[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[libreplanet-discuss] Education, Reproducibility and Computer Users' Fre

From: NIIBE Yutaka
Subject: [libreplanet-discuss] Education, Reproducibility and Computer Users' Freedom
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:39:24 +0900
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.6.0


Celebrating FSF30, I consider this.  It would be good if I could
listen your opinions.


Last month, we had a monthly meeting at FSIJ (Free Software Initiative
of Japan) for RTOS named Chopstx.  The topic was its support of
Raspberry Pi 2, which was proposed by Kaz Kojima.  Listening his
presentation, I realized that the board should be considered a
proprietary platform from the view point of lower-level software; It
seems that the hardware information is difficult to access (if any),
and the idea is like: kernel and/or drivers should be written and
distributed under control of hardware vendor.  We concluded that: if
it is user-space programming hands-on, it would be OK to use the board
in some specific situation, but we should inform this situation to
participants.  Now, I'm seeking another board of multi-core Cortex-A7
to merge Kaz's work to my repository.


Guideline for technology hands-on and something like free software
directory for educational materials, which care Reproducibility and
Computer Users' Freedom


My concern is that access to technology is getting easier, but I think
that there is a practice in the industry to put a trap towards
proprietary technology/software/business under the name of

For software, we have the free software definition, free licenses like
GNU GPL, free software directory, free system distribution guidelines,
etc., and a pile of free software itself.  That's great achievement
of FSF.

On top of this great achievement, I think it's good to encourage to
run free technology hands-on with free educational materials (free, as
in freedom, from the view point of Computer Users' Freedom, and
Reproducibility by third party, no bound to specific proprietary
technology/software/business).  Or, it is very important to inform
about computer users' freedom, to people who only have technical

Achieving 100% freedom of all levels would be difficult.  Say, I don't
have capability to reproduce CPU by myself, even if all technical
information were available.  I think that it is OK for some GNU
Operating System hands-on to assume using PC (with somewhat old CPU).
If we use newer CPU, it's better to address vendor's microcode update.

My point is that it is fair to disclose scope of freedom and

Well, this is just an idea, an immature idea.  I'll join FSF30
Birthday Party.  Please say hello when you recognize me there.

Happy FSF30 and Happy Hacking,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]