On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Jonas Smedegaard - [email protected] wrote: > 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"? >
Yes. I don't take The Ultimate Sacrifice lightly. I'd MUCH prefer we have those folks alive to help make progress. _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
