Bonum Certa Men Certa

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

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)

Recent Techrights' Posts

A Dozen Observations About "UEFI 9/11" Deflections
What we are expected to see, tentatively
The World's Richest Ponzi Scheme (Faking Value Using Net Waste)
The higher they go the harder they fall
We Could Dual-Boot Back in the 1990s, Why Has This Become So Difficult?
And prone to breakage
Slopwatch: Google News is Still Promoting Many Fake Articles About "Linux", in Effect Rewarding Misinformation and Plagiarism
things continue to deteriorate
They Say That People Are Afraid of or Worried About "Hey Hi", But the Worriers Should be the Fools Who Invested in It
At the end of the day nobody should worry more than those who invested their money in this bubble
 
Gemini Links 11/09/2025: Playdate Console, Dichotomy between the Real and the Digital
Links for the day
The Microsoft AstroTurfing and Microsoft-Led Blame-Shifting Tactics Are Ahead of Us
Of course it has nothing to do with security, it's about control, i.e. them controlling everything
Celebrating Assassination is Bad Because It Legitimises Assassination of the People You Like, Too
Condoning or even celebrating political assassinations is bad optics (and taste)
Longtime Red Hat Staff: Maybe Just Disable 'Secure Boot'
A refreshing take from Adam Williamson
Being Conditioned to Accept Unreliable Computer Systems That Fail With Black Screen of Death (BSoD)
Welcome to 2025
New Series: The Coup Against GNU/Linux Has Begun
today, this year in particular, we shall also focus on Secure Boot, which is sold based on a lie and tortures many computer user
New Paper on "BYOVD, but in firmware. Signed UEFI shells, vulnerable modules offer new paths for Secure Boot bypasses."
One might say digital "security theatre"
Links 11/09/2025: Oracle Layoffs, Drunk Pilots in Japan Airlines, US-Korea Tensions Grow
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, September 10, 2025
IRC logs for Wednesday, September 10, 2025
Xubuntu Site Compromised
Let's hope it is not a security breach
Links 10/09/2025: Retaliation at Facebook and Microsoft Reveals Almost 100 Security Holes
Links for the day
Gemini Links 10/09/2025: Annihilation of Self, The Future Eaters, and Leaving Academia
Links for the day
Harassment evidence: franceinfo's Clara Lainé report on Ubisoft prosecution
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 10/09/2025: Microsoft Layoffs in "RTO" Clothing and Windows TCO, GitHub TCO
Links for the day
Blaming Everything on China
TikTok works for China. GAFAM works for fascists.
People Get Tired of "Hey Hi" (AI), Unlike the Subservient Money-Obsessed Media That Gets Paid to Pretend This Bubble Still Matters
"crash will be way bigger than dot.com burst in 90s. and that was Internet, actually transformative technology, not this expensive AI toy with direct dependency on the energy input which is not scalable"
Brett Wilson LLP Accepts That the Serial Strangler From Microsoft Filed a Case That Also Implicates My Wife (Everything is Connected)
They used to pretend that there were two separate cases
10 Reasons to Disable (or Enable) UEFI Secure Boot
Tomorrow the "trusted corporation" Microsoft will see a certificate expire
Gemini Links 10/09/2025: Hospital and Large Feeds
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, September 09, 2025
IRC logs for Tuesday, September 09, 2025
The Bluewashing of Red Hat is Being Completed, Many Staff Understand They'll be Made Redundant
Jim AllowHurst (Whitehurst) is meanwhile promoting Microsoft's agenda from within other companies
Throwing Away "Old" Computers (Mozilla and Other Climate Deniers)
Mozilla is not leftist
statCounter Sees GNU/Linux Exceeding 10% in Bulgaria This Month
What can Microsoft still do to stop GNU/Linux?
Dark Patterns
Microsoft saying "security" is like a Convicted Felon in the White House saying "law and order".
It's Almost Fall (Autumn)
To "Facebook prison" you are bound
Bruce Schneier About "Secure Boot"
Bruce Schneier isn't a fan of "Secure Boot"
Links 09/09/2025: Microsoft Mass Layoffs Again and "RTO" (Timed Like It Serves as a Distraction From the Mass Layoffs)
Links for the day
RMS Told Microsoft to Stop 'Secure Boot' (He Even Went There to Say That), But They Didn't Listen
Dr. Stallman (RMS) assumed that speaking to sociopaths would work
What Richard Stallman Told Me About 'Secure' Boot in 2012
"if the user doesn't control the keys, then it's a kind of shackle"
Those Who Helped Microsoft Weaponise "Secure Boot" Against GNU/Linux and BSDs Are Fleeing
Microsofters doing what they do best: they evade accountability
Simple is Better, Simplicity is Power
That is "the advantage of having commodity GNU/Linux systems," an associate notes
Much Ado About Nonsense
Microsoft Lunduke is still all dramatisation and sensationalism
Current Events in France
It needs to dump Microsoft and other GAFAM (US) giants, move to Free software
Further Media Cut-downs
media reporting about the media being cut
Links 09/09/2025: US-Korea Tensions and Meta Whistleblowers
Links for the day
Gemini Links 09/09/2025: Moon Eclipse and ROOPHLOCH Reports
Links for the day
Links 09/09/2025: “Torrents of Hate” and Political Crisis in France
Links for the day
Gemini Links 09/09/2025: "Dedigitizing" and Forgejo on FreeBSD
Links for the day
Google News (Not Just Google Search) Lets Itself by Gamed by One Slopfarm - to the Point Almost Half of "Linux" News is Bot-Produced Plagiarism (LLM Slop With Slop Images)
That says a lot about what Google thinks of quality, even in Google News
Bill Gates-Funded Media Inadvertently Refutes the Microsoft Lie That in 2025 Microsoft Had Just Two Waves of Layoffs
There were about 12 rounds of layoffs so far in 2025
Official SUSE Blog Still Uses LLM Slop (Bots) to Make Fake Articles (Marketing)
The company is all about sound bites
Companies Realise That Slop Doesn't Work as Advertised, Accordingly Dump It
"Hype dims as a country-wide survey of US corporations shows a sudden drop-off in AI use among firms with more than 250 employees."
Microsoft-Funded Lawsuits Against Critics of UEFI 'Secure Boot'
Remember that no company (or law firm) ever survives collaborations with Microsoft
From theregister.co.uk to theregister.com (US) to The Register MS (Run by Microsoft Operatives) and theregister.ai
The best way to break this racket (or cycle of hype and harm) is to break the chains of funding
Open Source Initiative (OSI) Culture of Censorship Necessitates More Speech
The OSI bans dissent or people who merely point out that the OSI is abusive
How to Reach Us Discreetly (Other Than Encrypted E-mail)
We're still managing to maintain a 100% source protection record. We soon turn 19.
LLMs Are Vastly Worse Than a Waste of Energy and the Externalities Are Huge
Worse than just higher power bills for everybody
LLMs Versus Search (Not Replacing Search But Engaging in DDoS Attacks Against Web Sites That Permit Searching)
The state of the Web isn't just bad; it's utterly terrible
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Monday, September 08, 2025
IRC logs for Monday, September 08, 2025
It's Only the Second Week of September and Already Two Waves of Layoffs at Microsoft, Slopfarms and Microsoft-Funded Sites Spin It as "AI Investments" Rather Than Commercial Failure
A very large third one expected next week
The UEFI 9/11 - Part IX - Shunning Old Computers (in 2023 the Certificate Was Updated/Overridden, Underlying Aim May Be Herding/Forcing People to Get TPM and Other 'Novel' Restrictions)
the "upgrade treadmill"