Infinite Freedom??? -- More Insignificant Wisdom ...

[Bryan J. Smith]

Now that I'm away from my Crackberry ...
  More Insignificant Wisdom ...


On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 13:34 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: 
> An absolutely reasonable suggestion.  As a matter of fact, the Board
> considered that initially, but opted not to separate this content over
> concerns of simply not identifying any significant justification/payoff
> (and not having the time to implement in time for F7 either).

First off, by "suggestion," I merely meant, "okay, if this is what is to
happen, here's one way it should happen."  Not that I necessarily agree.

Secondly, why doesn't this not surprise me that the Board already
considered it?  Everytime I make a suggestion, as a counter "due
process" to what I consider to be -- oh, how can I put this, an
"inconsiderate demand" -- it seems the Fedora Project already thought of
it.  Wow!

Now does that mean I understand things, Fedora, etc...???
Is it that maybe my "screwed up" values are similar???
Hmmm, I won't think too long on that.
Or maybe, just maybe, the Fedora Board is "Being Bryan Smith."  ;)
Oh yeah, no ego there (BTW, that's trademarked!  Royalties bay-bee!)


On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 01:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: 
> Removing firmware outside of the kernel is easy. Removing kernel in the 
> firmware is going to be difficult but you or whoever wants to drive such 
> a effort can probably get in touch with gNewSense folks to coordinate 
> the effort. If there is a real need for it someone should step up to it. 
> Let's see if that happens.

At what point does this really cross into the kernel space?  Or even
beyond that, at what point does this cross into someone stepping forward
-- outside of Fedora (even if they work on Fedora, for Red Hat, etc...)?

A generic facility for user-space loading, update, initrd, etc... would
be a nice facility, although I'm not sure it would be entirely feasible.
But it would and could, possibly, address some issues.

But one thing is for sure, I don't see this being an endeavor for Fedora
at all -- at least not a consideration for the distribution.  It's
really a larger detail to be tackled outside of distribution tools
themselves -- especially at the kernel level.

Unfortunately, the "screaming experts" tend to cause this stuff to be
non-PC, regardless of the legal and GPL compatible bundling or other
details it may be.  Not sure I want to touch this any further.


On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 01:08 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: 
> Sure. Do you want to do it? can you explain on what you consider 100% 
> Free?

<tongue-in-cheek>What the FSF does you fool!</tongue-in-cheek>  ;->

Seriously now, I don't know or think subjective -- or even if truly
objective -- suggestions can and should be made outside of not just
merely the Fedora board, but outside of many, community associations.
And that includes maybe including this other entity ... like the FSF
itself.  ;->

What facilities, forums, etc... can Fedora advocates and/or contributors
tap to get this discussion rolling?  Especially in a more open, and
probably more technical arena, to solve the real considerations that
some people will have.

I mean, even though I used the word "ignorant" -- and strongly feel it
applies when I used it (despite the lack of tact) -- we can't ignore
that there seems to be significant (majority?) of people who will feel
this way.  We need an avenue to better explain the issues -- especially
since they go outside Fedora itself.

In other words, get a crapload of smarter and more civil people than
myself together and hash them out.  There's got to be a series of both
marketing and possibly even technical solutions.


On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 13:40 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: 
> Rodrigo, 
> Actually... I'd like to thank you for speaking up, especially about
> something you are clearly passionate about.  Just because not everyone
> agrees with you 100% doesn't mean that you aren't being heard.  Please,
> keep up the good work (and the good fight)!

The great thing about Freedom is also its greatest downfall, especially
in an ignorant majority.  Not everything is about ignorant majority.
Basic social constructs themselves are about majority.  Unfortunately,
technical specifics tend to be about the expertise that only applies to
a minority, and the ignorant majority must be careful not to let their
majority view become the self-fulfilling truth -- outside that
expertise.  I see it regularly with engineering and law myself.

Freedom requires careful consideration, due process and analysis -- not
merely from an outsider, but as an insider, a stakeholder, someone who
has a point to make.  We have to remain vigilant in not merely a
"stance," but our utmost consideration for the technical _specifics_ and
real issues -- from copyright to licensing to trademark to technical
ability or even just technical feasibility -- to implement that stance,
if possible.  That's why it's very important not to merely say "the FSF
blah" but to put forth the concerned, technical argument and -- most
importantly -- technical _solution_ that implements it.

If you cannot provide a technical _solution_, then you must be
considerate of the processes _already_ in place to best deal with such
consideration, such due process, such "expertise" in moving forward.
And as it has been suggested in many ways in this thread now, if you do
_not_ like that still, then you are also _free_ to install your own
organization, your own due process, your own "expertise" into solving
the problem outside these existing processes.  Otherwise, you accept the
existing processes as they are, and you either take the time and effort
to involve yourself in them, and its solution, or you decide to trust
those who have already taken your views -- which are rarely (if never)
unique -- into account and tried to accommodate them best.


On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 01:08 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: 
> Sure. Do you want to do it? can you explain on what you consider 100% 
> Free?

<tongue-in-cheek>What the FSF does you fool!</tongue-in-cheek>  ;->

Seriously now, I don't know or think subjective -- or even if truly
objective -- suggestions can and should be made outside of not just
merely the Fedora board, but outside of many, community associations.
And that includes maybe including this other entity ... like the FSF
itself.  ;->

What facilities, forums, etc... can Fedora advocates and/or contributors
tap to get this discussion rolling?  Especially in a more open, and
probably more technical arena, to solve the real considerations that
some people will have.  Especially since it touches core design and
implements in the kernel itself, especially as how all parties address
firmware updates, run-time, etc... in drivers today.

I mean, even though I used the word "ignorant" -- and strongly feel it
applies when I used it (despite the lack of tact in doing so) -- we
can't ignore that there seems to be significant (majority?) of people
who will feel this way.  We need an avenue to better explain the issues
-- especially since they go outside Fedora itself.

In other words, get a crapload of smarter and more civil people than
myself (since I'm the stupidest and most ignorant fool in the world --
let alone a very biased and land-locked/narrow-minded American engineer)
together and hash them out.  There's got to be a series of both
marketing (and possibly even technical solutions) to address this.  But
as I've pointed out, this is hardly Fedora on its own.


-- Bryan "really going to STFU now" Smith


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution