Re: FSF not related to hardware

[Jacob Hrbek]

> You are not well defined. It is discussion that goes on, you have not
brought good arguments friend. -- Louis

You are dismissing all arguments that i've provided and refuse to take
them seriously.
I clearly said that Hardware files meaning schematics, gerber files,
etc.. yet you keep insisting on writting manuals which development would
be in direct violation of a copyright while seemingly not understanding
how the fabrication works..

In short to fabricate e.g. notebook's motherboard you need gerber files
so that the fabricator knows how to wire the connections together and
for the assembler to put the components where they are supposed to be.

Writting manuals and especially manuals of proprietary hardware or any
other reverse-engineering of proprietary hardware is not helping anyone.

You are also constantly dismissing my criticism without taking it
seriously to claim conflict of interest where there is none and confuse
this activism for Hardware Fre
edom as "begging for money"..

So to summarize it:

RMS Inadvertently created Free Hardware Movement as it's a branch of
Free Software Development with FSF being in the position of authority on
the subject.

People are using GPLv3 which is a license designed to protect
user-freedom where in this usecase it fails to do as evident by the
provided example with RepRap project and people forking their design and
making it proprietary so i've proposed to follow up on their suggestion
and create GPLv4 that includes Hardware Freedom and i m happy to submit
a proposal for it.

By promoting proprietary hardware without acknowledging Free Hardware
Designs the FSF harms Free Hardware developers, I argue that ryf should
add additional certification that is directly only to a hardware for
that reason and that h-node should add additional attribute to clarify
Hardware Freedom Rating so that people are aware about those
alternatives and are not afraid to use them.

Wi
thout such certification i disagree that "Respect Your Freedom"
deserves it's name and should be renamed to "Respects Software Freedom"
to avoid passivly making Free Hardware insignificant.

FSF should highlight the problems with the usage of proprietary hardware
and actively promote Free Hardware to make it mainstream which benefits
us all.

And since FSF actively endorses and promotes Purism they should hold
them accountable if their CEO says that they will release the hardware
files and decade later the files are still not provided and if they fail
to do so or if they fail to establish transparency then FSF should
withdraw their endorsements.

As Leah Rowe said Schematics to Proprietary Hardware are also important
for projects like Libre Bootloaders, i personally don't support those
schematics but i recognize the importance of them for Free Software
development.

I agree with RMS that we should figure out an official term for Free
Hardware and set of
rules for it so that the term is well defined and
enables further activism.

Why can't we do this and make Hardware Freedom significantly more
sustainable?

On 2/1/22 10:12, Jean Louis wrote:
> You are not well defined. It is discussion that goes on, you have not
> brought good arguments friend.

--
Jacob Hrbek, In support of ukraine sovereignty #supportUkraine

publickey - kreyren@rixotstudio.cz - 1677db82.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature