Re: [Trisquel-users] Intel AMT and Free Software

2017-11-29 Thread vitacell 

Also read this:

http://techrights.org/2013/06/24/nsa-and-uefi/
https://www.csoonline.com/article/3220476/security/researchers-say-now-you-too-can-disable-intel-me-backdoor-thanks-to-the-nsa.html
https://threatpost.com/intel-confirms-its-much-loathed-me-feature-has-a-kill-switch/127739/
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/201722-linuxs-worst-case-scenario-microsoft-makes-secure-boot-mandatory-locks-out-other-operating-systems

be careful with UEFI crap and Intel's ME. Anyway we can nothing to do.

Re: [Trisquel-users] how to upgrade to belenos from 6.0

2017-11-29 Thread oralfloss 
You are right it was set to never and so I changed it to "for any new  
version". I have reset my computer and went to the update manager again and  
clicked reset but there is still no button to upgrade to trisquel 7 and the  
update list is still blank.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Re : Starting T7 GNOME Shell

2017-11-29 Thread Caleb Herbert 
How do I switch to GDM?  Can I get that tasksel menu or whatever it was
up again?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Starting T7 GNOME Shell

2017-11-29 Thread gnugaz77 
Easy way. Log in. Try Alt+F2 and press R for restart. If it works its Xorg.

[Trisquel-users] Re : Starting T7 GNOME Shell

2017-11-29 Thread lcerf 
It must be Xorg.  I actually use GDM as a display manager.  However I used to  
use LightDM (or was it on Trisquel 6?).  I switched to GDM to:


get a "lock screen" button in the menu;
get notification on that lock screen (configurable from "Brightness & Lock"  
in the "System Settings").



Anyway.  Try GDM.

[Trisquel-users] Re : how to upgrade to belenos from 6.0

2017-11-29 Thread lcerf 
Your system is probably configured to "never" "notify of a new version of  
Trisquel".  If so, change that configuration in the "Updates" tab of  
"Software & Updates" in the "System Settings".

Re: [Trisquel-users] Intel AMT and Free Software

2017-11-29 Thread gnugaz77 
Use as much Free Software as possible but an older system, Core 2 Due, works  
great. If you can't get a Libreboot system use as much Free software as you  
can. Use a FULLY free OS, graphics and WIFI, and enjoy. Yes 80% is better  
than 20%. Plenty of laptops out there to be 100%. Just go for it.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Starting T7 GNOME Shell

2017-11-29 Thread Caleb Herbert 
How do I check?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Starting T7 GNOME Shell

2017-11-29 Thread gnugaz77 

Wayland or Xorg?

Re: [Trisquel-users] how to upgrade to belenos from 6.0

2017-11-29 Thread oralfloss 
Never mind I just found it in system settings if that is the correct one you  
are talking about.


It only had 2 updates to offer for me (see the pic attached)

I did both updates and nothing else appears now. (see second pic)

Is there something I am missing?

Re: [Trisquel-users] how to upgrade to belenos from 6.0

2017-11-29 Thread oralfloss 
I do not remember using update manager before.. I use synpatic manager to  
update my programs. Where do I find the update manager?

Re: [Trisquel-users] How does one respond to this statement?

2017-11-29 Thread Adonay Felipe Nogueira 
Also, interestingly, the [A]GPL (at least since version 2) has
*implied* patent grant and which is way more precise than most patent
grants, see [1].

Basically, something under GPL 2 (or even GPL 2+, GPL 3 or GPL 3+,
whatever) will also allow the licensee/receiver to make use of that
patented part and --- as far as I understand --- only in the licensed
work, and also allows the adaptations made from that work to carry the
same grant.

If however, someone makes a work that didn't come from yours, didn't
come from any adaptation made based on yours and happens to implement a
thing described in one of the patents, then in the worst case (not
recommended if you believe in Community Oriented GPL Enforcement), he
can get sued for patent infringement.

Inside the group of those who obtained a copy of the work, if one of the
licensees breaks the license, then (again not recommended) the licensee
can get sued for breaking the license *and* perhaps for patent
infringement.

[1]  (under CC
BY-SA 4.0). Particularly, see chapter 6 ("GPL’s Implied Patent Grant").

2017-11-29T20:47:30-0200 Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> Contributing a little more to what was said by others:
>
> First lets make a point about what is "economics". To put it simple,
> economics deals with evaluating how scarcity or abundance of a given
> resource (not money!) shapes how society behaves. Those who understand
> econmics feel free to complement what I just said, because I'm just
> simplifying the description.
>
> Now, what *isn't* economics? Simple: the art of getting rich. If one
> talks about "economics" in terms of getting rich, then you are talking
> about chrematistics (see [1][2]).
>
> Having said all that, lets dive a bit more:
>
> There are various resources in the world, besides there are those which
> are consumed when used, and those which are very costly/expensive to
> transport/carry arround, even more, there are resources that can be used
> and combined in order to form other resources that might have the same
> properties as the parent ones... or not.
>
> Thanks to computers and things that store stuff digitally, resources
> such as "knowledge" and "information" can now make other resources that,
> *by nature* (pay attention to this, it'll bite you in the future
> otherwise), are non-rival and non-excludable, both in the economic sense:
>
> - non-rival because, *by nature*, if one reads a digital book, for
>   example, its pages don't start to get old, neither they get undesired
>   wraps nor start to fall off. Furthermore, non-rival because, once
>   again *by nature*, it doesn't prevent another person to read that same
>   copy or any other copy originating exactly from the one you're
>   supposedly reading.
>
> - non-excludable because, *by nature*, there is no way to prevent those
>   who have not paid for it from having access to, say, the digital book
>   given as example before. Furthermore, the cost of transaction for
>   things originating from the "knowledge"+"information" combination and
>   which can be stored digitally somehow are almost non-existing, take
>   any computer file you have and which you received from someone else
>   and copy it anyware: you're done, the transaction cost for you was
>   almost nothing.
>
> Now, what does software patents have to do with what I said here?
>
> If one takes a resource that is naturally non-rival, non-excludable,
> which can be stored digitally, that came from the combination of
> "knowledge"+"information" resources --- to summarize: a public good by
> nature (in economic sense) --- and puts it under "contracts" (also in
> the economic sense) which are made like it's done for non-public goods
> (idem) and which excessively limit the capabilities of one party
> relative to what the offerer/provider already can do, then we have a
> tragedy of the anticommons, where everyone who *will be entering* the
> economic scenario and which could be providing a given public good by
> nature (again economically speaking) will feel tempted to hold up (not
> do anything), even though they might not know if there is already such a
> thing, this is well described in [3][4] and briefly mentioned in [5][6].
>
> In the other hand, if one makes the contract too loose so as to say "do
> whatever you want, I'll give you everything and not require anything
> besides attribution to me" then we *will still* face the problem of
> finding/fostering an oportunistic competitive behavior which further
> makes the tragedy of the anticommons stronger (see [3][4]), because this
> /homo economicus/ will attempt to proprietarize the adapatations done
> individually by that person.
>
> So both the receiving party and the offering one must find a contract
> that makes everyone possible to make everything as long as the thing in
> question and all the derivatives are kept under the same contract,
> furthermore, make all those involved contractually bound

Re: [Trisquel-users] How does one respond to this statement?

2017-11-29 Thread Adonay Felipe Nogueira 
Contributing a little more to what was said by others:

First lets make a point about what is "economics". To put it simple,
economics deals with evaluating how scarcity or abundance of a given
resource (not money!) shapes how society behaves. Those who understand
econmics feel free to complement what I just said, because I'm just
simplifying the description.

Now, what *isn't* economics? Simple: the art of getting rich. If one
talks about "economics" in terms of getting rich, then you are talking
about chrematistics (see [1][2]).

Having said all that, lets dive a bit more:

There are various resources in the world, besides there are those which
are consumed when used, and those which are very costly/expensive to
transport/carry arround, even more, there are resources that can be used
and combined in order to form other resources that might have the same
properties as the parent ones... or not.

Thanks to computers and things that store stuff digitally, resources
such as "knowledge" and "information" can now make other resources that,
*by nature* (pay attention to this, it'll bite you in the future
otherwise), are non-rival and non-excludable, both in the economic sense:

- non-rival because, *by nature*, if one reads a digital book, for
  example, its pages don't start to get old, neither they get undesired
  wraps nor start to fall off. Furthermore, non-rival because, once
  again *by nature*, it doesn't prevent another person to read that same
  copy or any other copy originating exactly from the one you're
  supposedly reading.

- non-excludable because, *by nature*, there is no way to prevent those
  who have not paid for it from having access to, say, the digital book
  given as example before. Furthermore, the cost of transaction for
  things originating from the "knowledge"+"information" combination and
  which can be stored digitally somehow are almost non-existing, take
  any computer file you have and which you received from someone else
  and copy it anyware: you're done, the transaction cost for you was
  almost nothing.

Now, what does software patents have to do with what I said here?

If one takes a resource that is naturally non-rival, non-excludable,
which can be stored digitally, that came from the combination of
"knowledge"+"information" resources --- to summarize: a public good by
nature (in economic sense) --- and puts it under "contracts" (also in
the economic sense) which are made like it's done for non-public goods
(idem) and which excessively limit the capabilities of one party
relative to what the offerer/provider already can do, then we have a
tragedy of the anticommons, where everyone who *will be entering* the
economic scenario and which could be providing a given public good by
nature (again economically speaking) will feel tempted to hold up (not
do anything), even though they might not know if there is already such a
thing, this is well described in [3][4] and briefly mentioned in [5][6].

In the other hand, if one makes the contract too loose so as to say "do
whatever you want, I'll give you everything and not require anything
besides attribution to me" then we *will still* face the problem of
finding/fostering an oportunistic competitive behavior which further
makes the tragedy of the anticommons stronger (see [3][4]), because this
/homo economicus/ will attempt to proprietarize the adapatations done
individually by that person.

So both the receiving party and the offering one must find a contract
that makes everyone possible to make everything as long as the thing in
question and all the derivatives are kept under the same contract,
furthermore, make all those involved contractually bound to provide
everything that is needed in order to study and adapt the object.

Finally, one has to take into account that references [2][3][4] have
some minor issues, to know more see my comment on [7].

Now a funny observation: when digital technology started to appear,
people were used to seeing two distinct groups of people: (a) those in
favor of it; (b) those against. Nowadays those still exist, but (a) has
divided itself, so we have: (a) those in favor and which think it still
deserves the same old rival+excludable+oportunistic+competitive
thinking; (b) those in favor and which are contrary of (a); (c) those
against it. So now I'm starting to understand why Stallman seems to
recommend digital *extraction*, because if the new group (a) continues
this madness it will affect (b), (c) and the rest of (a). Besides, the
old (a) pushed its goal so hard that now it can't carry the burden of
realising what the new (b) is telling. Interestingly, at least from a
quick look, these problems don't seem to exist if one goes to a place
where everyone agrees and forbids use of any digital technology.

[1]

(under CC BY 4.0).

[2]

(under CC

Re: [Trisquel-users] Intel AMT and Free Software

2017-11-29 Thread leestrobel 

I agree with calher. Being 80% free is better than being 20% free ... :-)

Re: [Trisquel-users] How does one respond to this statement?

2017-11-29 Thread shiretoko 

I think the question here is a bit weird... "what does one respond"?
Well, if you're asked a question, then why not just answer what you think is  
correct?


I think it will not be so convincing if you just repeat what other people  
told you.
Maybe you can find examples of absurd patents and cases when developers have  
been unrightfully sued.


If you have just second-hand-information on the topic (like most people do,  
including me), then you can be upright about it and say: "From what I've  
heard i think patents are wrong because..."
Or "I don't know much about it, but I really dislike the idea of software  
patents because... (I believe practical knowledge should be freely  
available)".


You don't have to claim to know everything, and you don't have to try to  
convince people who already made up their minds.
At the same time, you can just question on what grounds the arguments of your  
opponent are based on. I mean let's look at the quote that you've given:



“Software patents are essential because they are the consequence of  
substantial risk-taking and investment on the part of firms. Without software  
patents or without adequately protecting them, the incentives of firms to  
innovate and invest would be undermined, with the consequence that consumers  
may be worse off as a result.”


How does she reach this conclusion? How many firms (I guess this means  
companies) has she observed in detail so that she can

put this thesis on solid grounds?
I bet there aren't that many. So if she's just guessing and telling vague  
ideas, then I think a simple "My guess is that you're wrong" can be already  
enough.

[Trisquel-users] Starting T7 GNOME Shell

2017-11-29 Thread Caleb Herbert 
How do I start GNOME Shell in Trisquel 7?

I installed GNOME.

sudo apt install gnome

But, when I select "GNOME" in LightDM, I am immediately returned to the
display manager's login screen.  GNOME does not start.

How do I start GNOME?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Intel AMT and Free Software

2017-11-29 Thread Caleb Herbert 
Using free software instead of proprietary software is always better.

It's good to use free programs on a proprietary OS, if the alternative
is using proprietary programs on a proprietary OS.

It's good to use a free OS on a proprietary BIOS, if the alternative is
using a proprietary OS on a proprietary BIOS.

It's good to ADD free software.  It's not good to ADD proprietary
software.

[Trisquel-users] Intel AMT and Free Software

2017-11-29 Thread davidecaramori 
Hello to everyone. I came across a thought.If most computers and mobile  
devices have the latest intel processors (and we know that this is not free  
hardware as Stallman said) how can we consider ourselves more free than those  
who use Windows or Mac? I mean, if someone has newer intel hardware and Free  
Software installed can we consider that person free (as in freedom)? Is still  
worth to install Free Software on a computer that runs iAMT? Or is the same  
as having a computer with proprietary software?

Re: [Trisquel-users] How does one respond to this statement?

2017-11-29 Thread contact 
How many inventors had their ideas stolen by big corporations because of our  
dysfunctional system/patent laws? What about their money and time? Patent  
laws are strangling innovation. Patent laws were there to originally help  
encourage the sharing of ideas, now it is not about who is right, it is about  
who has the most lawyers.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Uruk 2.0 Last Touches

2017-11-29 Thread gnugaz77 
Been a long time since I posted. Running Uruk on a Librebooted Thinkpad T500  
and its running really smooth.
The installation worked without a hitch. Once installed and rebooted I run  
the updates and rebooted again. No issues.


The control center is great. Nice short cuts to just about everything you may  
need. Not had any problems with it.


I tip my hat to you sirs. Very good work. Looking forward to final release.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Do Riseup, ProtonMail, and Openmailbox webmails use only free JavaScript code?

2017-11-29 Thread jodiendo 
SuperTramp83 said: Riseup mail also offers the awesome squirrel mail  
interface which doesn't require the use of any javascript code in order to be  
completely functional.


Well I use to hunt for squirrels, man they taste good, buy I hate rabbits.

Re: [Trisquel-users] How does one respond to this statement?

2017-11-29 Thread jodiendo 

something to read

Introducing the Innovator’s Patent Agreement
https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/a/2012/introducing-the-innovator-s-patent-agreement.html

Re: [Trisquel-users] How to get most up-to-date abrowser for Trisquel 6.0

2017-11-29 Thread Caleb Herbert 
If you were talking about Guix, earlier I linked the instructions for
doing it.

https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/html_node/Binary-Installation.html

[Trisquel-users] Re : how to upgrade to belenos from 6.0

2017-11-29 Thread lcerf 
Isn't the "Update Manager" proposing you to click a button to update to  
Trisquel 7?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Noscript installation

2017-11-29 Thread stone 

It works now!!

Thank you very much!!

Re: [Trisquel-users] Noscript installation

2017-11-29 Thread alonivtsan 
You should be able to download it from Mozilla's web page. If the newest one  
doesn't work, try installing an older release (non web extension one, 5.1.7)  
from there.


https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/versions/