Re: [tlug] Debian rant

[宇井野 理男 <leo@example.com>]

(2010年09月18日 10:24), Sach Jobb wrote:
> I have to agree with Shawn though, I think
> the entire idiotology about what the definition of "free" is totally
> ridiculous and for the most part is simply wasting vast amounts of
> peoples' time. I also fail to see how it has (is?) improving the world
> in any way what-so-ever.

I'm no zealot, but if you're going to allow binary blobs as a matter of 
course, there is a real issue of where to draw the line.

For a USB device that requires firmware to operate, you're saying that 
while the device is programmable, users should make do with the 
interface you provide.

I'm certainly not going to be hacking USB device firmware any time soon, 
but there's almost certainly somebody around who does want to.

Say you accept that that's a reasonable compromise - well then, what 
about graphics cards? Nvidia's binary drivers provide the OpenGL API 
which allows me to use all the features of the graphics card. Is that 
acceptable? It means I can't port the drivers to a new OS, just like the 
USB device hacker can't tweak his device firmware to do new things.

That's why there's a "non-free" repo. (And no, it's not about price as 
you well know - I'm not free to kill people without legal consequences, 
but that doesn't mean I can do it if I pay money). Some people are happy 
to accept binary blobs, or restrictive licenses, in order to get work 
done. Others aren't. If you're going to ship something that gives users 
less flexibility than you have, the non-free repo is where it belongs. 
That way everybody is happy.


Leo