[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: purism why does fsf and libreboot embrace a misleading company?

From: a
Subject: Re: purism why does fsf and libreboot embrace a misleading company?
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 22:33:42 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0

My post is about getting official comments from
libreplanet and fsf. Of course anybody can
reply, but I already know how people attempt
to defend purism's behavior.

On 3/11/20 8:48 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> If I understand you correctly, you believe: Purism marketing talks about
> software freedom and the goal of RYF 100% free hardware, but they don't
> deliver to that level, and they minimize or hide the details. You worry
> that people buy Purism products believing they are getting more complete
> freedom than they actually receive. You doubt Purism's good faith, and
> because you feel FSF should be skeptical rather than gracious about
> these concerns, FSF is making a mistake by giving Purism a platform or
> acknowledgment (at least without some explicit qualifiers from FSF about
> these concerns). Is that right?


> I agree with you that marketing claims should not mislead people about
> the facts of products. Stating a goal of reaching some standard is not
> the same as already being there, and the difference should be plain and
> transparent.


> I don't find your jump to speculating about bad faith at all warranted.
> There's no evidence that FSF is corrupted in any way around this. And
> there's inadequate (though perhaps non-zero) evidence that Purism has
> any bad faith.

educate yourself.

About purism they claimed about their notebooks that
there was a real possibility that intel would publish
the software in question. Everybody in the field
know, intel does not publish such
pieces of source software.

purism claimed reverse engineering was an option. The
software in question is signed. Name a cryptographer who will
agree, that breaking the cryptography is an option?

As I said, one email to libreboot would have been enough.
Also after people told purism that their claims were
unfounded, purism did not rectify their websites.

It is swindle if you deceive people in order to gain

About fsf.
fsf is known to be strict and harsh in matters of free
software. It is a mystery why fsf has acted that amateurishly
about purism. That is why I ask, has fsf received money
or hardware from purism? Are there people who at the
same time represent both fsf and purism?

> In general, you're more likely to learn and also to get others to listen
> when you express concerns from a position of genuine curiosity without
> hints of accusations and other attacks.

You do realize I have stated arguments? You have not. A
pattern I have noticed from other defenders of purism.

fsf has been informed by me and maybe others, how
purism has acted. It makes fsf an accessory in
purism's fraud. fsf failure on this matter results in loss of
credibility among those who are able to look behind
purism's deceptions.

> It can also help to try to create a *strong-man* argument. Generate the
> strongest argument you can for a defense of Purism and FSF, and then see
> if that holds up to scrutiny. That's much more insightful than
> generating weak or straw-man arguments or speculative suspicions.

Start rebut my arguments.

Attachment: pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

reply via email to

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