On November 20, 2024 1:49:55 AM GMT+03:00, bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote: >On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 22:33:11 -0500 Richard wrote: >> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] >> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] >> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] >> >> > vague - telemetry is not literally "malware" and is not necessarily >> "spyware" - >> > it is usually collected anonymously, for instance - we interpret the "no >> > malware" FSDG section as actually "no anti-features", an even less >> well-defined >> > concept - i think we should define it formally >> >> To proclaim a complete official list of anti-feature types is a hard >> project and it would take time to be confident that we have got the >> important ones. I think it is good to start worlking on one. >> >> What is feasible to do in the short term to state officially that >> certain kinds of malicious functionalities are unacceptable. >> https://gnu.org/malware/ and other things we have published >> could be a good start towards this. >> >> We can work on adding whatever we find to be missing. > >even without precise definitions or a comprehensive list of examples, the main >reason why i raised this issue is because the FSDG does not mention >"anti-features" at all - for that reason alone, anti-features such as telemetry >are not forbidden; though probably most people believe that they should be > >to be clear, i do not believe that telemetry is necessarily "mal" or spying - i >believe that it is an anti-feature (a feature that users generally want >removed) >and that the FSDG does not forbid anti-features > >this is the entirety of the "No Malware" section: > >> No Malware >> >> The distro must contain no DRM, no back doors, and no spyware. > > >defining the terms is not difficult - i could define them clearly enough off >the top of my head > >anti-feature: any feature which has no obvious value to users, but exists only > for the benefit of the authors or distributors > >malware: software which damages your hardware, software, or data > >spyware: hardware or software running on your computer, which collects > information about your computing habits and delivers it to someone > else's computer, if/when your computer is connected to a shared > network > >it would be good to clarify the terminology; but that was not my intention - i >want the FSF to confirm that anti-features such as telemetry are acceptable or >not - i suspect that the FSF would deem them to be acceptable, because they do >not impede software freedom; but most of its constituency believes otherwise - >i think that most want all anti-features removed, whether or not they are known >to be malicious > >although anti-features do not impede software freedom, there is already >precedent for forbidding them in that "no malware" section - malware and >spyware >are themselves the classic anti-features - neither impede software freedom; yet >those are forbidden - any network-active software has the potential to spy to >some degree - the spying actually happens on the remote side though - it >always has - the classic "spyware" of the 90s probably does not even exist >anymore - it has taken new, more elusive forms such as telemetry, website ads >and "like-me" buttons, etc > >maybe that makes my intention more clear - i dont suppose that the FSF wants to >make such controversial statements, even where they are due - the difficulty is >in provoking the FSF to take a stance on issues within the community which are >contentious or misunderstood >
I support that defibrillator if an anti feature and that it shouldn't be in free software Jean
