1. 6

    The “Libre-washing” part is strange:

    coreboot, as shipped by Purism, is not open source, or at least ships proprietary blobs. Compare this with the work System76 has been doing in recent times. […] And while those might sound like small things compared to liberating the CPU firmware, I will point out that they actually succeed in completely liberating those components, […] What has Purism done, in the meantime? Neutralized IME. That’s it. They have not published anything on LVFS…

    W…why?? Why is LVFS, which is just a FW update shipping mechanism that doesn’t have much to do with freedom, so important to the author?

    System76 and Purism laptops currently have equivalently free (i.e. FSP-using of course) coreboot based firmware. It’s so weird to imply that any one of them is better.

    The Librems [Phones] are heavily overpriced but that is because Purism seemingly never tried to get better deal and the South San Francisco partner abused this so that is why Purism Librems are double the price they should be.

    that’s sad :/

    1. 13

      System76 and Purism laptops currently have equivalently free (i.e. FSP-using of course) coreboot based firmware. It’s so weird to imply that any one of them is better.

      As stated in the doc, System76 is actively working on more aspects of firmware than just x86 firmware, e.g. the Embedded Controller. And that’s the difference between a company reselling China stuff with marginal improvements like privacy toggles (see the “South San Francisco Partner” problem Purism faces) and a company that slowly but steadily increases the influence it has on its hardware, leading to stuff like https://github.com/system76/ec

      I’m a coreboot developer, and Purism created a fair amount of extra work for us to manage the PR storms that they created (and that then came our way). There have been a number of coreboot devs trying to explain Todd from Purism early on what can be reasonably done and which of his claims seemed rather outlandish. While Purism is now calmer in general, they still seem to like the hyperbole.

      Compared to that, System76’s entry in our little corner of the world has been a much nicer experience: If anything, we were frustrated because they refused to discuss firmware for a long time, but when they did, they were ready to deliver.

      All in all, I’m fine with both companies around, but I’m also prepared to have to strip off some amount of hype from Purism’s announcements while I can take System76’s at face value. (But still, there’s a Pinebook Pro on my desk that awaits its corebooting.)

      1. 3

        W…why?? Why is LVFS, which is just a FW update shipping mechanism that doesn’t have much to do with freedom, so important to the author?

        It’s important because it makes firmware upgrades more accessible to their users. That is a critical feature to ensure the security and reliability of an ecosystem.

        System76 and Purism laptops currently have equivalently free (i.e. FSP-using of course) coreboot based firmware. It’s so weird to imply that any one of them is better.

        System76 is slightly better in that regard, because they try to make shipping those updates easier. I don’t think it’s weird to outline that.

      1. 19

        The first 14″ laptop designed to protect your digital life Ultra-portable workstation laptop that was designed chip-by-chip, line-by-line, to respect your rights to privacy, security, and freedom.

        Yet it still ships with Intel processors

        I don’t envy companies that try to target “libre” market. It’s a bar impossible to meet. Author demands specialist hardware with customized software and CIA-proof customer service, and at the same time doesn’t like it’s much more expensive than mass-market devices.

        1. 10

          I’m not a fan of his writing their either, but the company positions itself as CIA-proof and talks a lot about that subject…

          Example: https://puri.sm/posts/what-the-cia-vault-7-documents-mean/

          1. 1

            I’m not a fan of his writing their either

            What’s great about not writing professionally anymore is that don’t need to care about creating new fans, because I don’t get paid either way. ;)

            But thanks for the comment anyways. :)

            1. 2

              Oh, not implying. You write your way, I like my way. :)

          2. 2

            I don’t think I have an “impossible bar to meet”. I’m typing this on a Thinkpad X220 because I’m still waiting for the Librem to be repaired. The Thinkpad also ships with an Intel processor, yet it doesn’t claim to fix every privacy issue under the sun and the kitchen sink. That X220 is at least 8 years old and it’s still working fine. I can open it up easily and fix it myself. Parts are easy to come by, and it’s dirt cheap on the second hand market.

            If all Linux-friendly laptop manufacturers had the same high prices as Purism, I wouldn’t complain. And I didn’t complain, at first: I noted that this was one thing to keep in mind if you buy that machine, but I did buy the damn thing. So I think it’s a fair comment to make: Purism devices are more expensive, not only to mass-market devices, but also to their competitors in their niche.

          1. 7

            Short version: the new license effectively gives a BSD-like, transferable license to all projects hosted on Github and raises issues with attribution requirements of other licenses.

            1. 1

              Update: after reviewing a few other comments, I’m not sure it’s the case. But that’s the point made in the article of course. :)

            1. 6

              This is really a shame. Mozilla invests tons of money in a company producing closed source software while there’s this free software alternative that has been well established against that quasi monopoly. They should support Wallabag instead of Pocket… sometimes I just don’t understand the Foundation’s decisions… (and i know they need money, but this seems like a decision contrary to their principles)…

              1. 19

                Pocket has a business model and larger audience. If they adopted Wallabag then they would be competing with Pocket, through acquisition they also get rid of their largest competitor. C'est la vie.

                I too wish they supported OSS like Wallabag, but I likewise wish more OSS products had robust business models.

                1. 7

                  Presumably Pocket will become licensed as Open Source?

                  I do agree with you here, though.

                  1. 25

                    https://bugzil.la/open-pocket

                    (I have nothing to do with any of this, even though I work at Mozilla)

                    1. 2

                      Super cool! :)

                    2. 2

                      Yes, that’s why I created an account yesterday and transitioned many of my open tabs into it.

                    3. 6

                      The Mozilla foundation is about OSS. Pocket will become OSS. Mark my words.

                      1. 6

                        “Mozilla invests tons of money” – I haven’t seen any reports of how much Mozilla spent on the acquisition. The numbers may have worked out to be something reasonable for Mozilla, on a per-user basis. It really depends on the company’s trajectory and the investors' view of the company.

                        Acquiring a service that has lots of users and some penetration on mobile devices might not be a bad investment. I guess we’ll know in a few years.

                        1. 5

                          A good way of describing Mozilla is “principled but pragmatic”. Basically, be principled, but not to such a degree that you shoot yourself in the foot in the process. A textbook example of this was the decision to adopt EME.

                          I’m not very familiar with either Pocket or Wallabag, but I’d guess Pocket has better market penetration and recommendation algorithms which would support existing Mozilla initiatives like context graph.

                        1. 2

                          can someone clarify what exactly this implies? previously, one could compile Signal without GCM support but phone calls wouldn’t work, and there would be battery issues as well.. are those issues fixed?

                          1. 6

                            Previously nothing would work in standard Signal without GCM, it required patches to get messaging working and even with the patches voice wouldn’t work. Standard Signal should now work without GCM and voice works too (via the new WebRTC code). Battery life will be worse as it can’t use a shared GCM connection for the push notifications, but how much worse depends.

                            1. 1

                              I use Copperhead OS. There is a port of signal called Noise. It works without play services and is available on F-Droid. Its packaged and maintained by Copperhead.

                              Can’t promise it will work for you, but here is the link: Noise (Signal-compatible encrypted messaging app) - https://f-droid.org/app/co.copperhead.noise

                            1. 3

                              how does this compare to the TeX family or SILE mentioned here recently?

                              1. 2

                                As bad as TeX is, highly imperative/script-y OCaml code is not an improvement on TeX.

                                1. 3

                                  You’re criticism of this code is that it’s imperative? That’s literally all code in your browser, operating system (unless I guess you’re using xmonad), lobste.rs, and most things in general.

                                  Functional code can be great! But there’s also lots of great code that’s not functional.

                                  TeX, though, is known to be particularly bad—I think SILE did a good job of expressing the problems. While idk how patoline compares to SILE, I’d be very surprised if they didn’t manage to improve TeX, at least as far as code quality goes.

                                  1. 4

                                    That’s not my only criticism, it’s just the most salient one. I’ve written a 1,300 page book with LaTeX, among other things. I know where the rough spots are. Patoline solves none of them.

                                    1. 5

                                      What are the rough spots that you want to see solved with LaTeX?;

                                  1. 2

                                    i thought lobste.rs was deduplicating things already…?

                                    1. 1

                                      That’s a manual process. :) It’s really meant for when the two conversations are in close temporal proximity, but I’ve merged these ones anyway; we might as well keep discussion together.