You can't be too extreme; it's social rules and you decide those.
My point is that in the current climate we see corporations as "future-
proof" solutions because they market them as such and it's a part of
our culture to try to find "future-proof" solutions.
The error that we do is that we forget that all corporate initiatives
were built on other initiatives. Google would be nothing without
webpages, they've built their business on placing ads on top of
information they do not own. Webpages would be nothing without HTML.
HTML would be nothing without CERN. CERN would be nothing without
European cooperation. And so on.
So it's just societal evolution. FLOSS is a foregone conclusion of the
current rat race, not an alternative. Sticking to FLOSS is "future-
proof", at least for now. :)
IMHO,
Rasmus
On 14 sep 2011, at 12.13, julien forgeat wrote:
Hi Uwe,
Maybe my message was too extreme? What I would like to highlight is I
think there is a huge difference between using and contributing.
As a user, I do compromise a lot (this is a gmail address I am using
hehe) but when it comes to contributing, I prefer to do it in a way
that preserves as much user freedom as it is possible, not out of
pride (I am actually a very unskilled hacker when comparing to many of
my friends) but because it is what I want to promote and because I
think it brings some different kind of value.
Maybe an example will be easier, I use google maps a lot because it is
convenient and saves me a lot of time, but if I have to create any
mapping related web app, I would rather turn to openstreetmap, even if
it lacks accuracy in the city I am living in.
Cheers,
Julien
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Uwe Dippel <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 09/13/2011 10:40 AM, julien forgeat wrote:
I am not really very knowledgeable about the whole project but
from my
point of view, it is mostly a hardware issue. Open source driver
(and
even that is very hard to find with wifi chips) are not enough, we
want to know how the chip works, what registry is used for what
purpose and so on, apparently, this kind of knowledge is never
freely
provided by wifi chip manufacturers.
Dear all, what an interesting discussion!! - I have been following,
using,
and advertising Nanonote for the last year or so. Therefore, the
topic
'host' on USB is and remains a hot one. It actually is Number One
for me not
to use it much more frequently, and has been the Number One turn-
away of
everyone until now when it came to advertising it. On the other hand,
Wolfgang seems concerned at times about the financial prospects of
the
project. "No wonder", sorry, that's the best I can say. The major
impediment
for me is that I would LOVE to carry it around and hook it into all
sorts of
WiFi-points (here in Malaysia they are abundant, contrary to
Germany where
it is often difficult to hook up), but I simply can't. Over.
Now back to the exact topic: No, I am not. Yes, I am for total
freedom in
software as far as possible. So I appreciate the distinction into the
'really free' stuff, and the 'not-so-free' stuff, that I can still
add on
just to put food on the table. I'd love to have all free software
on all of
my machines, but then I'd have to harm the environment because I'd
have to
fly to Europe because I refuse to use Skype.
No, I don't need totally free hardware that I can plug into my
totally free
nanonote (is it??). I'd love to, but there is a clear distinction,
much
easier in hardware than in software, when I connect a totally non-
free
WiFi-dongle into my nanonote. I know what I am doing, and I can
even put a
sticker "Free", in green, on the nanonote, and "Not Free" and in
red on the
dongle. But I can use it usefully.
Try to contact SanDisk for the blueprint of their micro-SD card,
and they'll
call an ambulance for you.
In short: don't overdo it, please. keep the target in mind, provide a
totally free (is it??) core (nanonote, e.g.), and then bite the
bullet (easy
in this case) and allow the rest of the world to get their jobs
done, even
with a devilish dongle. USB is a reasonably open standard, so is
micro-SD,
so what is wrong of interfacing the devil through an open standard
with open
hardware? Or do you not connect the nanonote to the Internet
because Google
doesn't use all free hardware and software? Come on, stay
realistic. Don't
compromise in what you do, I fully agree, but only in your court.
Don't try
to be an island.
Uwe
_______________________________________________
Qi Hardware Discussion List
Mail to list (members only): [email protected]
Subscribe or Unsubscribe:
http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/mailman/listinfo/discussion
_______________________________________________
Qi Hardware Discussion List
Mail to list (members only): [email protected]
Subscribe or Unsubscribe:
http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/mailman/listinfo/discussion
_______________________________________________
Qi Hardware Discussion List
Mail to list (members only): [email protected]
Subscribe or Unsubscribe:
http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/mailman/listinfo/discussion
