Start from the basics again



Summary: Richard Stallman's Four Freedoms (4 Freedoms, or freedoms 0..3) need something akin to clarifications or Amendments to the US Constitution in order to better address workarounds and loopholes that are growingly being exploited to reduce freedom and increase monopoly power

THE FOLLOWING informal principles for software freedom are ever more crucial in 2020, in light of growing threats of a different nature (which Stallman's 4 Freedoms mostly tackle, hardly/barely/slightly/marginally tackle or do not tackle at all):

1. All software should be possible to host locally (decentralisation and control)



2. All software should be bootable on any system without a signature (similar to the classic freedom to run, with UEFI 'secure boot' as well as TiVoization in mind as impediments)



3. Software must not be possible to censor (no single point of failure/breakage/removal)



4. There should be no discrimination against users of the software (not at a legal level; verbal condemnation is fine, that's what free speech is for)



5. Code should ideally conform to modularity and portability best practices/guidelines (not as monolithic as inter-dependent millions of lines of code)



6. Platform-specific extensions should be discouraged (unified and universal is better)

Surely there are many more, but let this be a start. The freedoms as put forth 4 decades ago are somewhat outdated due to industry trends such as "clown computing" and increased lock-down, not to mention software patents.

"Fighting yesterday's battles as if we're still in the 1980s is almost guaranteed defeat."This post is by no means 'having a go' at RMS, GNU or the FSF; the goal is to help all three at least think about what steps can re-zoom on the original vision of the movement. Fighting yesterday's battles as if we're still in the 1980s is almost guaranteed defeat. ⬆