cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/8984968
The #FSD purpose is to help people “find freedom-respecting programs”. Browsing the directory reveals copious freedom-disrespecting resources. For example:
- projects jailed in MS #Github (amid substantial ethical issues)
- projects jailed in #Gitlab·com (amid substantial ethical issues)
- projects with resources (docs, forums, wikis, APIs, etc) that are jailed in #Cloudflare’s walled garden (amid substantial ethical issues)
FSF has no tags for these anti-features. It suggests a problem with integrity and credibility. People expect to be able to trust FSF as an org that prioritizes user freedom. Presenting this directory with unmarked freedom pitfalls sends the wrong message & risks compromising trust and transparency. Transparency is critical to the FOSS ideology. Why not clearly mark the freedom pitfalls?
The idea of having exclusive clubs with gatekeepers is inconsistent with FSF’s most basic principles, specifically:
All important site functionality that's enabled for use with that package works correctly (though it need not look as nice) in free browsers, including IceCat, without running any nonfree software sent by the site. (C0)
Does not discriminate against classes of users, or against any country. (C2)
Permits access via Tor (we consider this an important site function). (C3)
If Cloudflare links in the #FSF FSD are replaced with archive.org mirrors, that avoids a bulk of the exclusivity. It also automatically invokes the Library Bill of Rights (LBR) because #InternetArchive is an #ALA member:
V. A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.
VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use.
VII. All people, regardless of origin, age, background, or views, possess a right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use. Libraries should advocate for, educate about, and protect people’s privacy, safeguarding all library use data, including personally identifiable information.
The LBR is consistent with FSF’s principles so this is naturally a good solution. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights are also noteworthy. Even if the FSD is technically not a public service, the public uses it and FSF is an IRS-qualified 501(c)(3) public charity, likely making it public enough to observe these UDHR clauses:
art.21 ¶2. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
art.27 ¶1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
These fundamental principles & rights are a minimum low bar to set that cannot be construed as “not reasonable” or “purist” or “extremist”.
I'm not sure if its completely official but if you look for software such as emacs it lists the fsf as the creator and the donation link works.
This project is no where near production ready but its still cool
I like the idea of flatpak but I want the option to block all non-free software and non-free dependencies.
What is free software?
Free software is software that respects the 4 software freedoms. The 4 freedoms are
The freedom to run the run the program The freedom to study the source code The freedom to modify the source code The freedom to distribute modified versions of the source code
Please note: Free software does not relate to monetary price. Free software can be sold or gratis (no cost)