The FSF is deceiving themselves and others by believing that just because a user no longer has the ability to update firmware on a device, that device is acually no longer running non-free code.
I really do not understand what is so hard to understand that from a free software POV there is no distinction between a chip loading a blob from system storage and a chip loading a blob from it's own tiny updatable flash. Both load a non-free blob. Neither fully respects your freedom. Drawing the line of Respects Your Freedom TM between those 2 is stupid and deceptive.
The users ability to update firmware is also the ability to revert firmware changes (to a old trusted even if closed source version) made by a malicious party. Users do not gain any freedom by giving up that ability. They loose freedom.
Being able to choose between MS Office and Lotus and Star Office and WPS Office (1) gives the user more freedom compared to being stuck with just MS Office (2), even if none of those respect your freedom. Being able to also choose Libre Office (3) is obviously better. But 1 is still obviously better than 2. The existance or absence of 3 does not change that.
With regards to firmware, the FSF believes that 2 is better than 1. That is stupid. How do you not see that?
It is a valid form of protest but Respects Your Freedom TM certified hardware does not truuuuly respect your freedom.
This is harmful because the goal should be hardware with FLOSS firmware with reproducible builds and with the option for the user to add their own signing keys, NOT unupdatable (by the user) closed source proprietary firmware.
>With regards to firmware, the FSF believes that 2 is better than 1. That is stupid. How do you not see that?
your comparison with MS is ridiculous. FSF software is open. do with their software what you like. FSF believes it should not help you with 1 or 2 due to its principles, and that is OK. why wouldnt it be? the source is there so help yourself if you really want something that they are not willing to help you with (even if they often do apparalently)
anyway this whole exchange is becoming tyring to me. a lot of these comments by people seem to be more about vaging a crusade against FSF than it is about discussing issues in good faith. its somewhat dissapointing, esspecially since i only just realised who marcan is. as far as i am concerned, i am completely unconvinced by marcan and co that FSF is a deceptive organisation and that their work is somehow bad for free software. quite the opposite, i am happy that they exist. i say this simply as a spectator. to me the following comment on their website just clearly shows that they are aware that products they certify run nonfree code:
"If and when free software becomes available for use on a certain secondary processor, we will expect certified products to adopt it within a reasonable period of time. This can be done in the next model of the product, if there is a new model within a reasonable period of time. If this is not done, we will eventually withdraw the certification"
(source given elsewhere in the exchanges)
i do not feel deceived in the slightest. if deception is happening it seems to be regarding FSF's position. take care
I really do not understand what is so hard to understand that from a free software POV there is no distinction between a chip loading a blob from system storage and a chip loading a blob from it's own tiny updatable flash. Both load a non-free blob. Neither fully respects your freedom. Drawing the line of Respects Your Freedom TM between those 2 is stupid and deceptive.
The users ability to update firmware is also the ability to revert firmware changes (to a old trusted even if closed source version) made by a malicious party. Users do not gain any freedom by giving up that ability. They loose freedom.
Being able to choose between MS Office and Lotus and Star Office and WPS Office (1) gives the user more freedom compared to being stuck with just MS Office (2), even if none of those respect your freedom. Being able to also choose Libre Office (3) is obviously better. But 1 is still obviously better than 2. The existance or absence of 3 does not change that.
With regards to firmware, the FSF believes that 2 is better than 1. That is stupid. How do you not see that?
It is a valid form of protest but Respects Your Freedom TM certified hardware does not truuuuly respect your freedom.
This is harmful because the goal should be hardware with FLOSS firmware with reproducible builds and with the option for the user to add their own signing keys, NOT unupdatable (by the user) closed source proprietary firmware.