On many of our computers in office and home, we run Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre, and I was very satisfied with the decisions of managers who take care of users' freedom.
One reference for readers is here: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html While we all know what is free software, the reference is to philosophical parts and methods of verification of freedom for users: Quote: ,---- | The freedom to run the program as you wish | | The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of | person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for | any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to | communicate about it with the developer or any other specific | entity. In this freedom, it is the user's purpose that matters, not | the developer's purpose; you as a user are free to run the program for | your purposes, and if you distribute it to someone else, she is then | free to run it for her purposes, but you are not entitled to impose | your purposes on her. `---- When software package such as Telegram Desktop is included in the FSF free software distribution, there are factors to observe: - Telegram Desktop communicates exclusively with SaaSS Telegram servers, there is vendor's lock in, and there exist no free server software that users can host it themselves and thus operated client software such as Telegram Desktop with their own self-hosted servers. - Telegram network is centralized, server software is proprietary, API terms are proprietary and represent "further restrictions" on the GPL3, which are we free to ignore; we may build "Telegram-like server", but nobody did that; however, by ignoring it legal threats or issues do not end by ignorance, and issue for FSF endorsed distribution is not ended there. Reference: https://core.telegram.org/api/terms where that API terms dictate limits on how client software cannot be changed; this impairs users' freedom, but we are are, due to GPL3, free to ignore such further restrictions. In addition to that, Telegram Desktop DOES NOT clearly indicate in sources that there are further restrictions that relate to some specific part of program. There is something about "API acceptance" in the software, but no reference to further restrictions. - FSF promotes decentralization, references: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/campaigns-summaries#surveillance https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/surveillance https://www.fsf.org/news/free-software-foundation-statement-on-prism-revelations Quotes like: "To protect their freedom and privacy, the FSF urges everyone to contact their representatives, avoid Software as a Service, and donate to support projects working for a better, safer world." Now does that everyone includes also decision makers within the FSF endorsed free system distributions? I think so. - There are huge privacy issues, for example there is no encryption for GNU/Linux users, read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_(software)#Secret_chats and security breaches: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_(software)#Security_breaches Now, FSF promotes decentralization, is putting money and efforts to decentralize Internet, but on the other hand endorses system distributions which ship centralized software which only purpose is to serve developers', to serve the network and vendor's purpose, and not users' purpose, where users are unable to install proprietary server themselves and build their own networks. Some free OS distributions do not share this opinion and include such software such as Telegram Desktop and other similar software clients that interact with proprietary SaaSS. They look into software package itself only, not looking at a broader picture, and if software is GPL licensed, then it seem to be enough to be included in the FSF endorsed system distribution. But I don't think so. As such (Telegram Desktop and akin clients interacting solely with proprietary SaasS) software's purpose is sole purpose to serve developers' purpose, that is to widen their network and earn more money, but do not help user to build users' own network. Luckily, Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre excludes software that is meant to exclusively serve developers' purposes, not users' purposes. Example grep result: grep -i telegram blacklist.txt cutegram::hyperbola:1005:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service libqtelegram-ae::hyperbola:1006:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service telegram-qt::hyperbola:1007:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service telegramqml::hyperbola:1008:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service telepathy-morse::hyperbola:1009:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service Other examples: skype-call-recorder::::[uses-nonfree] only useful with Skype installed Slight comment: Skype runs as proprietary software on computer, but it also serves as good example that GPL3 license for software will not be the only decision factor if some package will be included in the FSF endorsed distribution or not. We have to implement what we teach and preach. s3cmd::::[nonprivacy] only useful with Amazon S3 Slight comment here, I am not sure if s3cmd decision is right or wrong, maybe s3cmd may be used with other servers, I am pointing rather to the fact that Hyperbola does make good decisions to exclude software which sole purpose is to serve the proprietary SaaSS. Thus my proposal is that FSF reviews these matters, and that free system distributions adopt the principles of Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre developers, to look at the broader picture when deciding if software should be included or not -- not only into the fact that it is GPL/otherwise-freely licensed. Few questions shall be raised when there are conflicting issues raised in relation to GPL/otherwise-freely licensed client software: Purpose of software ==================== https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html When including package, client software into free system distribution endorsed by FSF, developers shall ask themselves: is the sole purpose of this package to interact with proprietary SaaSS and thus promote relationship to vendor and vendor's purposes? If YES, such package should not be included. Or does that software helps users to be free to build their own network with free server side software that interacts with client software? Do we have a free server software that may be used with this software? If YES, then package should be included. Answer to these questions also solves the promotion of decentralized networks and is aligned to FSF public statements. Inclusion of client software into FSF endorsed free system distributions that promote centralized vendor' politics, does not conform to FSF public statements and campaigns on surveillance and decentralizations. Quote: ,---- | The freedom to run the program as you wish | | The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of | person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for | any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to | communicate about it with the developer or any other specific | entity. In this freedom, it is the user's purpose that matters, not | the developer's purpose; you as a user are free to run the program for | your purposes, and if you distribute it to someone else, she is then | free to run it for her purposes, but you are not entitled to impose | your purposes on her. `---- Thus I am asking FSF and developers of free system distributions to consider these issues, and EXCLUDE software clients that have the sole purpose to serve proprietary SaaSS -- where there is no server software that users may install themselves. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ Discussion on Parabola: https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/3010
