From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8F513858CDA for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2023 06:31:51 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org D8F513858CDA Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gnu.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gnu.org Received: from linux-libre.fsfla.org ([2001:470:142:5::54] helo=free.home) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qcgeC-0004MY-Lm; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 02:31:49 -0400 Received: from livre (livre.home [172.31.160.2]) by free.home (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 3836VTlG065294 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 3 Sep 2023 03:31:29 -0300 From: Alexandre Oliva To: Paul Eggert Cc: Joseph Myers , "Carlos O'Donell" , "Ryan S. Arnold" , Maxim Kuvyrkov , Jakub Jelinek , Andreas Schwab , libc-alpha Subject: Re: [Action Required] glibc decision to use CTI services. Organization: Free thinker, not speaking for the GNU Project References: <15af1715-3530-7c29-7595-5abe48c18e8b@cs.ucla.edu> Errors-To: aoliva@lxoliva.fsfla.org Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2023 03:31:29 -0300 In-Reply-To: <15af1715-3530-7c29-7595-5abe48c18e8b@cs.ucla.edu> (Paul Eggert's message of "Thu, 31 Aug 2023 12:59:11 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Aug 31, 2023, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 2023-08-30 10:31, Joseph Myers wrote: >> I believe the LF has already agreed to implement the hosting entirely with >> free software. > Where is this agreement written down? To the best of my knowledge, it just isn't. It's the sort of commitment that's not worth the paper it's written on. Besides, LF is not really about Free Software, and never has been. They might as well prefer to refer to it with such weasel words as Open Source Software, that when it comes to the software mean pretty much the same, but that shift the focus and motivations away from the freedom that software users deserve. One of the consequences of this shift is that people who swallow their terms are more prone to make mistakes and forget that when doing your computing through third-party services, the software that the third-party uses, if free, respects the service *provider*'s freedom, not the service *users*' freedom, and the users end up even more helpless than in the case of proprietary software. That's how SaaSS providers have managed to fool some Free Software-caring people time and again, making them believe that it's enough for the software to respect someone else's freedom. Multiple businesses have engaged in lock in through SaaSS, and we need to make sure we avoid such traps. And then, even if there was a written agreement, the other relevant question is who'd enforce it. Just like a strong copyleft without enforcement is little different from de-facto optional compliance, LF's making an alleged commitment to a group without any leverage or means for enforcement is little different from the group's having begging rights. That's not a position I want us to be in. It's not like the LF has a long history of respecting or caring for software freedom that could make their unwritten allegation more trustworthy. The kernel Linux, that they're named after, contains binary blobs, after all. Their board is packed with companies who have long disregarded provisions of the GNU GPL, even when it comes to Linux. If the LF were at a bank trying to borrow some money, these factors would demand the bank to require *more* assurance from the borrower, not less, than from a random borrower without such a history of not living up to commitments to others. We should be no less careful than this hypothetical bank in protecting our collective assets, particularly our freedom. -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/ Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Think Assange & Stallman. The empires strike back