Being believable? Well, not about gaming under Linux (without GNU). More and more the "open-source"-excuse is getting used. The newest addition? The SDL-project, with here more to read about: https://www.patreon.com/posts/new-project-top-58563886

And please: No company grant support to free, libre software, because they think about emancipation. They think about benefits for the next possible integration into their own projects, without giving back anything. And that's the problem with "open-source": The cheap illusion of thinking to integrate capitalism with some kind of showing and sharing source-code. That will never work!

No, I don't blame the SDL-project itself. I just don't think this is the correct way. But why do we all think having companies integrated is the way to go? Just because of pragmatism? Think again: No market helps to regulate anything.

And just to note: If you think a democratic society can uphold itself, you should read for sure more in history. There are enough people around having their own problems with democratic participation and wanting to exclude others not fitting in their perspective. You think it is your right to participate? Way too easy as all those parts were fought for, a major part of human history was about freedom and ways of living together. And you think now we have the best society of all times? Okay, think again as all people thought the same in history. But that's not what emancipation is all about. You think fascists have the right to participate also? Okay, get this clear: Fascism is an ideology of complete destruction. There is no other outcome. And get this also clear, please: Totalitarian systems CAN have fascism backgrounds, but also can exist without it. System based onto fascism ALWAYS have totalitarian backgrounds included and cannot exist without it. Learning the difference and learning also that antifascism is the duty within democratic participation. And it is not only an empty phrase as the word "Antifa" itself is of a meaning, but also a word. You think there is an agenda behind the word? Well, you have read for sure wrong-sided perspectives. Antifa is antifascism, nothing more and nothing less.

So-called "freedom activists" using unfree services like Twitter for their essential communication. But hey: They wish to use better ActivityPub-implementations, because ... well? Those platforms and networks enrich life and communication so much. How did we ever survived without the knowledge that someone else is bored and share some questionable meme-pictures? Come on, people: Please read again those postings and shared views. And afterwards tell me that this is only some abstract illusion or bad nightmare for sure. And what happens with the people not interested to participate with this absolute emotion-show, but want to support and help with tests? Oh nice, they don't even get to read more about release-schedules for example about Libreboot: https://nitter.namazso.eu/n4of7/status/ … 13648900#m

Because of what? Yes, Twitter to be used for central communication instead the project-page itself.
Okay, and then we create even more projects to circumvent and use unfree services like YouTube or make just a copy with so-called alternatives like "PeerTube". Internet is about sharing these days and please share more data as there is need for even more servers (bitter sarcasm included). You even recognize on how those so-called alternatives have done some part of vendor-lockins? And where is the difference? Oh how "cool" is that, a free platform, but to participate I have to create an account on Diaspora, Mastodon or whatever. And then what? Doing more or less the same as on Facebook, Twitter or whatever. How "cool", more absolute emphasized hatred, questionable imagery and more. But hey: Communication is key. With even that part I'd say "yes" as we need to communicate, but not only with our digital "alter ego" and play with that. A believable communication looks for sure different. And to say that somebody is not existing because nothing is to be found "online": What kind of dystopian perspective is this?

Nobody had a shout for YouTube once, but now many cannot even think not using it. And with all of those services the web is going down. But for that we have organizations like the FSF telling us about DRM. Yes, for sure is all a generic problem. But you see the point? How much cost and you never touch again those services or search for the next ultimate browser delivering all you want and be the multimedia-central? We play with fire and it is for sure getting out of control, long ago. We only react or copy known paradigms instead try absolutely NOT to go in that direction. But okay: Tell me more about enrichment for my life and making myself to some machinery only delivering data. In the end there is no difference if the service is free or unfree. With federated data for example you only need one instance sharing with others and getting the information. Oh you can block that, but what about the next 100 instances to come? Or the next 1000? What about the services becoming important enough so centralized platforms like Twitter implement also ActivityPub? Okay, again with blocking. But you should be aware that thoughts can be different and therefore you should be ready to also block every other instance NOT blocking Twitter for example. And I have not even mentioned that Diaspora has the APIs implemented and Mastodon has options for that. A brave new world awaits and we all can see that. But it is more about the visions from Aldous Huxley for example: The individual does not even count within that machinery, only data. You don't want to participate? No problem, at one point you will have to do that, because others have taken away your choice. No I'm not talking about some "evil groups", that's just imagination and non-existant: The "others" are just the other members of the global society itself.
But go further with copying the known, because it is "cool to like". Oh and before I forget this point: Many participants within those anti-social platforms (calling them "networks" or "social" is not fitting and a bad joke) think they read just some little notes and going to be experts in politics, pandemic, science in general and even more. True enrichment, isn't it? No, because just reading some article on the internet does not change anything. But hey: People tend to "communicate" everything there. Besides that's the reasoning I completely deny the usage for example of this "new" Libreboot. Just because of personal interests the democratic organization of that project was removed. And now what? A new release? The circle is closing here: No new release until now, but some kind of "testing" being near about "stable". As I've said with bitter sarcasm: Truely enrichment and while people go ahead with sharing daily routines, make fun with their political positions (which some can be called pure hatred also) our world is in flames. Go ahead, going to be warm, but not nice and comfy.

And what those "freedom-activists" want is nothing more than "domination of freedom": Sounds good? Perhaps, but the outcome is? For sure this sounds like emancipation. But then what? You think going tribal per definition is good? Not working together and instead everyone is the own little "ruling person" makes freedom ultimate? Think again, because you have a problem within this thought: The human nature itself. But okay, we can wait a little longer for the next Libreboot because there should be a PeerTube-instance (https://nitter.namazso.eu/n4of7/status/ … 63796992#m) and some Gitlab-instance also. And about those other projects? Ah well, the compiling works that great I can do it here with Hyperbola .. wait, wrong project. Compiling Libreboot is NOT working: No gettext, no sudo and many other parts missing. Yes, this could be fixed in some way. But what about other payloads like Tianacore? The download is not working correct. That's all part of the same: Instead telling the world some stories, we could focus. Instead of going for insane big dreams turning later for sure into nightmares, we should look out for peers sharing with. And then there is no matter if there is no stable release or not. Help and support for technical independent tryouts, coming back for group-working. When we look onto whole nations the proposed concept ends up with pure nationalism. As mentioned earlier here: Not nice and comfy warm, should we play again that bad game "mine is better than yours"? We all know what this is called onto the perspective of a nation: That's war. Cannot believe people go for this again and again, repeating history and thinking to make anything better.

What kind of literal crap neoliberalism is? You can see it on a daily base, especially now when people are forced to ignore all reasonable parts for solidarity and empathy as they need to keep their jobs. Otherwise companies will handle against them and that to say on a global base: No company is giving any kind of present just because they think to do something "good". For sure there is nothing evil to be found also, the problems are just quite deeper because we all are part of this system, of the capitalism. And the capitalism is just understanding one sentence: Make more money, just more.

That's the whole "magic" and reasoning in general. Yes, it is shortened by me for now but for this reasoning we go against everything within this pandemic and ignore all reasonable scientific aspects. For sure there is more, but I just describe now the generic meaning for people enforced to go outside with no possibility of more protection. And who is taking responsibility when those people are infected? Ending in hospitals? The politicians? The companies? The society? No one, just is the responsibility marked for "own part". How can any individual fight this pressure, just to protect others? In the end those individuals are even punished: Companies just do their parts, politics ignore their calls and society marks them being "strange" or "to frightened". And now what? We are not even near the ending of this situation and it is getting even worse. Everything is thrown away just because of the capitalistic viewpoints, everything is forgotten because of neoliberalism and science is ignored because of "freedom". We will pay a bitter price for all of that once as we are doing that even now! We are living lies and we are told lies when somebody notes nothing can happen in this concurrent situation. What is the reasoning for companies in general? Just to get money, there is no understatement for empathy or ethics. But society fails also to position against all that injustices. The best way we have is science and research, but even that we don't hear now and ignore all the cryouts worldwide for fair handles, for vaccinations and treatments. You have more money? No problem, you can get help, but please sign that paper before because of our "patents" and "copyright". Lifes are compared to that and considered in the end as not so "meaningful".

We call it other way today, but it is nothing more than plundering life and throwing away the rights of people. You think you can make any kind of "career"? Okay, nice illusions. Sorry, but reality looks a bit different, quite a bit. And for now to note also ending those dark thoughts: We need to turn back from that. Where is room and place to discuss other ways for democracy, empathy and solidarity for ALL beings? Just to make cutoff with all this greed for power and more. And for sure any kind of revolution also won't help, learning from history and not repeating it endless. With some hope for the future in any way.

I think we can call that for sure fanatism and it is coming in various flavors. The major issue is that many people seems giving their responsibilities away, believing in some kind of weird theories. But that was always part of human history: The issue we are onto now is loosing democratic and humanistic values. But it would for sure lead to just other parts of the discussion on this point. I can state that I believe in the good handle and the same time about criticism. Are my actions leading to something even more problematic? And I should always have a look for others, because I'm for sure not important alone. All beings are important!

But we also have to recognize that it is very complicated to get over problematic views hardened for centuries. So at best: Some of us have more privileges, use them to protect others having them not. Perhaps a good starting point.

To be fair is important, but also to recognize basic problems instead of following names blind and without any doubt. So you think the FSF and Richard Stallman are without doubts? Without any problems? Think again: Was it democratic based to bring back a person stepped down from positions? Yes to have the ideas from Richard Stallman and respecing them, but that would have been possible also without going back into positions. And what next on a social side? The FSF brought him back instead he is focussing again on absolute needed parts we have now the known problems: Preaching something the reality has not. Or do we have the freedom of choice? Are there not problems enough on the technical side? We have more and more projects going the "open-source"-way, making some foul compromises. More companies making contracts with projects and so getting influence. Just to name some: Audacity? Blender? There are enough questionable frameworks around made mandatory instead of being optional: systemd, pulseaudio, dbus, avahi und more? Projects directly from the GNU-project being a problem in respect of licensing or mixing problems within: Rust? Mono? Java?

But hey: Richard Stallman is back and now everything is "okay"? No, nothing is "okay", because following only blind ideas won't help. The FSF has overseen problems right away and talking with Microsoft seems more important than talking about problems already mentioned. Being believable is about talking problems, not about some illusions or marketing-ideas. Join what exactly? Projects like Hyperbola don't get more support from that. But personally it is also better not having the mass of people here, because that is one dedicated problem now and stay that way.

And I have enough to read those endless discussions where people think being personally attacked because others bring up problems or describe situations where the so-called "heroes" and "persons of interests" have failed. You think others have to solve that? Solve it by yourself and stop following only role-models. Think about ideas instead of think who can solve something on a greater level or do you want to give your own responsibility everytime away? Projects like Hyperbola live out from people working on them, not only talking about them. Better to have a small group working, instead of a great mass talking and discussing only. The reasoning is easy: Solutions can come with working, not only with talking.

In the end: Just following some names and persons because others do it does not make you something "free". Just to use something marked as "free" or others say so, does not make you "free" or emancipate anyone. And it is all about technical emancipation. We have problems at many points: The bloated Linux-only frameworks (without GNU)? Many bloated projects themself without freedom of choice? And people don't recognize the problems ahead within complicated structures in their own systems. But hey, if you want to follow some hierarchies? Feel free to do so, but this won't help.

But this is going from the base-theory that mostly all powerful persons have slightly bad or even worse intentions. Instead I would bring back the known paradigm of ignorance back into. For sure some people have bad intentions, but mostly coming up from ignorance to be on the "right side" while "right or wrong" are just even more complicated concepts. Fore sure at one generic point we can say: "That is wrong!"

Especially when talking about ground-base rights for living and being handled with respect for life. Not being harmed and more. But on other parts it is getting really complicated. Personally I'd prefer to stay onto that course and so the journalist have different possibilities, especially when the person of interest talking to is not reacting or is making some kind of masquerade as this is also about. Mostly all other versions come up with some kind of conspiracies. Are they true? For sure not, but they are good stories to be used for the opposite. Democratic values are not broken only from outside, but from inside and outside by telling lies and using the masquerade to tell the people to "preserve the democracy". History is a good learning factor!

Respect each other, having within mind that own freedom stops where freedom of others begin, especially the freedom for living and being handled without any harm. The basic rights for any being. When this cannot be guaranteed any longer, we have the red line crossing and the wrong-doing is happening. But this can be done from everyone, individuals or groups, whole nations included if someone wants to pronounce that also - besides personally I'd like to see no borders on this nice blue planet. But well? Another story at another time, perhaps never going to happen.

So more or less the rhetorical question: Why to use any kind of platform indicating to "socialize"? Why is there need to build some profile and help collecting data about own interests, preferences and hobbies? The answer quite simplified: Because people love to play with some digital "alter ego". Some mirror figuring, they can form and modify at any time again as they want. And what about older postings? Oh, better to delete that. You think this is going good for the future? When you have no further intention to look back at own failures, what do you think to learn from that? Sharing pictures and some texts and thoughts. Okay, and then what? The world is changing just because you or me doing some posting? Yes, this thread here alone is full with thoughts and discussions. So who am I to demand others not to use those platforms? Well, it is about the growing problems we will face in the near future: The global society on the move into a backlash, not into progression. You help others collect data about you instead of reflecting yourself, if you use free or unfree platforms. Help making profiles, help to categorize beings and be yourself into categories. In combination with capitalism we are confronted to do wrong: The on-going competition to be the one in the mass, to work not in a community, instead to search for more power and influence. And there is the point: So many people claim a shortened picture to criticize capitalism, but nevertheless this is wrong and very much reason of more bad things to come ... it also does not help stopping the essential problem: The lost of being believable as there is for sure a human being behind every profile, but no one can say if this is meant honest or just another part of the competition and marketing. And even that: Fascists making marketing for fascism and we talk about giving companies behind those platforms more responsibility? Come on, people: Better to power the unfree ones down for good, and question the handle of the free ones. Discussions are elemental, numbers of "like" for example not. That is no communication, it is just the part to encounter wrong parts being relevant. Is the number of people being in contact relevant? No. To learn and reflect is for sure, not on this way.

A forum is also a place to discuss, but do we need "endless scrolling" here? Do we need elements being reloaded and full with JavaScript? Also again: No. And we can discuss and go for a reflection, but that's another part being based onto the personal decision, when people are not confronted with intentional made time-consuming functionalities like "endless scrolling" for example.

What is the main point in this blog-like thread? is it thinking critically and keeping your integrity?

Just do yourself a favor: Don't be rude towards other systems and software. Yes, staying critical is one thing. But another to use slur-words. Is "Linux" (without GNU) better? Well, depends? It has problems, there are bugs and issues for sure. So don't try to make yourself just "better" because you are using "Linux" instead of others. Just don't make yourself seem "better" you are not using systemd or others. You can use for sure reasonable arguments, you can also point on issues about big frameworks. But just to point on others and stating that your choice is "better" is helping exactly where?

Helping others is about solidarity, to make clear WHY some choices can be more bad and not only they are in some way "better" or combined with your own ego making it "better". The world is not only rotating around you or me! Personal choices, but also reasonable and rational arguments for sure. And free software cannot exist in any environment focussed only onto money. Making "free soft- and hardware" better in any way? Give it more personality, hear people out and use rational arguments. And listen to each other as also building software is for sure NOT only your way when you want to work within a team. So you do yourself a favor for sure as you have a choice: Being completely egocentric only? Or try to open step by step? Sharing information and for sure the relevant information as there is no need for misguiding or conspiracies. We have science and we can have wisdom in combination with empathy and solidarity. We can choose how the rest is working.

One essential question drivins us all daily: Can we solve social problems with technical help? The answer is more or less just a plain simple No! And I have to admit: I have also my own problem with this answer, but ask yourself: Do you want to hand out essential parts of conversation and democratic discussions towards either individuals or groups? And is it correct that we are doing that? Not only speaking about making companies like Facebook (ah, sorry: Meta), Google (Alphabet) or others part of the justicial system and doing executive taks on their own, also speaking about the responsibility and pressure we bring people under that: One administrator for a whole instance within the so-called "Fediverse"? Come on, people: You can't be for sure serious. This person have to decide either some posting is fitting or some picture is not, some profile is violating rules or is even more onto fascist propaganda for example. Even though try out to speak with people on the street about fascism: You will see that there is no definite information and many don't even know more about. Going from this lack of information and knowledge in our society we think some individuals within the "Fediverse" can do that? Some companies should do that? For what? Don't get me wrong: This is not about the slur-definition of "freedom of speech".

This posting is about the essential question where we hand out decisions: And what is happening when we do that with companies? Ethics and moral are of no value for companies. That's for sure. Is it therefore correct we handout decisions to them and call platforms in some way "social"? Same for groups or individuals as we handout them decisions they cannot make, either because they have no historical knowledge about some happenings or they don't care for whatever reasoning. When we want to speak about freedom of speech, meaning that by definition also: We have to talk about responsibility. The questions I have to ask myself:

Can I write that?
Do I harm others or insult them?
How do I react on criticism?
Can I take responsibility for something I have shared?

Mostly this is all part of every posting and from my point of view: All platforms existing today are a failed concept under that perspective. Why should I share something on a platform I know the data is saved and taken from the own control? Why sharing impressions and perspectives, when there is no discussion? A discussion is elementary for the democratic course itself. And there are for sure points we should never discuss or even think about. But that is something which should part of our education, so where is the competence going forward with media for example? People share something only reaching their emotions, from any kind of blog without any kind of approval. That is for sure not any help and in the end we have filter-bubbles, keeping people within and no chance to come out. We need each other, so why do we go on with lies, greed and search for power? The price in the end will be too high. And why do we handout technical emancipation just that easy? Either some company or individuals and groups. No centralized or decentralized service can solve something we are all up to: Social responsibility for each other.
And yes: Part of this posting will for sure trigger some people now, but read careful again, please. I write about an education where people are told to think and discuss, learning where is the difference of a correct article and pure hatred-propaganda. To help each other, the concept of solidarity instead of reaching only the so-called next "level" as education has grown into some kind of highscore-board. But that's not helping the global society as we all can see the discourse is now damaged and most came up with this platforms I have mentioned, no matter of being free or not.

When we have that concept in mind: Many technical solutions should end only in one way, being powered down once and for all, that includes soft- and hardware as they are not free of responsibility. There is no neutral point within there also, otherwise free, libre software and culture would have never existed.
And surprise: Everything is connected. So you can for sure talk about free, libre soft- / hardware and try to show empathy for others, try to understand them and walk WITH them and not TALK ABOUT them. That would be a first good start: Ask for experiences of people in their living, in their own circumstances and not take their living as approval for YOUR OWN imagination or visions. Would be a great start, but you can also choose the other paths available. But sorry to say: Then you are part of the all common problem and not willing for now to help with the solution. And sorry, but when software is somewhat free and driven by thoughts of money, it will also become part of the problem sooner or later. Just takes longer and is a long-lasting illusion behind "open-source". Sounds nice for sure, but the outcome? For example Mastodon: They now go for "official applications on mobile devices". What is the wording of "official"? Are there no other projects doing that? For sure, but again: Decentralization is only another wording for "another form of authority". And where is YOUR authority? YOUR responsibility? MINE? OTHERS? Guess what: Not existing again. We need to change that.

Coreboot is quite a good and interesting project, Libreboot more or less the same. Besides that I personally state towards Libreboot that the last actions regarding the people taking part were not correct from Leah Rowe herself. But that all aside this posting should be not focussed onto the projects giving us all more possibilities for making hardware more "free". It is about those on-going discussions where to go for 100% free and libre hardware: First things first most people are not even aware that their hardware have many issues and problems taking away security and privacy. So we have first a complete problem with information and competence. Next we have a problem with growing complexity: How can I study even complex software like systemd with thousands line of code, still counting? And then how can this be part of the reality of people on the common ground, when they have nothing to do at all with soft- and hardware?

We should never forget that there are for sure different definitions of freedom for hard- and software. So what will also happen with free software when it is enforced instead people have the possibility to choose? The freedom of choice is absolute important for everyone, even when the choice results within a system providing less or no freedom at all. So here is discussion and exchange of reasonable arguments for security and why free, libre soft- and hardware is providing that, an absolute key.

It is time to get out of the on-going rotation within "what is more free, what is less free". For sure: Less free is nothing we need to bother. But we need to get the arguments on a correct base, so more people are able to understand them. Do you think any user is coming here and reading, thinking how to get the own workflow transported into free implementations while the known ones provide so much "nice promises"? Even when those "promises" are nothing more than illusions: They go for. But that's not a callout to simulate this also. That would be exactly the wrong point to start from and too many projects have already done that: Giving some kind of illusion they can do exactly the same. When you do the same things as unfree implementations, you will sooner or later also copy their flaws and failures when getting bigger.

From my point of view there is an absolute need to get more competence into the discussions: Getting away from "I have heard that" and "Somebody stated in one blog on the internet that" is nothing we should rely on for real. We should provide clear information. And yes: That means also getting more complex on time. But it should be more easy to start for the users for an understanding. Not by handling, by information and building competence. Cheap promises are nothing to rely on, clear information and competence within media and information should be the goal for technical emancipation. Meaning competence within soft- and hardware on a common ground, but also within what kind of information is prepared and what is just some kind of illusion and propaganda for whatever. Being believable should include that as absolute base and therefore discussions may help, but they should nevertheless stop rotating:

1. Minimum system is better than big environments
2. One software with one task instead too many of them
3. Free as in freedom but also freedom of choice for the users
4. Respect the common four freedoms including the new one not to install something you don't want

Being believable means to build your own system and understand it, but also being not enforced for something you don't want. So coming back to the start: First thing would be therefore having the user understand what Coreboot and Libreboot are, what Heads could be also as more additions. We discuss quite too often far ahead why something is less libre, many people never heard even from anything basic. And we wonder why there is less interest? Don't get that wrong: More interest means also more explanation incoming as any new user and interested person would ask to bring problems into as mentioned already. When getting "bigger" the danger grows to copy flaws and failures right ahead. So for Hyperbola this is no model at the moment, but in general for a thought for sure, dear readers.

And besides all of that also to add: You want hardware being 100% libre and free? Well, that won't happen soon and only if there are enough people being engaged and interested. And being interested means also being informed. Being informed needs to have a steady and good base instead "someone on some blog on the internet told that". We have those basics already, we have here places like Hyperbola being interested and focussed onto that. But what we need is clear information, no mystic papers going around, no further "Linux is free and safe". Every software has its own problems and 100% security is an illusion. Any copy of unfree platforms is marketing no one is needing. Any marketing is going to be sooner or later just a blunt lie (yes Purism, I mean you also). Focus onto information, focus onto emancipation, going step by step. That is only possible when we go with cooperation, empathy, solidarity and clear information.