Being believable is meant also being steady for principles and values. Empathy and solidarity are ultimate values, but based on facts and science, based on warm-hearted thoughts and clear stand for democratic inclusion for all. Remember this: Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. The pandemic situation has not vanished, the suffering throughout climate has not ended and war is there on a daily base, same for harassment, hatred and discrimination. The trickery is to make you ignore it. The question is: You want all of this? Better to take the path of democratic solutions and empathy instead of egoism and more ignorance.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

264

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Being believable is meant for being true and outright for values: So when stated slogans like Green IT once a decade ago this should be one way. Not to retire hardware just because it is defined as "old". GNU/Linux had its advantages within for that. Guess this was only another marketing-slogan. How comes? Just reading through some parts and notes:

And there are for sure more to be noted. What is done with all the hardware marked for retirement? And how do we handle all of that? This one big problem: Progress only because to make progress, not for inclusion, not for having a good solution without risking further problems for environment and climate and leaving people with even more bloated applications. The reasoning? Well, you have the resources to run overbloated websites, to run videos and animations within every website, make the whole "web-application"-part. We all want that, or better: We are told to want it. Remember: Has everybody the money to have all that traffic and hardware? And what is going on when this is going even faster as it is now? Hardware is thrown out monthly? And others should take it, when there is no system any longer in support? Please, stay a bit more realistic: Those are big problems. Excluding people for sure based on their income, making even more trash and have systems going seriously out of control. "Lightweight" is not only a phrase!

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

265 (edited by zapper 2022-04-23 04:31:44)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Wow, fedora really is going in the toliet then...

Sometime after 2012, when I got into linux, I picked fedora as my first distro...

I never would have guessed they would discontinue legacy bios support...

That is beyond stupid, for many reasons,  particularly, not everyone uses uefi...

besides, UEFI should stand for:

Underworld Endangering Foolish Interface

wink

Side note though,

Doesn't legacy bios removal make coreboot support, harder?

If that's the case, then the people in charge are many times more foolish than I thought...

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

266

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

As tianacore is there with bunch of other payloads: Support for coreboot is not a problem as it is the base and depending on the included payloads. Better not to use new names for interfaces, technologies or projects. Criticism can stand on its own without slur-names. wink

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

267 (edited by zapper 2022-04-24 01:31:13)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

throgh wrote:

As tianacore is there with bunch of other payloads: Support for coreboot is not a problem as it is the base and depending on the included payloads. Better not to use new names for interfaces, technologies or projects. Criticism can stand on its own without slur-names. wink

I usually consider slurs to be highly offensive statements that are meant to demonize people of different ethnicities, sexual preferences or beliefs of otherworldly ideals or supernatural type things...

That all being said, I would agree normally, but if you read that thread long enough, you see that "person"

This is the lightest way I can put it, but yeah...

Anyways, systemd's creator seems to lash out against anyone who has even the mildest of criticisms of his creation.

If the redhat devs who created stuff like that were less crass and less devoted to ideals that border on the idea of being as bad as Google's, Apple's or Microsoft's...

Then, well...

I would still have trouble keeping my mouth shut in some ways probably...

The others try to attack more from outside, but redhat likes to do so from within more.

I doubt the person I mentioned above is the only one who is that toxic at redhat.

So when others say  I should not demonize him so to speak, they are somewhat right.

The corporation redhat itself is toxic, so yes they are right in one sense, but in another sense, they leave a lot out that is more important to the actual issue.

While they are not nearly as toxic as the other three corporations I mentioned, they are easily many times more sneaky at shoving crap into an otherwise good system.

Not saying they the best, clarifying, of course I mean the system known as, GNU/Linux  aka...  would be many times better without so much corporate crap being added.

So yeah, anything that is proprietary, or is designed by people who want to EEGFC

Aka the new threat of:

Embrace
Extend
Gain Full Control

Should be ignored and treated as worthless especially by people who are so manipulative in getting what they want and have nothing great to give in return.

I believe that was Redhat's goal, also, if it wasn't now, it would most definitely be now due to IBM taking possession of them.

I still think even then, it wouldn't be ideal, but it wouldn't be the mess it is now.

Just my two cents, take it for what it is worth, but if nothing else, one thing is true, shame doesn't make people do better, it makes them do worse.

That being said, if they don't intend to do better, well...

There is no point even bothering, to do anything else, it seems...

meh...

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

268

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Well, it is not only about "Red Hat". This is just one company as many others and there is no need to discuss about them. The point is: Criticism with using "slurs" or ironical naming-schemes is not helping anyone. In fact we are here in a middle of a big problem. The idea behind Unified Extensible Firmware Interface was to create a more "modernized" approach for a replacement of the Basic Input/Output System.

This has gotten out of hand in some ways to be named:

- Instead of recuding complexity the idea was made more up and mixing strange more into by many different instances. Adding for example extra entries into a firmware including UEFI so Windows can look into and execute it everytime again at a startup.
- Self-repeating circles with UEFI having direct network-access, making it possible for attacking at startup.

There are for sure right away more. But the original idea was more or less the same behind systemd and many others: Making something better!
The problem I have named? By mixing criticism with strange and disrespecting naming-schemes people won't react correctly. Instead this is happening:

Anyways, systemd's creator seems to lash out against anyone who has even the mildest of criticisms of his creation.

When you are attacked ten times, hundred times, thousand times, not with clear criticism and a warm but straight forward helping hand, just more ironic disrespect and sarcasm, you won't listen any longer or react direct harsh. Please to understand: The "internet" is not only you or me It is not only a slight little group: There are billions of people and accounts to be even more multiplied. When being attacked some can block out insults, block also not helping sarcasm. But then people create just more and different accounts. There is one clear problem to be named. Instead of helping, there are enough people just with interest to attack harsh. This has nothing to do with "Red Hat" at all. This has to do with culture. And a free culture needs to be inclusive. For sure: This is includes criticism. But not on those ways I have mentioned and there is enough proof for this.

Coming now towards "Red Hat": Ignorance is here the key element. We can do whatever we want about, but the ground course won't change. In fact I would like to ask at a point why people even think it is "okay" to have their computers marked with logos and more so they are running around as kind of "marketing" for Lenovo (as example). You can do extra work, remove all of that and more. But that's the same point as mentioned with the software: Not everyone is seeing it the same. We here have no interest within systemd (and other Linux-only frameworks), others have no further problem with that. There is a warning about to be said and I'm thankful you have mentioned that. But can we change there more about it? I don't think so. Nevertheless: Clear criticism is needed, even when not listened, without ironic sidesteps at best. smile

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

269

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Yeah he does get criticized alot, that is true, but if you look at his rebuttals, they are kind of immature...

Basically, its a game of fight fire with gasoline over and over again...

That being said, corporate culture probably is in general the issue if that's what you mean.

I should add:

this is the giant problem with humanity as a whole

Basically, presentation of said ideals should rarely matter at all, with regard to technology, in particular, as long as the best idea wins out.

This is clearly not how things work 95% of the time though, it really makes me feel sad, ya know?

Btw, this below I mentioned:

"So yeah, anything that is proprietary, or is designed by people who want to EEGFC
Aka the new threat of:
Embrace
Extend
Gain Full Control"

It might have more truth then even I first thought, given that those 4 corporations I mentioned, as well as others, are finding ways to infect the ideals of open source and libre software at the same time.

Of course, open source doesn't care about freedom persay, but if they intend to make it free from proprietary software, it is also libre.

Also, here's another ironic twist, OpenBSD is more "libre" than some GNU/Linux distros...

But yeah, I will just add by saying, I am pretty sure some out there have tried to convey the issues they see with software like dbus, pulseaudio, systemd, etc... without hostility.

Even if other people flame you over stuff, its usually bad to ignore them completely and at least evaluate some of what they say before throwing it out, for a while.

If he did that for at least half of the critcisms, its possible, people wouldn't be so irritated with him and people who do similar projects.

Long story short,  I suppose I will say, nothing is all shadow or all sunlight.

His ideas could have merit, there are some  problems though,

its neverending the features he keeps adding thus creating bloat and security nightmares, complex code...

I think it would make more sense to just make new modules for the new stuff he wants, without making them mandatory like I mention below:

And of course, the backwards compatibility breaking situation and then there are some who are deceptive and try to get people to choose his software to make his software the default.  And finally,  last but not least, any crticisms, even if they have validity, he throws out if he hates the presenation.
Again though, I doubt its only him, this could very well be more than just a redhat problem like you said though. You do have a point there.

I recall some university teacher saying he was working for microsoft, but he kept finding too many bugs, so they fired him.

So yes, I do have egg on my face for forgetting that..

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

270

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

You see it is an on-going fairytale: Software is getting more complex and people think even when the point of no-return is far behind they have the control or can gain control. Google itself is doing that with YouTube, Facebook and Twitter the same. So many material is uploaded even within one minute, no one alone can review all of that. It is just to complex: Either the mechanics and dependencies or the data itself being generated also. And also not alone with all the closed platforms. It is the same illusion with the so-called free and libre projects: Diaspora, Friendica, Hubzilla, Mastodon, PeerTube and others. And we have not even reached the point of criticism when fascists are using those for their own goals.

When this is happening - and it is for sure: People are again rejecting. When called out for criticism, they try to slide it away from their perpective. Because that cannot happening in that perspective. It is for sure. But no one is listening, no one wants to see it. And while I write down those lines people are back into the ignorance: Technology will never be of any solution for social problems. Freedom always comes with responsibility. It is elementary that those are bundled. When not certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. Social interaction is complex enough. Making it even more complicated by taking this element away through right digital communication makes it even more out of a problem. And this is the whole story right in the beginning and going on.

zapper wrote:

It might have more truth then even I first thought, given that those 4 corporations I mentioned, as well as others, are finding ways to infect the ideals of open source and libre software at the same time.

No, it is not working like that and it was already mentioned here in this thread for multiple times. That is shortened criticism and it generates a shortened perspective. Companies and corporations are not working like that: There is not the whole intention right from the beginning like one "evil masterplan". It is just that: Pure ignorance. It is not working like that or someone intended to put and push some frameworks into something. The most clear answer: We all did and do. There is always a chance to do something different. But there are problematic parts within the free and libre culture and community. Some to mention:

- Something was not updated for a longer amount of time and is therefore no longer safe or used. Wrong conclusion: First there has to be some problem even showed and only because the project does not get updates does not make it "unused".
- Always newest versions, always more software, always more packages. Wrong conclusion: Quantity of packages does not make anything better or stronger. It is just more out of a growing problem because of side-effects or something going malfunction in the end.
- Ring of trust for elementary parts in distributions and systems. Sounds first good but afterwards it is getting more out of a problem with wrong conclusion: Free soft- and hardware, culture is based onto the key-element of trust in combination with the helping hand. Only waiting for some delivery, for some newer release does not create a better trust-model at all. In fact: It is failing because there is no real technical emancipation. Missing part is testing and reporting.

There is no "infection". It is pragmatism, it is convenience.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

271 (edited by zapper 2022-04-25 02:33:12)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

throgh wrote:

You see it is an on-going fairytale: Software is getting more complex and people think even when the point of no-return is far behind they have the control or can gain control. Google itself is doing that with YouTube, Facebook and Twitter the same. So many material is uploaded even within one minute, no one alone can review all of that. It is just to complex: Either the mechanics and dependencies or the data itself being generated also. And also not alone with all the closed platforms. It is the same illusion with the so-called free and libre projects: Diaspora, Friendica, Hubzilla, Mastodon, PeerTube and others. And we have not even reached the point of criticism when fascists are using those for their own goals.

When this is happening - and it is for sure: People are again rejecting. When called out for criticism, they try to slide it away from their perpective. Because that cannot happening in that perspective. It is for sure. But no one is listening, no one wants to see it. And while I write down those lines people are back into the ignorance: Technology will never be of any solution for social problems. Freedom always comes with responsibility. It is elementary that those are bundled. When not certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. Social interaction is complex enough. Making it even more complicated by taking this element away through right digital communication makes it even more out of a problem. And this is the whole story right in the beginning and going on.

zapper wrote:

It might have more truth then even I first thought, given that those 4 corporations I mentioned, as well as others, are finding ways to infect the ideals of open source and libre software at the same time.

No, it is not working like that and it was already mentioned here in this thread for multiple times. That is shortened criticism and it generates a shortened perspective. Companies and corporations are not working like that: There is not the whole intention right from the beginning like one "evil masterplan". It is just that: Pure ignorance. It is not working like that or someone intended to put and push some frameworks into something. The most clear answer: We all did and do. There is always a chance to do something different. But there are problematic parts within the free and libre culture and community. Some to mention:

- Something was not updated for a longer amount of time and is therefore no longer safe or used. Wrong conclusion: First there has to be some problem even showed and only because the project does not get updates does not make it "unused".
- Always newest versions, always more software, always more packages. Wrong conclusion: Quantity of packages does not make anything better or stronger. It is just more out of a growing problem because of side-effects or something going malfunction in the end.
- Ring of trust for elementary parts in distributions and systems. Sounds first good but afterwards it is getting more out of a problem with wrong conclusion: Free soft- and hardware, culture is based onto the key-element of trust in combination with the helping hand. Only waiting for some delivery, for some newer release does not create a better trust-model at all. In fact: It is failing because there is no real technical emancipation. Missing part is testing and reporting.

There is no "infection". It is pragmatism, it is convenience.

Meh, I been on here too much, lately...

That being said, whether you consider it convenience or pragmatism, the entire situation spells infection to me.

Btw, quality does indeed matter more, but as for, unused, that might not be the right word indeed....

What do you think about sabotaged?

Either way, the situation is intense enough, without feeling like I am getting hit on the head with your opinions, sigh...

I shouldve probably stayed out of this thread....

When I read your comments, its hard not to want to reply a specific way regarding this kind of material.

...

EDIT:

It doesn't need to be said, but technology cannot fix anything, but it goes further, without constant vigiliance, like you said, there is no way anything will ever remain stable.

There is a reason, the expression, "I am only human"

Came to be...

its because we will always be imperfect till the day we die

OpenBSD has one thing better than the GNU/Linux world though, they are extremely passionate about security/privacy/

Capitalism is indeed a vulgar thing.

Communism is also vulgar, if you consider it to be socialism to the insane level.

Socialism? I think is fine as long as it doesn't go the insane level.

I begin to wonder, if OpenBSD was right about permissive software being a better road to follow...

Only because,  if people are tricky enough, they will find ways to manipulate the licenses, just like gpl2 has been, many times over.

Either way... try to tone it down, it just has this effect on people like me or others, where it makes us angry to where we say stuff, that will probably upset you.

Even if that isn't our intention...

My point being, what can I even say without you getting annoyed with me in this thread?

...
...
...

sad

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

272

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

You are not getting me annoyed! smile
I just want to give the reasoning that there is the possibility for correction. Meaning: An inclusive language at a point is better to give a some hand. Not to forget that it had to hard enough with values and principles. We are discussing and that's a very good thing, we don't have to follow the absolute same opinion. I'm just onto that one point as recommendation: Don't be that hard onto the circumstances and in this way I try to give the reasnong that more or less we humans are the problem and the solution itself for this problem.

As long as enough of us are onto the search for selfish actions those things are going to happen even more. Perhaps the first years of free software were more about researching functional ways and the whole situation was quite different. But nowadays we have also groups and companies having their roots within those early developments. A company is the pure selfishness: With that in mind some very important projects are either on the risk of being driven in wrong directions or being moved through additions like the Linux-kernel. OpenBSD for example has some different points but nevertheless in the end the same problems. It is only not that visible because of the permissive licensing itself.

Free soft- / hardware and culture is in the roots not compatible with capitalism as it is based onto altruistic ideas. "Open-Source" was the tryout to make it a bit less more visible. It has failed doing that and brought up even more problems as that was clear right on the beginning. The generic point for example that "not for commercial" should be "unfree" is a bit sarcastic. Yes, in one way understandable. But on the other it is the same already mentioned: Altruism and selfishness are not compatible. Free culture and more is meant about working together from the generic thought, from the interest to move something forward. When only handle from selfish points there can be also movement, but this depends if people learn that there are more perspectives. Regarding the Linux-kernel for example: Sorry, but the learning is over for now - with also having hope for more like HyperbolaBSD. wink

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

273 (edited by zapper 2022-04-25 23:44:27)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

throgh wrote:

You are not getting me annoyed! smile
I just want to give the reasoning that there is the possibility for correction. Meaning: An inclusive language at a point is better to give a some hand. Not to forget that it had to hard enough with values and principles. We are discussing and that's a very good thing, we don't have to follow the absolute same opinion. I'm just onto that one point as recommendation: Don't be that hard onto the circumstances and in this way I try to give the reasnong that more or less we humans are the problem and the solution itself for this problem.

As long as enough of us are onto the search for selfish actions those things are going to happen even more. Perhaps the first years of free software were more about researching functional ways and the whole situation was quite different. But nowadays we have also groups and companies having their roots within those early developments. A company is the pure selfishness: With that in mind some very important projects are either on the risk of being driven in wrong directions or being moved through additions like the Linux-kernel. OpenBSD for example has some different points but nevertheless in the end the same problems. It is only not that visible because of the permissive licensing itself.

Free soft- / hardware and culture is in the roots not compatible with capitalism as it is based onto altruistic ideas. "Open-Source" was the tryout to make it a bit less more visible. It has failed doing that and brought up even more problems as that was clear right on the beginning. The generic point for example that "not for commercial" should be "unfree" is a bit sarcastic. Yes, in one way understandable. But on the other it is the same already mentioned: Altruism and selfishness are not compatible. Free culture and more is meant about working together from the generic thought, from the interest to move something forward. When only handle from selfish points there can be also movement, but this depends if people learn that there are more perspectives. Regarding the Linux-kernel for example: Sorry, but the learning is over for now - with also having hope for more like HyperbolaBSD. wink

Well, if a company  becomes corporate enough, definitely, I would agree...

But yeah,  honestly, I am not saying commercial is always bad, I am saying, the potential for bad is more likely...

As for OpenBSD, the permissive licensing as far as I know does make a difference, it doesn't fix the problem, which is absolutely true.

However, it does mitigate some of it I have noticed,  because corporations don't feel like they need to screw anything up to make it non-free or bloated for their "uses" Small EDIT:

By that I mean, the copyleft licenses tend to make corporate people more likely to find a different opening if they want to use said product for their other purposes, which usually are corporate which tends to be more likely to be bad, in this case.

It probably happens still to BSD, but I think it reduces a corporations desire to feel the need to screw stuff up.

As for GNU and/or linux kernel as a whole, regardless,  I do wonder what differences between the way both work will occur...

I assume, OpenBSD doesn't use bash for sure and possibly there are other things I have yet to find out.

I am sure more or less, it will be an interesting implementation.

I also think depending on how it is done, it could use anywhere, from...

25%-75% as much battery life as GNU/Linux

Not quite sure at this time, but I think it will use less.

The question however that is really up in the air, for me, is also speed.

smile

Also, Hyperbola does have a different focus, so it makes me wonder about what will be different from OpenBSD vs HyperbolaBSD as well as HyperbolaBSD vs Hyperbola GNU/Linux-Libre

I look forward to seeing how this works.

Btw, not that this will be done right away and possibly ever, unless someone has a weird idea of doing things differently...

I hope at some point, its possible to have 3 FDE + /Boot  installations on system

And when you boot into the main system,  you can choose one of three installations. to login from. 

Aka, above whatever bios you have, you have the utter root, then three different small roots attached to it, each, you can login from, the utter root, would have a password, of course.

The next three small roots could have, their own as well, or decline, then the user login, which I think you already know...

smile

This is probably a bad idea for HyperbolaBSD itself, but it could be a good idea for a Hyperbola libre BIOS!

Just a thought, if you have interest, or anyone here for that matter...

wink

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

274

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Well, just to make it more short for me speaking: NO commercial at all. The reasoning is the easiest one: Because we humans have no control about our essential understanding of greed and power. Better to have this out as the neverending competition is one result besides other even more problematic ones and we won't stop it onto illusions that we can control it. That's the reasoning the idea is not functional from my point of view. Free software and commercial usage will be forever some kind of bad compromise, some really bad deal in the making. You will also have people coming up with some really strange ideas like cutting one freedom away because they want to have full control about everything and no further forks or something else. And no: This is not something I have thought of. There are for sure people out there thinking about that. Once perhaps as better example how to "support free software". But we should be honest: This can turn right away also into another selfish act, very fast and hard when people search for making a name about something.

And with that the circle is closing as it is about competition then. It should not be about any kind of competition, more about helping and support each other, learning more and getting technical emancipation right forward. But that is the utopian perspective as the reality shows right away another picture.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

275

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

throgh wrote:

Well, just to make it more short for me speaking: NO commercial at all. The reasoning is the easiest one: Because we humans have no control about our essential understanding of greed and power. Better to have this out as the neverending competition is one result besides other even more problematic ones and we won't stop it onto illusions that we can control it. That's the reasoning the idea is not functional from my point of view. Free software and commercial usage will be forever some kind of bad compromise, some really bad deal in the making.

Actually, that's unfortunately true 80% of the time or more...

That being said, people can disagree with me on this, but unless decentralized cloud storage and emails, get way easier, like say, you upload your file, but it is attached to some kind of, like torrent? And only private users, can access it/unlock it and it would be stored using tor, or i2pd,  atttached to said stream, etc.... and it probably would need to get vastly more complicated from there regardless of how simple the code is, because the authorities would probably try to stop that kind of anonymity...

My point being, cloud storage, webmail, email clients, cloud storage clients, are one example of this kind of stuff,

By the way, I fully realize SaaSS is discouraged in general in the libre community, but I think we both know that various diasters can occur, in the world, besides stuff being seized, such as natural ones, aka, power surge, fires, stuff breaking being the most common, point being, I find that use to make sense, if nothing else.

That being said, obviously, it would be nice if extremely strong curves for GnuPG, etc... could be developed or something even stronger than that, to be used, solely for files uploaded to the cloud, or stuff similar,

But other than that, more than often, you are likely right, even by my thought process.

Anywho, more two cents of mine...

wink

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!