Please tell your friends about federated social media site that speaks several fediverse protocols thus serving as a hub uniting them, hubzilla.eskimo.com, also check out friendica.eskimo.com, federated
macroblogging social media site, mastodon.eskimo.com a federated microblogging site, and yacy.eskimo.com an uncensored federated search engine. All Free!
@SuperDicq Merely compiling it is unreasonable on all freedom-respecting computers due to the level of bloat.
It optimizes worse than GCC, but still takes far longer to compile than GCC, which is reason enough not to compile it.
Gentoo changed the grouping of the llvm package, thus bypassing existing masks and I checked how my update after 2 years was going and I found that LLVM was several hours into compiling - I C-c'd so fast.
The only reason LLVM exists is because GCC license sucks, creating a lack of interest to support certain architectures used by companies.
For example, both AMD (GCN,r600) and Nvidia (NVPTX) do their own LLVM backends without LLVM team whereas GCC would require their own consent to do that
LLVM only exists because GCC uses a great license that doesn't give you the power to take the users freedom (was GPLv2-or-later-with-GCC-exception, now GPLv3-or-later-with-GCC-exception).
Both AMD and Nvidia have permission to write their own GCC backends without needing to ask the GCC team and also have permission to distribute such without asking for permission either - they just are not granted the power to take the users freedom by the license.
AMD and Nvidia wanted to take the freedom of the users and unfortunately the LLVM developers have intentionally granted them the power to take it via proprietary versions of GCC and they have done so.
If only LLVM did not exist, there's a chance that such injustice would not have occurred - as AMD and Nvidia would have had the choice between writing their own compiler, licensing a proprietary one (almost all are garbage), or writing a GCC extension that implements it and releasing it under a free license - I suspect the latter would have occurred.
LLVM uses the Apache 2.0 license, which is a non-copyleft license. It is free software, but using something like the GPLv3 would be much better for this use. As it disallows people from making proprietary versions of LLVM.
taking away others' freedom is not freedom, it's power over others, and this one isn't a power that anyone needs or should have.
a license that gives you back the freedom you deserve that copyright law took away, without giving you power to abuse others is a great license
a license that gives you that freedom, while also giving you power to abuse others, is an ethically acceptable license, but it depends on intermediaries' consciences for users to get the freedom everyone deserves
@lxo @SuperDicq I truly don't disagree with most free software licenses, but GPL-3 have a very annoying clause forcing use exclusively for GPL-3 compatible projects. Acts like a virus in terms of licensing.
In other hand, licenses like BSD allow you to use the software in any way possible as long you give proper recognition to the authors.
This is why most companies use BSD and Apache licenses on everything, and that's why those software tend to have better widespread support then GNU-like.
A widespread usage of any FOSS software or library seems to me far more important than restricting usage to users and business overall. That's why PostgreSQL is the mainstream database nowadays. That's why MariaDB and Linux kernel uses GPLv2 and not GPLv3. They would die if they move to v3.
the GPL requires each entire work to be distributed under it, indeed, (aside from explicit compatibility with AGPL), but there's no forcing involved: nobody is forced to use (as in modify, adapt) software that comes under these conditions, nor is anybody forced to choose this license. the misconception is that the GPL doesn't stop you from doing anything whatsoever, not to the software, not even to other users of the software. it's copyright that does. the GPL merely refrains from granting powers that copyright law reserves to copyright holders, so copyright prohibitions remains in effect.
but the GPL is not viral, that's another misconception. a virus can pass from one individual to another, but the GPL doesn't do that: the GPL is only passed on to derivative works: the freedom for users is a gift that's inherited by the program's descendents.
the reason companies prefer the lax permissive licenses is that they grant the companies power to abuse their downstream users. that's no surprise for exploitative businesses, but that doesn't make the licenses good for anyone else.
I agree with you that restricting usage is undesirable, and that's exactly why I prefer copyleft licenses like the GPL: with lax permissive licenses, intermediaries gain power to restrict usage and carry out the very harm you claim to be concerned about. preempting that by not granting that power avoids the problem.
besides, the GPL doesn't stop you from doing whatever you wish with the program, it just doesn't allow you to do whatever you wish unto downstream users of the program. do you see the difference?
you'll need to elaborate further on the differences you perceive between GPLv2 and GPLv3 for your apparent argument about Linux to be as much as checked on correctness. AFAICT, it's based on false premises and doesn't follow at all. the reasons Linux stayed with GPLv2 had to do with having painted itself in a relicensing corner, more than anything else, but its main sponsors through the LF were mainly concerned with having to share keys and installation instructions for firmware bundled with Linux. Linux still contains such nonfree components under obnoxious licenses to this day, despite being widely regarded as licensed under the GPLv2.
for userland projects that don't interface with more than general-purpose hardware and doesn't carry blobs for specific devices, such as MariaDB, the differences between GPLv2 and GPLv3 are really minor are in details. I'm very curious about what it is that would get MariaDB in trouble should it change the license, but it seems as nonsensical as claiming it would become as successful as PostgreSQL if it switched to a lax permissive license.
@lxo @SuperDicq A correction to your statement, Linux as a fully Open-Source project. They have blob requirements at runtime under linux-firmware repo which is non-free.
Some kernel modules will work with reduced features like 2D graphics only, Wifi under 2.4Ghz only, etc. Some others will do nothing.
Under my perception, I have a similar vision than Linus Torvalds about OpenSource. Free to disagree with me, that's okay.
You have the software, you should have the right to use it as you wish, even if that means using non-free firmware (because of features using annoying patents from the IP warlords).
We can talk about an ideal world where everything is FOSS, and this is a good direction, but limiting support to people because non-free drivers or restrictive licenses is very user unfriendly... like those years with "ndiswrapper", being the main annoyance to anyone who tried to move out from Windows/OSX.
fact-checking: binary blobs remain, and keep getting added to Linux. there's a new one in the pipeline for 6.16. disgusting as this is, I have to find them, because I maintain a blob-free version of the kernel Linux.
I have no objections to allowing users to make their self-defeating choices. my objection is to imposing those losers' choices on people, and to fooling users that pursue freedom by offering them something that's proprietary.
misrepresenting nonfree software as free is not conducive towards this ideal world, it's rather a means to deny people the pursuit of that world. you may be right that limiting support is unfriendly, but you shouldn't misrepresent who's being unfriendly in that picture: is it that who's setting things up to control users by chaining them, or is it that who's trying to protect them from being chained? is the unfriendly person that who tells the abused person not to go back to the abuser's home?
@lxo @SuperDicq It is, but what's your option then?
Do you honestly think companies will submit to Linux and release stuff without blobs? Of course not.
The main reason companies do binary blobs is because patents involved. Sometimes from their side, sometimes legal obligations from 3rd parties. Innovation is unlikely free of patents.
The alternative basically means the same output from any GNU Linux distro, mostly nerds who use old laptops modified by Leah Rowe with no WiFi or some old ath9k.
when it comes to corporations with publicly-traded stocks, it depends significantly on the size of the market they'd be giving up
as long as people tolerate abuse, and abuse is conducive to their increase of profits, they will do that
when it gets to a point in which lots of people can't stand the abuse and, more importantly, start rejecting enshittified products for real, a market opportunity arises for those who respect users. that's one way for consumers to drive the market towards respecting freedom, because ultimately what the suppliers are interested in are the profits. I acknowledge that it's one of those tricky collective action issues, but it's one that may emerge out of consumers' acting intelligently on their own interest
another way to go about it is by regulation. if regulators demand respect for users, suppliers may scream, but will eventually comply (or buy the regulators' heads, the cynic in me points out 😉
blobs due to patents are a convenient excuse, but it's a lie. reverse engineering is not that hard, and it would uncover patent infringements, if market leaders didn't have cross-licensing agreements among them. the roadblock for reverse engineering is that regulations prohibit using the results of reverse engineering in cases that would make them interesting and useful
@SuperDicq @lxo I don't disagree with your statement, but that is unrealistic into the 99.9% of people.
I'm not saying you are wrong with your goals honestly speaking, but most people are OK with binary blobs as long they don't sniff your files or send data elsewhere.
So far, the only dangerous active threat is the Intel MEI/AMT or AMD PSP, which are known to potentially use people hardware without consent. Every other single piece of hardware can be successfully tracked in case they do nasty stuff.
Also, I do also understand the binary blob creates some programmed obsolescence as community can't effectively fix bugs, but some can be fixed from the software layer (at expense of performance)
the larger freedom problem in blob updates is that they're a vector for enshittification, inasmuchas they enable suppliers to push "security" updates onto users bundled with enshittifying features. see fsfla.org/~lxoliva/#Unshittify
but the problem is how they attack our freedom. a partner that "behaves nicely" as long as you "behave", but that prevents you from learning, developing, growing, helping and getting help from your community is an abusive partner. a software supplier that offers software that does just what you expect, but that won't allow you to make changes if you so wish, with or without help from your community, is analogously an abusive supplier
As the Labour leadership tries to shut down debate over the nature of racism, Kevin Ovenden looks at how ruling classes have long sought absolve themselves from blame
The Canadian state in the 1970s faced two insurgencies that seriously threaten…
seriously considering learning taiwanese hokkien so i can understand enno cheng songs, but i fear i'll just scramble my brain more if i add 25% fluency in another language to my internal monologue
@onehushhush Kinda sorta, more there's a lot of foreign terms and phrases mixed in, rather than entire sentences
My relationship to the concept of language is pretty fluid cause like, languages are just various sounds mapped to the same repeating ideas anyway, don't think it matters strongly which sounds I choose but that does cause non-zero friction at times when I start speaking my thoughts
We risk another summer of far-right pogroms whipped up by the establishment and the right, unless the labour movement comprehensively organises to stop it, argues John Westmoreland
The horrific events in Epping may well be repeated across the UK…
There has been a huge shift in the propaganda struggle over Palestine this week, writes Kevin Crane
Since the end of May, many have said that Israel was starting to lose the propaganda war.
Support the show using crypto: https://nicholasjfuentes.com/donate Donate to the America First Foundation: https://americafirstfoundation.org/donate Merch: https://fuentes.store Follow Nicholas J. Fue
It’s been the kind of day where it’s hard enough to keep up with all of the news at the intersection of law and politics, let alone figure out what it means.
"Author: Research and DestroyTitle: HIC NIHIL, HIC SALTA!Subtitle: (a critique of Bartlebyism)Date: July 29, 2015Source: researchanddestroy.wordpress.c… [We offer up to our comrades the following critique of the nihilist turn in communist and anarchist thought, in part because we find some of its appeal
[We offer up to our comrades the following critique of the nihilist turn in communist and anarchist thought, in part because we find some of its appeal mystifying and some of its appeal understanda…
Absolutely kicking myself for resisting antidepressants for so long. I definitely lucked out with this one, side effects have been minimal and effect effects have been quick and very noticeable. All those years in bed I could’ve avoided… all those things I could’ve actually done… I should’ve done this in 2008…
It's always a roof the dice, you could've ended up with a really nasty one. I don't blame you for being uneasy. I put it off for many years myself, and had mixed results.
When one finally actually doeswork it's NICE, enjoy it!
@violetmadder yeah I recognize that I really lucked out with this one, especially because if I had felt shitty on it I probably would’ve not tried again! I hope you found something that worked for you, meds or not!
“It’s not just the tailpipe y’all,” joked one Electrek commenter, alluding to the black discolorations on alloy wheels visible proof of a less infamous city pollutant: brake dust. For d…
FRIGERI Pietro dit BASTON, cordonnier, anarchiste italien, réfugié à Londres, Paris, Marseille. anarchiv.wordpress.com/2025/07…
"Ministère de l’Intérieur Police des chemins de fer Commissaire spécial d’Annemasse Haute-Savoie N° 489 Anarchistes FRIGERI Pietro dit BASTON Annemasse, …Lire la suite →"
Ministère de l’Intérieur Police des chemins de fer Commissaire spécial d’Annemasse Haute-Savoie N° 489 Anarchistes FRIGERI Pietro dit BASTON Annemasse, le 20 avril 1892 Rapport On signale la présen…
Columbia University (and others) allegedly discriminated against Jewish students by not shutting down protests of the genocide against Palestinians by Jews. It's bullshit!
when you look at the google maps street viee of ghana it looks ok. not wealthy but not like a complete trash heap either. a fair amount of farmland and green, and nice beaches
i can't think of anywhere in africa i would actually want to go, except maybe egypt to see the pyramids. and that strange formation that looks like the lost city of atlantis
Money talks, and Columbia University finally admitted that on Wednesday, after a stunning settlement with the Trump administration was announced. As...
An Iranian Navy helicopter intercepts US destroyer DDG Fitzgerald in the Sea of Oman, warning it to stay clear of Tehran-monitored waters. Backed by Iranian air defense, the vessel was forced to retreat.
connected into my desktop from work reboot because it's having issues can't reconnect, VPN is down manually open the RDP port on my router and connect directly VPN won't start until i tell microsoft i don't want to use edge
The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza announced on Tuesday the suspension of several health facilities’ services, as a result of the Israeli occupation’s insistence on preventing the World Health Organization from bringing fuel into hospitals i
Trust in the US is eroding. The question isn’t if the dollar will lose supremacy – it’s when.
As global trust in Washington’s stewardship of the international financial order declines, the long-predicted transition to a multi-polar monetary world may finally be close.
America First Show with Nick Fuentes is live on Rumble covering the WSJ story that Trump is 100% in the files, Israel’s covert war against Iran, and much more!
Send a superchat: https://entropystream.live/nickjfuentes Support the show using crypto: https://nicholasjfuentes.com/donate Donate to the America First Foundation: https://americafirstfoundation.org/
"PDFs: A3 | Tabloid These pages address the excesses of repression in the Bavarian kingdom and attempt to view the repressive strikes in the context of the broader state militarization taking place. Furthermore, this publication also touches upon the history of censorship in the BRD, the spectre of “eco-anarchism” and sabotage, what actually sucks about … Continue reading Hetzlumpen →"
Wanted war criminal #Netanyahu's interview on the #MAGA friendly "Full Send" podcast by the "Nelk Boys" backfired. Spectacularly.
The backlash included comparisons of Netanyahu to #Hitler and accusations of war crimes. Hosts Kyle Forgeard and Aaron Steinberg faced heavy backlash, admitting they should have been tougher or avoided the interview entirely. This farce, which most Israeli media ignored, exposes a total failure of #Israel's narrative among U.S. youth, who increasingly view Netanyahu as committing daily crimes against humanity in #Gaza.
"סופת החרא" שספג נתניהו אחרי הראיון שהעניק לאחד הפודקאסטים הפופולריים בקרב צעירים טראמפיסטים, מעידה על עוצמת הפגיעה בתדמיתה של ישראל בעקבות ההרג העצום והמתמשך, ההרעבה והרס ברצועת עזה • "אתם הנחתם לפושע מלחמה לדבר בחופשיות במשך שעה מול המעריצים שלכם.
In today’s competitive construction industry, selecting the right equipment is critical to achieving efficiency, safety, and profitability. Among the many choices available, concrete pumps have become increasingly popular for projects of varying sizes. From small residential builds to larger commercial or infrastructure developments, the use of concrete pumps can have a significant impact on return on investment (ROI). This article explores which construction scenarios benefit most from concrete pumps(venta de bomba de concreto) and whether the ROI justifies the investment.
Understanding the Versatility of Concrete Pumps
Concrete pumps come in various types, including the concrete mixer pump and the concrete trailer pump(bomba estatica hormigon). Each type offers unique advantages that make them suitable for specific construction scenarios. Whether working in remote areas, urban settings, or complex terrain, these machines help streamline concrete placement by reducing manual labor and time.
For residential projects, especially those with limited site access, a concrete trailer pump can be easily transported and set up in tight spaces. On the other hand, a concrete mixer pump, which integrates mixing and pumping functions, is ideal for small to medium-sized construction projects, enabling on-site production and continuous pouring.
Scenarios Where Concrete Pumps Excel
1. Urban Construction with Restricted Access
In densely populated urban areas, space constraints can make traditional concrete pouring methods inefficient and time-consuming. Concrete pumps solve this problem by transporting concrete vertically or horizontally through pipelines. This capability is especially useful when building multi-story structures, underground parking lots, or basements.
2. Mountainous and Remote Project Locations
For construction projects in mountainous regions or remote rural areas, logistics and access can be a challenge. Using a concrete pump simplifies concrete delivery, especially when paired with a mobile batching system. The pump can operate on uneven terrain and deliver precise amounts of concrete to hard-to-reach areas, reducing the need for manual transport and boosting productivity.
3. Medium-Scale Infrastructure Developments
Projects like bridges, tunnels, and small dams fall into the medium-scale category where consistent concrete flow is crucial. Concrete pumps ensure uniform distribution without cold joints, improving structural quality. This level of performance is particularly achievable with a high-efficiency concrete mixer pump(bomba hormigonera), which combines the batching and pumping into one seamless process.
Comparing ROI: Concrete Pump vs. Traditional Pouring
Investing in a concrete pump for sale may seem costly initially, but the long-term ROI can be considerable. Traditional pouring methods often require more labor, longer timeframes, and higher operational costs. In contrast, concrete pumps improve site productivity, reduce waste, and minimize labor costs by automating the delivery process.
For example, one small-to-mid-size project can benefit from saving days of labor, avoiding mixer truck delays, and ensuring continuous operation even with variable weather conditions. This operational advantage directly translates into financial gains, reducing the overall construction schedule and allowing contractors to take on more projects within the same timeframe.
Factors That Influence ROI Differences
1. Equipment Lifespan and Maintenance
Concrete pumps are designed for durability and extended service life. Regular maintenance can keep them running efficiently for many years. When compared with the repetitive costs of renting or outsourcing concrete delivery, owning a pump can yield better ROI within just a few projects.
2. Local Labor and Material Costs
In countries like Peru or Chile, where construction labor costs are variable and remote project locations are common, the use of a concrete pump significantly reduces dependence on manual handling. This not only improves safety but also enhances ROI through cost efficiency.
3. Project Frequency and Scale
For contractors handling frequent or large-scale builds, the savings multiply. The more a concrete pump is used, the faster it pays for itself. Therefore, contractors who work regularly in rural or high-volume environments are likely to see a larger ROI difference compared to occasional users.
Conclusion: Is the ROI Difference Significant?
Yes, the ROI difference between using a concrete pump and relying on manual or traditional methods can be substantial. When evaluating a concrete pump for sale, contractors should consider not just the initial investment but also the potential time savings, labor reduction, and increased project throughput. Whether you choose a concrete mixer pump for smaller sites or a concrete trailer pump for versatility and mobility, the long-term benefits often outweigh the costs.
Ultimately, understanding the project environment, operational needs, and cost structures will help you determine if a concrete pump is the right solution for maximizing ROI in your construction scenarios.
As intense scrutiny falls on Trump’s links to Epstein, newly declassified Russiagate documents allege Obama’s role in fabricating interference claims ,but
Die digitale Gesellschaft, FSFE Berlin, KDE eco und Bits&Bäume laden ein zur endof10 install Party auf der @cbase!💻 Alte Kiste? Neues Leben! 🐧 Bring deinen alten Laptop mit – wir verpassen ihm ein frisches, freies Linux und machen ihn wieder flott! 🌱 📅 Termine: 19.07.2025 & 09.08.2025 🕑 Jeweils um 14:00 Uhr 📍 Alle Infos: www.endof10.org/de/ & www.c-base.org ‼️ Wichtig: Bitte mach vorher ein Backup deiner Daten (z.B. auf USB-Stick oder externen Festplatte). Wir freuen uns auf dich! 🙌
Those that can't grasp the concept of what's happening, nicely illustrated here, nor see the irony & horror of the words being used by #media and others... I mean, the remaining doctors are now suffering from lack of food themselves, and the land is a rubble, and people are rounded up and shot en masse. Ambiguous?! SMH....
@Jay Byrant: That is the nature of unresolved trauma. It tends to restage itself, individually as well as collectively. Only the roles in the drama triangle usually change.
SHOW NOTES AND COMMENTS: https://corbettreport.com/the-blueprint-for-ai-government-revealed/ What is the Global Government Technology Centre? Why are they writing whitepapers on The Agentic State? Wh
SuperDicq
in reply to GNU/翠星石 • • •GNU/翠星石
in reply to SuperDicq • • •@SuperDicq Merely compiling it is unreasonable on all freedom-respecting computers due to the level of bloat.
It optimizes worse than GCC, but still takes far longer to compile than GCC, which is reason enough not to compile it.
Gentoo changed the grouping of the llvm package, thus bypassing existing masks and I checked how my update after 2 years was going and I found that LLVM was several hours into compiling - I C-c'd so fast.
WalterKühl
in reply to GNU/翠星石 • • •@SuperDicq LLVM is great overall.
The only reason LLVM exists is because GCC license sucks, creating a lack of interest to support certain architectures used by companies.
For example, both AMD (GCN,r600) and Nvidia (NVPTX) do their own LLVM backends without LLVM team whereas GCC would require their own consent to do that
GNU/翠星石
in reply to WalterKühl • • •@waltercool @SuperDicq LLVM sucks in every way.
LLVM only exists because GCC uses a great license that doesn't give you the power to take the users freedom (was GPLv2-or-later-with-GCC-exception, now GPLv3-or-later-with-GCC-exception).
Both AMD and Nvidia have permission to write their own GCC backends without needing to ask the GCC team and also have permission to distribute such without asking for permission either - they just are not granted the power to take the users freedom by the license.
AMD and Nvidia wanted to take the freedom of the users and unfortunately the LLVM developers have intentionally granted them the power to take it via proprietary versions of GCC and they have done so.
If only LLVM did not exist, there's a chance that such injustice would not have occurred - as AMD and Nvidia would have had the choice between writing their own compiler, licensing a proprietary one (almost all are garbage), or writing a GCC extension that implements it and releasing it under a free license - I suspect the latter would have occurred.
SuperDicq
in reply to GNU/翠星石 • • •WalterKühl
in reply to SuperDicq • • •SuperDicq
in reply to WalterKühl • • •WalterKühl
in reply to SuperDicq • • •@SuperDicq
> As it disallows people from making proprietary versions of LLVM.
That doesn't look very "pro-freedom" if the license tells you what not to do.
Alexandre Oliva
in reply to WalterKühl • • •that's a common misconception
taking away others' freedom is not freedom, it's power over others, and this one isn't a power that anyone needs or should have.
a license that gives you back the freedom you deserve that copyright law took away, without giving you power to abuse others is a great license
a license that gives you that freedom, while also giving you power to abuse others, is an ethically acceptable license, but it depends on intermediaries' consciences for users to get the freedom everyone deserves
CC: @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
WalterKühl
in reply to Alexandre Oliva • • •@lxo @SuperDicq I truly don't disagree with most free software licenses, but GPL-3 have a very annoying clause forcing use exclusively for GPL-3 compatible projects. Acts like a virus in terms of licensing.
In other hand, licenses like BSD allow you to use the software in any way possible as long you give proper recognition to the authors.
This is why most companies use BSD and Apache licenses on everything, and that's why those software tend to have better widespread support then GNU-like.
A widespread usage of any FOSS software or library seems to me far more important than restricting usage to users and business overall. That's why PostgreSQL is the mainstream database nowadays. That's why MariaDB and Linux kernel uses GPLv2 and not GPLv3. They would die if they move to v3.
Alexandre Oliva
in reply to WalterKühl • • •that's a collection of common misconceptions
the GPL requires each entire work to be distributed under it, indeed, (aside from explicit compatibility with AGPL), but there's no forcing involved: nobody is forced to use (as in modify, adapt) software that comes under these conditions, nor is anybody forced to choose this license. the misconception is that the GPL doesn't stop you from doing anything whatsoever, not to the software, not even to other users of the software. it's copyright that does. the GPL merely refrains from granting powers that copyright law reserves to copyright holders, so copyright prohibitions remains in effect.
but the GPL is not viral, that's another misconception. a virus can pass from one individual to another, but the GPL doesn't do that: the GPL is only passed on to derivative works: the freedom for users is a gift that's inherited by the program's descendents.
the reason companies prefer the lax permissive licenses is that they grant the companies power to abuse their downstream users. that's no surprise for exploitative businesses, but that doesn't make the licenses good for anyone else.
I agree with you that restricting usage is undesirable, and that's exactly why I prefer copyleft licenses like the GPL: with lax permissive licenses, intermediaries gain power to restrict usage and carry out the very harm you claim to be concerned about. preempting that by not granting that power avoids the problem.
besides, the GPL doesn't stop you from doing whatever you wish with the program, it just doesn't allow you to do whatever you wish unto downstream users of the program. do you see the difference?
you'll need to elaborate further on the differences you perceive between GPLv2 and GPLv3 for your apparent argument about Linux to be as much as checked on correctness. AFAICT, it's based on false premises and doesn't follow at all. the reasons Linux stayed with GPLv2 had to do with having painted itself in a relicensing corner, more than anything else, but its main sponsors through the LF were mainly concerned with having to share keys and installation instructions for firmware bundled with Linux. Linux still contains such nonfree components under obnoxious licenses to this day, despite being widely regarded as licensed under the GPLv2.
for userland projects that don't interface with more than general-purpose hardware and doesn't carry blobs for specific devices, such as MariaDB, the differences between GPLv2 and GPLv3 are really minor are in details. I'm very curious about what it is that would get MariaDB in trouble should it change the license, but it seems as nonsensical as claiming it would become as successful as PostgreSQL if it switched to a lax permissive license.
CC: @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
WalterKühl
in reply to Alexandre Oliva • • •@lxo @SuperDicq A correction to your statement, Linux as a fully Open-Source project. They have blob requirements at runtime under linux-firmware repo which is non-free.
Some kernel modules will work with reduced features like 2D graphics only, Wifi under 2.4Ghz only, etc. Some others will do nothing.
Under my perception, I have a similar vision than Linus Torvalds about OpenSource. Free to disagree with me, that's okay.
You have the software, you should have the right to use it as you wish, even if that means using non-free firmware (because of features using annoying patents from the IP warlords).
We can talk about an ideal world where everything is FOSS, and this is a good direction, but limiting support to people because non-free drivers or restrictive licenses is very user unfriendly... like those years with "ndiswrapper", being the main annoyance to anyone who tried to move out from Windows/OSX.
Alexandre Oliva
in reply to WalterKühl • • •fact-checking: binary blobs remain, and keep getting added to Linux. there's a new one in the pipeline for 6.16. disgusting as this is, I have to find them, because I maintain a blob-free version of the kernel Linux.
I have no objections to allowing users to make their self-defeating choices. my objection is to imposing those losers' choices on people, and to fooling users that pursue freedom by offering them something that's proprietary.
misrepresenting nonfree software as free is not conducive towards this ideal world, it's rather a means to deny people the pursuit of that world. you may be right that limiting support is unfriendly, but you shouldn't misrepresent who's being unfriendly in that picture: is it that who's setting things up to control users by chaining them, or is it that who's trying to protect them from being chained? is the unfriendly person that who tells the abused person not to go back to the abuser's home?
CC: @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
WalterKühl
in reply to Alexandre Oliva • • •@lxo @SuperDicq It is, but what's your option then?
Do you honestly think companies will submit to Linux and release stuff without blobs? Of course not.
The main reason companies do binary blobs is because patents involved. Sometimes from their side, sometimes legal obligations from 3rd parties. Innovation is unlikely free of patents.
The alternative basically means the same output from any GNU Linux distro, mostly nerds who use old laptops modified by Leah Rowe with no WiFi or some old ath9k.
Alexandre Oliva
in reply to WalterKühl • • •when it comes to corporations with publicly-traded stocks, it depends significantly on the size of the market they'd be giving up
as long as people tolerate abuse, and abuse is conducive to their increase of profits, they will do that
when it gets to a point in which lots of people can't stand the abuse and, more importantly, start rejecting enshittified products for real, a market opportunity arises for those who respect users. that's one way for consumers to drive the market towards respecting freedom, because ultimately what the suppliers are interested in are the profits. I acknowledge that it's one of those tricky collective action issues, but it's one that may emerge out of consumers' acting intelligently on their own interest
another way to go about it is by regulation. if regulators demand respect for users, suppliers may scream, but will eventually comply (or buy the regulators' heads, the cynic in me points out 😉
blobs due to patents are a convenient excuse, but it's a lie. reverse engineering is not that hard, and it would uncover patent infringements, if market leaders didn't have cross-licensing agreements among them. the roadblock for reverse engineering is that regulations prohibit using the results of reverse engineering in cases that would make them interesting and useful
CC: @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
SuperDicq
in reply to WalterKühl • • •It is better to not use a computer at all than to use one that abuses you.
I think it is better to drop hardware support in favor of actually making free software.
The goal of the GNU project is to make a 100% free operating system.
The goal never was to increase "marketshare" at the expense of freedom.
WalterKühl
in reply to SuperDicq • • •@SuperDicq @lxo I don't disagree with your statement, but that is unrealistic into the 99.9% of people.
I'm not saying you are wrong with your goals honestly speaking, but most people are OK with binary blobs as long they don't sniff your files or send data elsewhere.
So far, the only dangerous active threat is the Intel MEI/AMT or AMD PSP, which are known to potentially use people hardware without consent. Every other single piece of hardware can be successfully tracked in case they do nasty stuff.
Also, I do also understand the binary blob creates some programmed obsolescence as community can't effectively fix bugs, but some can be fixed from the software layer (at expense of performance)
Alexandre Oliva
in reply to WalterKühl • • •the larger freedom problem in blob updates is that they're a vector for enshittification, inasmuchas they enable suppliers to push "security" updates onto users bundled with enshittifying features. see fsfla.org/~lxoliva/#Unshittify
but the problem is how they attack our freedom. a partner that "behaves nicely" as long as you "behave", but that prevents you from learning, developing, growing, helping and getting help from your community is an abusive partner. a software supplier that offers software that does just what you expect, but that won't allow you to make changes if you so wish, with or without help from your community, is analogously an abusive supplier
CC: @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
Alexandre Oliva's Home Page
www.fsfla.org