Le mardi 16 août 2016 à 10:31 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a écrit : > On 15.08.2016 22:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > > Le lundi 15 août 2016 à 21:45 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a écrit : > > > > > > On 15.08.2016 21:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Le lundi 15 août 2016 à 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free- > > > > > > software- > > > > > > friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the > > > > > > facts. > > > > > > > > > > I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly > > > > > because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't > > > > > really > > > > > tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that > > > > > piece > > > > > of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at > > > > > liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly". > > > > > > > > Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal here. I > > > > think > > > > vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as > > > > such. > > > > > > It depends on the targeted audience. If that is the general public, I'm > > > sure that the average user doesn't clearly recognize this term as vague. > > > > > > I believe the targeted audience of the Parabola blog is not only > > > educated users/free software activists/developers, but the general > > > public/average computer user. > > > > I mean that the precise wording "free-software-friendly" is intrinsically > > vague, > > so I doubt that anyone will understand it as an equivalent of "fully free > > software" or "freedom-respecting". > > However, both average users and high-profile organizations in the free > software world are using "free software friendly" to also mean "fully > free software" or "freedom-respecting".
I don't see the problem or contradiction here. It is vague so it can rightfully cover both terms. The point is that it is not intrinsically equivalent to one of those. > > So the question is whether it's good to use vague wording. I think that e.g. > > for > > the news title, it would be fine. Of course, a link to RYF and the single- > > board- > > computers page could shed some more lights for anyone interested. > > Given the examples above where "free software friendly" is used by a > wide range of users, companies and nonprofits for both hardware fully > compatible with free software and hardware not fully compatible with > free software, I hope we can reach the same conclusion that we have to > avoid this ambiguous term which spreads confusion among what is and what > is not software freedom respecting, thus working against our efforts to > educate users as part of the free software movement. I disagree with that conclusion. Using a vague word implies that it doesn't refer to something more precise -- but it can cover such terms. I don't think that using a vague/broad expression, that lacks details, is confusing and misleading. It's just imprecise, which is different. People who'll understand free software-friendly as fully free are jumping to conclusion without any basis. The words don't hold that meaning, they are adding more sense to it than what the words hold. > To draw a parallel between "free software friendly" and "eco-friendly", > yes, I believe Purism has pioneered the practice of "software freedom > washing", similar to greenwashing :-) > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwashing I agree with this but again, don't see a problem. If Purism had said "free software friendly" all along, it would have been fine IMO. Sadly, they did much, much than claiming that. -- Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices Website: https://www.paulk.fr/ Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/ Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
