EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

09.25.19

Guest Article: Are We Still Removing Problems, or Removing Options?

Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux at 3:37 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

By figosdev

Windows options
Windows options

Summary: Monoculture in GNU/Linux as explained by figosdev

To avoid a misunderstanding, here are two things this article is NOT referring to:

1. I’m not referring to situations where there is too much extra trouble to create an option. In other words, if you switch to (or from) elogind to another method of removing a systemd dependency, I’m NOT saying that you need to make both methods an option. That would lead to a potentially infinite amount of maintenance when applied across everything.

(Don’t forget though, that a similar argument is made against providing alternatives to systemd. And maintaining alternatives to that is important.)

2. I’m also NOT saying that it is important to include “the option of having handcuffs.” This is not about supporting non-free software.

“When I do promote FSF-endorsed distros, I focus mostly on Hyperbola and Guix — Hyperbola is particularly important in that I feel Guix is more highly technical, and Hyperbola is necessary for the mainstream.”So with that out of the way, I think a lot of the fully-free FSF distros fall short when it comes to user freedom. I’m referring of course, to newer problems like init freedom. When I do promote FSF-endorsed distros, I focus mostly on Hyperbola and Guix — Hyperbola is particularly important in that I feel Guix is more highly technical, and Hyperbola is necessary for the mainstream.

So I support Hyperbola about as much as any FSF-approved distro. I’m still very happy that Hyperbola was accepted to the list (it’s a huge step forward for the FSF.)

My critique is based on something someone has told me, which I will treat as a mostly-hypothetical problem that I hope Hyperbola devs will either mitigate or avoid.

Essentially, it’s how we go about liberating the user. There are (at least) two ways we can make the user more free: We can become nannies, or we can assist the user in their freedom. I consider these two different approaches, and the difference is the point.

“There are (at least) two ways we can make the user more free: We can become nannies, or we can assist the user in their freedom.”If we choose to be nannies, we make all the decisions, we enforce those decisions, we might even (and this is the worst of it I think) choose to enforce those decisions in a way that there is little recourse for the user if “we” (developers) make a mistake in our judgment.

Here are some things I would like to have removed:

* Gnome: As much as possible. I guess we are stuck with GTK at least — I LOVE leafpad. I use IceWM as well. Year after year, it’s the best. Qt is good, but will there ever be a Qt IceWM or Leafpad?

* Pulseawful: Not enough is done in other distros to make this monstrosity optional.

* Systemd: Obviously. I refer to it as a weapon against free software.

“Some of these technologies are bad for the user and don’t even belong in the free software ecosystem.”And I know the blacklist Hyperbola uses — there are a lot more things.

Some of these technologies are bad for the user and don’t even belong in the free software ecosystem. If they are under a free license, they are free software at least. If they are designed deliberately to limit what else we can do, perhaps the term “Open Source Proprietary Software” (OSPS) applies. I am also ready to promote the term “Punix” for, a reduced-modularity, reduced-user-respecting corporate overthrow kind of design.

Some of these technologies make it really difficult to remove them once they are entrenched. Many of us already agree that this is a major problem.

Getting back to the critique, the longer the blacklist gets, the higher the odds that we will make “a mistake” in what we should remove. And as much as other people are making mistakes about what to include, mistakes about what to remove are just as important.

“Because there are more users than developers; we want the user to have as much say as possible.”It’s very important that we not become nannies — it goes against the entire spirit of free software in my opinion. I’ve spent a while now complaining that the distro concept itself is ripe for user abuse and limits user autonomy.

We should always have user autonomy as our goal — a goal that is higher than autonomy for developers only. Because there are more users than developers; we want the user to have as much say as possible. The freedom isn’t just for us, we are trying to bestow it on everybody.

That means the decisions aren’t just for us.

So I think it’s great that we provide services to remove harmful software. It’s all about how we do it, and what the user is left with in terms of options. Yes, our first priority should be to minimise the impact of (OSPS) software designed to take freedom away. But as we remove more and more we should always try to empower the user in making their own decisions, and not to simply be protective.

I’m not saying distros are evil — they can help a lot. There was a time when a distro was the only efficient way to provide freedom to the user. In an age of automation, we will find the distro is not the most liberating thing possible. We should transcend the distro, and consider options that are distro-agnostic when possible.

That’s a long road ahead, and in the meantime we should never take too much power for ourselves.

I’m in favour of the blacklist, I think it’s a great idea.

I’m not saying that everything on the blacklist should be hosted in the repos either. Perhaps some of it should be. I don’t know if it is — this is partly hypothetical, so the current status is partly irrelevant to what I’m saying.

“Defaults are defaults — the very nature of a default is that it is a choice made for everybody. That’s alright.”What I am saying is that freedom is more important than choice, but choice matters as well. We cannot support every possible example of choice, but we can keep some choices open. That should remain the default, except when we honestly can’t do everything.

We don’t have to make every decision for the user. Defaults are defaults — the very nature of a default is that it is a choice made for everybody. That’s alright.

The decisions made that go beyond defaults, we need to be careful not create another distro that tells the user what to do by doing everything for them, and denying them recourse against our own decisions.

We really have to trust the user more than that, and not devalue their judgment.

This doesn’t necessarily mean making systemd an option; this is about other things than systemd. Systemd itself is an endless growth of problems — plural.

But we definitely can’t treat every option we consider a problem, the way we treat systemd. We can’t enforce every choice of ours as though “we know best.” We have to leave distros more open than that, or we are ultimately making ourselves a slightly improved version of Lennart himself.

“What I do know, is that apart from Hyperbola, other distros are making mistakes like these.”There are no accusations here. This is a comment on concerns brought to me personally, that I have not yet verified. I hope those concerns are unfounded.

What I do know, is that apart from Hyperbola, other distros are making mistakes like these.

So my advice to the Hyperbola team, and my advice to the entire culture of free software is: Let’s do better than that. It’s not about perfection, it’s not about making “every single possible choice” an option.

It’s just about our attitude towards users, and how highly we think of our own decision making and value theirs.

Let’s abandon all the hubris that we can — not just for Hyperbola, but as a higher goal for all free software development: to create freedom wherever we are able as a higher goal, and make our job go beyond removing things we consider a threat.

Finally I will, as an example, put to you a matter related to linux-libre.

“Many of us don’t really care about non-free kernel modules, as we don’t think it’s good to load them in the first place.”Linux-libre has a bug related to its loading of non-free kernel modules.

Many of us don’t really care about non-free kernel modules, as we don’t think it’s good to load them in the first place.

But we don’t work to forbid people from loading them — not even in the FSF distros; meaning, we don’t create whitelists or use DRM-like measures to stop people from loading non-free code on their computers.

Linux-libre has had a bug for years, that prevents it from loading non-free modules.

I used the word “bug” because that’s the word the linux-libre developers use. It’s actually not a desired effect that linux-libre prevents loading non-free modules. It is an unwanted side-effect, according to the developers.

They have sought a fix for years, and consider it unfixable. But it is a shortcoming.

We don’t want to be in the business of creating shortcomings like that when they’re avoidable. Linux-libre has that shortcoming because of its goal of not “enticing the user to install non-free software.” It is related to an error that shows up during boot. In fixing that problem, linux-libre creates an unwanted side effect.

“Having this goal requires an entirely different attitude to one of a nanny. It requires the attitude of a devoted civil servant — devoted not to institutions, but to everyday people.”The point here, is that linux-libre does not have a goal of creating such side effects. They are not considered desirable and it may not be fixable for linux-libre, but when it is possible we should avoid such effects.

Having this goal requires an entirely different attitude to one of a nanny. It requires the attitude of a devoted civil servant — devoted not to institutions, but to everyday people.

To the Hyperbola team and anybody who takes up a similar list of goals, keep up the good work. I realise you are volunteers — this consists of a think piece stating opinions, there are no demands being made here.

Licence: Creative Commons CC0 1.0 (public domain)

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 28/2/2020: Qt 5.15 Beta, UBports/Unity8 Now Lomiri, GCC 8.4 Release Candidate

    Links for the day



  2. Richard Stallman is Now Eligible for the FSF's Award

    To counter the impression that FSF leadership distances itself from the FSF's founder it can publicly display a healthy and cordial relationship with GNU's chief



  3. People Who Oppose Stallman Can be Rude and They Pick on People Who Merely Defend Stallman's Role at FSF

    Earlier this week I wrote about aggressive reactions I receive for my articles; here's one of them (minutes old)



  4. 3 Founders Out in 5 Months

    With OSI's co-founders both out (not long after the start of this year), as well as the founder of the FSF, one must ask who's left to lead the fight against proprietary software injustices



  5. Inside the Free Software Foundation (FSF) - Part II: The Majority of the Board Supports Richard Stallman

    It seems to have become somewhat fashionable separating high-profile projects and institutions from their founders; at the FSF, thankfully (at least for now), the founder still has a foothold



  6. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, February 27, 2020

    IRC logs for Thursday, February 27, 2020



  7. EUIPO and EPO Celebrate Corruption in Croatia

    The EPO returns to its corrupt roots of the Battistelli era even in the form of photo ops



  8. Death of the UPC (Unitary Patent) Confirmed by the British Government

    The lies about the UPC are repeatedly being called out as UPC disarray is confirmed by the spokesperson of Prime Minister Boris Johnson



  9. A Month After One OSI Co-Founder Resigns in the Mailing Lists Over OSI's Attacks on Software Freedom the Other OSI Co-Founder Gets Kicked Out for Speaking About It

    The 'cancel culture' seems to be canceling people who speak about software freedom, under the guise of the real motivation being manners (when one lashes out at those who attack Free software and free speech)



  10. Links 27/2/2020: LibreOffice 6.4.1, Collabora Office for Phones and Latte Dock 0.9.9

    Links for the day



  11. The Linux Foundation is Deeply Committed to Diversity and Inclusiveness (as Long as You Have Perfect Vision and Use 'Big Browsers' That Spy)

    The Linux Foundation's message of inclusiveness refers only to a particular kind of inclusiveness



  12. Inside the Free Software Foundation (FSF) - Part I: Year Zero

    People behind the ousting of Richard Stallman (or 'leaders of the coup' as some call them) want a fresh start; but they aren't starting what most FSF supporters have been led to believe



  13. Alexandre Oliva on Diversity Hypocrites

    "Some of them purport to be for inclusion and diversity, but won't hesitate to make fun of someone's poorly-disguised handicap."



  14. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, February 26, 2020

    IRC logs for Wednesday, February 26, 2020



  15. Alexandre Oliva: Courage is Contagious

    Having a proposal rejected at a conference is nothing unusual, but the surrounding circumstances and the conflicting versions are.



  16. Links 26/2/2020: Cosmo Communicator 2-in-1, FSF Outlines Plans for Code Hosting

    Links for the day



  17. Reminder: At Linux Foundation in 2020 Three Board Members, Including the Vice Chair and Director at Large, Are Current or Past Microsoft Employees

    Sometimes the facts speak for themselves (or pictures speak louder than words)



  18. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, February 25, 2020

    IRC logs for Tuesday, February 25, 2020



  19. Links 25/2/2020: MakuluLinux LinDoz and Manjaro 19.0 Released

    Links for the day



  20. FSF's Interim Co-President Alexandre Oliva on FSF Communication Policies

    Surely I, being acting president and then half-acting president, must suck as a manager. I probably do indeed, but it's not so simple.



  21. The EU's EUIPO Will Later Today Help the EPO (Run by EUIPO's Former Chief) Promote Illegal Software Patents

    Propaganda terms such as "intellectual property rights" and meaningless concepts like "technical effect" are being used to promote so-called 'computer-implemented inventions' (software patents by another name)



  22. Growing Acceptance That There's No Future to the UPC System and the Unitary Patent

    There are growing pains and more signs that even key elements of Team UPC move on, accepting the demise of the UPC



  23. Emulating the Linux Foundation's Business Model (Selling Influence)

    LibrePlanet sponsors are presented with benefits of offering money to the event (or to the FSF)



  24. Guest Article: LibrePlanet Attendees Should Demand a Partial Refund

    What we do know is — that the FSF is no longer “Free as in Speech!”



  25. IRC Proceedings: Monday, February 24, 2020

    IRC logs for Monday, February 24, 2020



  26. An FSF That Rejects Its Founder Would Not Remain FSF As We Once Knew It

    It's important to keep the FSF focused on its goals; that won't be achieved by expelling those who insist on these goals



  27. Links 24/2/2020: Linux 5.6 RC3, Netrunner 20.01, Google Summer of Code 2020 Mentoring Organisations Announced

    Links for the day



  28. Alexandre Oliva's New Article About a Coup

    Some people try to tell me that the criticism I've got, inside the FSF and outside, since the Free Software Sept 11, are not about my being supportive of RMS, but about my making public statements referencing him at all.



  29. Debian Leadership Should Not be 'Shy' of Politics (and It's OK to Admit Palestinians Are Human Beings Too)

    The contemporary tendency to limit people's freedom of speech (e.g. permission to express political views) means that while people may find software freedom they will lose other essential freedoms



  30. New Series: Inside the Free Software Foundation (FSF)

    In the interest and motivation of exposing the true nature of things, Techrights will turn its attention to internal affairs at the higher echelons of the FSF, founded more than three and a half decades ago in MIT (where Stallman launched the GNU Project, developed the GNU Compiler Collection and a lot more foundational Free software)


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts