Hello FSFE,
(First post here.) Here is a small set of reasons why businesses should
choose the Linux ecosystem to build their information systems:
http://piotr.chmielnicki.com/10-reasons-to-choose-linux.html
It is based on practical considerations, not on philosophy.
I hope it could help people that are advocating for Linux.
Feed-backs welcome.
Have a nice week-end!
Piotr Chmielnicki
"I must, sadly, withdraw my endorsement of yubikey 4 devices (and
perhaps all newer yubikeys), as apparently Yubico has replaced all
open-source components that made yubikey NEOs so awesome with
proprietary closed-source code in Yubikey 4s […]"
https://plus.google.com/+KonstantinRyabitsev/posts/4a7RNxtt7vy
Although I don't use the Yubikey myself, it is makes me quite sad that
the developers decided to make one of their products non-free.
Maybe we can convince them to readjust their decision.
Regards
-- egnun
Hey list,
have you already heard about the new hot shit?
Briar[1] is a "next level" messenger that is supposed to work without a
central server
and that wants to protect your meta-data through communicating via the
tor network.
What do you think?
Is the project going to be successful?
When you follow the argumentation of Moxie Marlinspike [2], then it's
probably not.
I hope that Briar is going to become popular and I'm going to download
it as soon as it's available in the F-Droid store.
Greetings,
-- egnun
-----
[1]
https://blog.grobox.de/2016/briar-next-step-of-the-crypto-messenger-evoluti…
[2] https://whispersystems.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/
Hi all!
This is a message to the legal experts on this list:
I find the EULA of the "Electronic Exchange System" (EES) rather nasty: [1]
--- QUOTE: ---
Without prejudice to the rights of users under the legislation relating
to the protection of computer programs (which cannot be contractually
denied), users may not in any way:
(a) modify, translate or adapt the EES;
(b) decompile or disassemble the EES;
(c) copy the EES (or parts of it);
(d) pass on, dispose of, grant as a sub-licence, lease, lend or
distribute EES or EES documentation to third parties;
(e) create any product or service substantially similar to EES; or
(f) copy any ideas, characteristics or functions of EES.
--- END QUOTE ---
Point (c) is just a bit funny, because I just copied part of the EEC
onto my computer screen by using it... ;)
But really parts (e) and (f) are alarming. :-(
It seems to me, that the Commission is actively supporting the concept
of software patents.
This reminds me of the Adobe EULA problem:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash_%28software%29#Adobe_Flash_Player_End-U…
And then the EC tries to protect the validity of the EULA by adding
"Without prejudice to the rights of users..."
Any ideas what can be done about this?
Are there activities regarding such?
Comments?
Greetings,
Jann
[1]
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/api/authentication/termsandcondit…
There have been a couple of threads on the list this week about the
creation of individual teams to manage some FSFE services and the type
of service that the system-hackers are offering to provide.
One of the bigger issues associated with all this is the question of
whether FSFE's IT model can be replicated by other organizations
(including non-profits) of similar size.
The default strategy for many organizations today seems to start with a
Facebook group and graduate to Google Apps, possibly outsourcing a web
site where money is spent on appearance and dodgy SEO services rather
than development of any real functionality.
This brings me to a few questions:
- should it be a priority for FSFE's IT strategy to be easily
replicated, so that we can say to other organizations that they can
follow the FSFE sysadmin wiki and they will be up and running in a few
hours?
- are there other small non-profit organizations that already
demonstrate best practice for volunteer-run IT with free software and
should we build a list of them? For example, is FSF's or Debian's
strategy considered suitable for other organizations to replicate?
- going beyond the scope of Linux distributions like Debian, there are
solutions like ClearOS[1] that aim to provide a turn-key office/small
business solution, is anybody maintaining a list of these and would it
be more productive for FSFE to move onto something like that and
individual volunteers (such as the blog team) would contribute to that
project?
Regards,
Daniel
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClearOS
Dear list,
Imagine a European Union that builds its IT infrastructure on Free Software.
Imagine European Member States that exchange information in Open Standards and
share their software. Imagine municipalities and city councils that benefit
from decentralized and collaborative software under free licenses. Imagine no
European is any longer forced to use non-Free Software.
This is what we are seeking. And although this vision feels like a long road
to go, we know that we are taking major steps along it today. If you like to
inspire us on this journey, sent your submission to the first FSFE European
summit until May 29:
https://wiki.fsfe.org/Events/Summit2016/CallForParticipation
For any questions, do not hesitate to directly ask me. Forwarding this mail to
any interested people is encouraged.
Best regards,
Erik
--
FSFE summit - Call for Participation: https://fsfe.org/summit16
Save the date: September 2 - 4, 2016 - BCC Berlin, Germany
Hashtag: #FSFEsummit - Picture: http://polr.me/vfc
"In search of a home for Thunderbird"
https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/686286/656f2620b9cf296a/
Unfortunately Mozilla is giving Thunderbird away.
Personally I'd be very happy, if they gave it to The Document Foundation.
Regards
-- egnun
Hello,
I have found an interesting article in the latest FT weekend (14-15
May 2016) titled "Does Facebook bend the trends that govern our news?"
I was able to open it with the link:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5c68e88e-18e6-11e6-bb7d-ee563a5a1cc1.html
But most of FT content is under paywall and it can happen that the
link is not functioning for all.
I think the content can be of interest for free software supporters:
Summary:
- There is a suspicion that FB manipulates "trending topics" which are
shown to the user in order to shape the political views of the users
(E.g.: http://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1…
)
- In fact, FB now acts as a "gatekeeper" ( See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatekeeping_%28communication%29 ) and
(contrary to traditional media) this function of FB is not supervised
by any organizations
- In traditional media, gatekeeper function is editor's
responsibility. In FB this is "algorithm"
- And the algorithm is proprietary.
Quotes:
- When TV was a new medium, it was dominated by public broadcasters
under the eye of regulators, who could watch what editors choose to
put on the evening news. But social media is unregulated and
proprietary algorithms are harder to understand.
- Raju Narisetti, senior vice-president of strategy at News Corp,
which owns newspapers including the Wall Street Journal, the Times and
the Sun, says publishers also have little insight into how Facebook’s
algorithm works or why certain stories appear where they do. “There is
opaqueness in the way choices seem to be made and when questioned the
fallback position is always: ‘it’s an algorithm and it decides on its
own’. That rings pretty hollow,” he says.
- Facebook has inserted itself into the relationship that publishers
used to have with readers, argues Ken Doctor of Newsonomics. “There
are going to be far fewer gatekeepers deciding what counts as news. In
the old days, those decisions were made by a variety of people working
at newspapers, radio and television stations,” he says.
--
WBR & WBW, Vitaly