On 11-06-22 at 04:23pm, Neophyte Representative wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Jonas Smedegaard - [email protected] wrote: > > On 11-06-22 at 02:28pm, Neophyte Representative wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:34 AM, Jonas Smedegaard - [email protected] wrote: > >> > > >> > We should continuously have all possible use cases in mind, but > >> > prioritize those easy to provide rather than those with most > >> > direct benefit for users involved in most obvious > >> > freedom-enabling activities. > >> > > >> > Both segments care, else they don't buy FreedomBox at all. > >> > > >> > Example: Karla is increasingly frustrated with her government, is > >> > politically active, and may start an uprising in 3 months. > >> > Joanna is supportive of political activism but is more into > >> > partying and chasing guys, not willing to get up on the > >> > barricades. Joanna and Karla both want a FreedomBox. > >> > FreedomBox-dating already exist in Debian testing, but > >> > FreedomBox-stealth is still so flaky it is not even packaged for > >> > Debian yet. > >> > > >> > Do we then... > >> > > >> > a) release FreedomBox 1.0 in 6 months with -dating only, > >> > and FreedomBox 2.0 in maybe 1 year with -stealth added, > >> > prioritizing all parts being reliable and maintainable. > >> > b) release FreedomBox 1.0 in 6 months with -dating and -stealth, > >> > prioritizing urgent features for urgent matters (even if flaky > >> > and perhaps even dangerous for Karla to use). > >> > c) release FreedomBox 1.0 in 1 month with -dating and -stealth, > >> > prioritizing urgent features for urgent matters (even if flaky > >> > and perhaps even dangerous for both Karla and Joanna to use). > >> > > >> > >> You don't have any idea what quality or quantity of reliably > >> available developmental labor units you will have available to even > >> try to push the schedule around in this manner. > > > > Yes, I do have an idea: Get stuff packaged for Debian so that it can > > be qualified/quantified a.k.a. get some eyeballs to make all bugs > > shallow. Stuff in Debian unstable is sensible to consider > > "unstable", and stuff so thoroughly "starred at" that it has > > trickled down into Debian stable is sensible to consider as > > "stable". > > > > > >> The last thing I think you would want to do is put Karla in any > >> serious danger of over-estimating the utility of FreedomBox in > >> protecting her anonymity while facilitating her quest for > >> governmental improvement, regardless of Joanna's uses. Joanna can > >> probably be fully satisfied with reasonable use of today's spyware > >> infected commercial offerings. Karla, in the most dangerous case, > >> can't. > > > > In my opinion only option a) makes sense (among above three > > options). > > > > I agree that Joanna would be ok waiting a couple of years for a > > Facebook replacement, but she is supportive of political activism so > > given the option of FreedomBox 1.0 (a.k.a. "silly" edition without > > -stealth) she would favor that, because it could help Karla > > slightly: Karla would lack stealth (and a bunch of other features > > quite helpful for overthrowing a regime) but would at least not be > > sold out by Zuckerberg - while we reliably extended FreedomBox with > > more radical features. > > > > Hmmm, I'm beginning to understand where I'm really having trouble with > your plans. > > For a committed, deeply involved (willing to make the ultimate > sacrifice) political activist like Karla, anything that gives the > opposition a chance to find the activist represents too high a risk. > S/he must not be lulled into relying upon our product naively. > > It is, indeed, a legitimate, interim goal to reduce the reliance of > folks like Joanna upon products like the other FB. That does further > the goal of Freedom. Perhaps we should coin another name for that > project to avoid the high risk represented to the naive by the full > name of this FB. > > We've already had deaths of many naive folks in Libya who thought all > they needed was enthusiasm and numbers against modern weapons only > slightly countered by International intervention. The International > response in Libya in 2011 may be an improvement over the response in > Hungary in 1956, but I don't think we need to set up such a mismatch > in another arena. We need Freedom Fighters, not Dead Freedom > Fighters. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and > Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela were all opposed to and by relatively > civilized governments. Libya and Syria indicate that may not always > be the case.
So due to violent regimes killing Karlas, you suggest we do not label a box helping Joannas making a silverlining of the cloud as "FreedomBox"? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
