Grench
Forum Addict!
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 6,629
More personal insults? Do you have anything constructive to add to the conversation or are you simply trolling?
"Respects Your Freedom" certification?
- Thread starter _wb_
- Start date
milkshake
Advanced Member
Why when references to factual real requirements do you shrug them off without a counter argument or proof?
That's like when your little sister knows they can't win the argument so results to calling u stupid.
I have sent an email to the FSF asking for clarifications on some of their RFY requirements. I'll post their answers here.
Meanwhile there is no need to invent crazy interpretations of the RFY criteria. For example, the "no recommending proprietary software" criterion is clearly aimed at avoiding a website full of slogans like "Dell recommends Windows", which would be rather embarrassing. It does not mean you cannot mention proprietary software at all.
Meanwhile there is no need to invent crazy interpretations of the RFY criteria. For example, the "no recommending proprietary software" criterion is clearly aimed at avoiding a website full of slogans like "Dell recommends Windows", which would be rather embarrassing. It does not mean you cannot mention proprietary software at all.
Grench
Forum Addict!
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 6,629
Thank you. I look forward to it.
The wording is no where near that narrow.
"100% Free Software
All the product software must be free software. The product software includes all software that the seller includes in the product, or provides with the product, or recommends for use in conjunction with the product, or steers users towards installation in the product."
All. Not just OS slogans. Not just the OS. All explicitly, per the statement above, includes everything even recommended or steered toward (advertised with) for use in conjunction with or to be later installed on the product. This isn't vague. It is very broad and would include everything from secondary OS capabilities game ROMs.
Besides which, why do they require exclusive branding?
"Other Misleading Endorsements
Companies awarded RYF certification for a given product, must not distribute any product-related materials with endorsements or badges to proprietary software, such as "Works with Windows" or "Made for Mac" badges, because these would give an appearance of legitimacy to those proprietary packages, and may make users think the product requires them. However, we don't object to clear factual statements informing the user that the product also works with specific proprietary operating systems."
If the hypothetical device, "Works with Windows", but includes a FOSS alternative, both statements could be absolutely true. I see nothing wrong with having BOTH badges if BOTH apply. There is nothing "embarrassing" about that. Their requirement for exclusivity (speech restriction) is simply another downfall.
The funny bit. A factual statement in a non-exclusive font and no 'badge' of, "Works with Windows" would be OK - so long as they vetted it and found it to be a factual statement, not a badge, and that nothing was included to actually make it actually do so. That would, in theory, be OK. I suspect that this was likely added as a nod to devices such as USB dongles and DAS devices that can operate independent of the OS on the machine they are attached to. The existing Pandora, "Works with Windows" in this respect. It can connect via a USB cable and appear as a mass storage device.
No, I am not advocating using Windows as the shipping OS for any Pandora successor. But, as above, it doesn't have to have Windows installed on it to, 'Work' with another OS.
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
I don't know if I agree with the extreme interpretation Grench takes but yours sounds overly naive. They say no recommendation of proprietary software or steering to it. What does this really mean? At what point does mentioning become highlighting, and at what point is that considered recommendation? If I understand right your interpretation seems to be about making sure that proprietary software isn't recommended over FOSS alternatives. But they don't say that and I don't think they even imply that.
Look at the emulator ad Craig made for Pandora. That's pretty blatantly promoting Pandora as being capable of running this vast plethora of proprietary software. Not just saying it can be done, it's clearly making it the number one selling point - it's good at playing games from an industry that is proprietary to the core.
Tangent rant - is anyone ever annoyed by people who insist that all emulators be FOSS but then have no problem playing proprietary ROMs on them? The console and retro computer gaming industries are about as proprietary as you get in the software world...
Last edited by a moderator:
Grench
Forum Addict!
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 6,629
Don't you know that game ROMs are not programs but merely an 'encumbered format' data file?
I noted the video on the Pandora home page before as 'advertising' the use of proprietary software as a primary purpose of the device. I was promptly informed by FSF/RYF proponents that game ROMs are merely an 'encumbered format' much like an MP3 audio file. (Roughly Oct 12 in this thread if anyone wants to try to find the reference.)
The proponents of FSF/RYF certification try very hard to stretch the FSF/RYF stated rules to encompass everything used to advertise the Pandora. IMHO game ROMs are clearly proprietary software. Apparently that is questionable...?
comradekingu
Glowing ember
Ad hominem non arguments, non sequitur, ignoratio elenchi, naturalistic fallacy with undistributed middle, argumentum ad ignorantiam et cetera.
It doesnt matter how you are wrong, just why, its because you have an inability to read.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
I went back and looked at that. Sorry WizardStan, but I don't agree with any argument that this constitutes as encumbered software at all. They contain proprietary software, plain and simple. Anyone who takes a principled stance against using proprietary software - which is the main audience for something like RYF - would be a hypocrite to play commercial game ROMs that haven't been subsequently made GPL-compatible (sorry, I'm struggling to say "Free" without feeling like a douchebag)
FSF may be willing to tolerate mp3 playback even though they don't like the mp3 patents, because that's still not really core to their software platform. Consoles games are.
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
The argument wasn't to prove that he was conclusively wrong, it was to demonstrate that there exists one possible interpretation of the rules where he might be wrong. I could have picked a lot of things, I just went with the first thing that came to mind, and if he'd actually wanted to debate instead of playing games I'd have suggested a few more. Grench made the universal "it is this way" statement, I wasn't saying "no it is the opposite", I was pointing out that he was fabricating facts that weren't necessarily true.Maybe I'm wrong and I'd be ok with that, it would mean that at that point we have definitive evidence of their intentions and then he can make all the absolute statements of fact about the subject he wants, because then it would be fact. Right now it's not fact, just conjecture.
Considering your lame response to somebody else, I recommend that you take your own advice here. Ricing Windows was common well before most people had ever heard of Linux, suggesting that it is something that can be done because of Linux is misleading. Most proprietary OSes can be similarly modded without too much troube.
And the fact that most people can't read the code and don't care, is a valid point that you fail to credit. The point is that the software was already closed. It's not going to be opened without a pack of patent attorneys spending thousands of hours reviewing the code. It would be nice if the software were open, but realistically the primary concern should be a stable driver with good software as 90% or more of the people using the unit won't be able to read it anyways, and the bulk of the remainder won't have the time to really get to know the code base anyways.
Considering that this is your MO, except for the last line, don't you think it's time you took your own advice?
Last edited by a moderator:
comradekingu
Glowing ember
wb was describing the merits of free software, and how it would have been impossible without. In no way is that anywhere similar to what you can do on windows. Which proves his point, not yours. People did not rice windows before most people had heard of linux, that is ad populace, generally wrong fallacy supporting nothing. Reverse engineering code is legal. Our choices are between code that is, and code that isnt, that is the point.
I did credit the point, read. You did nothing to disprove my statement.
Non sequitur argument with ad populace fallacies. You did the same thing as me, only turned it around, and gave no reasoning, bravo. My point still stands.
A time concern does nothing to prove the point you arent making, nor does it take away anything.
Documentation and code is a bonus. You may shift your primary concern towards something that is unrelated, but you arent disproving anything about the point at hand. Case in point, you cant have good drivers over time if they are closed, so you manage to yet be wrong.
Given that i didnt have time to point it out last night, and that disproving something that is pointed out as wrong with no evidence to the contrary, doesnt make me wrong. You made an ad hominem attack.
I did credit the point, read. You did nothing to disprove my statement.
Non sequitur argument with ad populace fallacies. You did the same thing as me, only turned it around, and gave no reasoning, bravo. My point still stands.
A time concern does nothing to prove the point you arent making, nor does it take away anything.
Documentation and code is a bonus. You may shift your primary concern towards something that is unrelated, but you arent disproving anything about the point at hand. Case in point, you cant have good drivers over time if they are closed, so you manage to yet be wrong.
Given that i didnt have time to point it out last night, and that disproving something that is pointed out as wrong with no evidence to the contrary, doesnt make me wrong. You made an ad hominem attack.
FSF "tolerates" mp3 playback because its an alternative to an alternative. Its about choice. It is in no way comparable to shipping an emulator, because that doesn't state anything about what you emulate with it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Game ROMs are obviously a form of closed-source proprietary software. That means we cannot ship them with the device and get the RYF certificate. It also means that we cannot put statements on our website like "once you receive your Pandora, the OpenPandora Team recommends that you install the New Super Mario Bros ROM on it, here's a link to a ROM site".
Obviously we're not going to do that (for other reasons than to get RYF certification), so this is not an issue. It's more problematic to not recommend legally available proprietary Pandora software like DraStic or Kami Retro. Here's where some clarification is required as to what constitutes a recommendation. In my opinion, it would be a recommendation if for instance at first boot, you would get a dialog saying "Do you want to download DraStic?" or if on the official OpenPandora website, there would be a list of "recommended software" which includes proprietary software. It would in my opinion not be a recommendation if screenshots or videos are shown in marketing material or if the software is made available for download on a community-maintained repo hosted on the official vendor server. But clarification is needed as to what exactly the boundaries are of the notions "recommend" and "steer towards".
The RYF certification is all about being able to do what you want with your device. If you want to run proprietary software on it (and most games are), that is fine. But the device has to be usable without proprietary software.
So yes, I guess that if all marketing videos have the implicit or explicit message that in order to actually use your Pandora you absolutely need to put proprietary software on it, that would be contrary to the spirit of the RYF certification. Watching ED's videos, I never had that impression though.
Obviously we're not going to do that (for other reasons than to get RYF certification), so this is not an issue. It's more problematic to not recommend legally available proprietary Pandora software like DraStic or Kami Retro. Here's where some clarification is required as to what constitutes a recommendation. In my opinion, it would be a recommendation if for instance at first boot, you would get a dialog saying "Do you want to download DraStic?" or if on the official OpenPandora website, there would be a list of "recommended software" which includes proprietary software. It would in my opinion not be a recommendation if screenshots or videos are shown in marketing material or if the software is made available for download on a community-maintained repo hosted on the official vendor server. But clarification is needed as to what exactly the boundaries are of the notions "recommend" and "steer towards".
The RYF certification is all about being able to do what you want with your device. If you want to run proprietary software on it (and most games are), that is fine. But the device has to be usable without proprietary software.
So yes, I guess that if all marketing videos have the implicit or explicit message that in order to actually use your Pandora you absolutely need to put proprietary software on it, that would be contrary to the spirit of the RYF certification. Watching ED's videos, I never had that impression though.
comradekingu
Glowing ember
Breaking copyright law is illegal to begin with.
If you wanted to be anal about it, one could argue that the display of a proprietary game alone would be a problem, as that would theoretically imply its the only game available, giving you no options.
All in the mindset of "I interpret this to be against itself"-sort of way, but still.
I don't understand grenches ability to go out of his way in defending badges, that we cannot get, and for all intents an purposes have the same restrictions imposed that he is supposedly against, making it inept, and then a whole heap of others too, the theoretical aspect of that withers too.
So long as its only a list, with images/video and the license is stated thats fine. Which is what a (functional) repo is. There are no restrictions as to how things are provided, so long as it isn't forced upon the user.
Therefore its unproblematic to not have the word "recommended" with the list, since that falls squarely in the "recommended"-stear towards category. Staying impartial about the choice of the user, which many proponents speak out in favour of, (kami retros author for one), is a good line to follow.
And grench, no, that doesn't mean FOSS is anything but an option...
I think software that display the device's abilities should be credited, not so much for advertising the software in itself, but its a nice way of giving back for providing that.
If you wanted to be anal about it, one could argue that the display of a proprietary game alone would be a problem, as that would theoretically imply its the only game available, giving you no options.
All in the mindset of "I interpret this to be against itself"-sort of way, but still.
I don't understand grenches ability to go out of his way in defending badges, that we cannot get, and for all intents an purposes have the same restrictions imposed that he is supposedly against, making it inept, and then a whole heap of others too, the theoretical aspect of that withers too.
So long as its only a list, with images/video and the license is stated thats fine. Which is what a (functional) repo is. There are no restrictions as to how things are provided, so long as it isn't forced upon the user.
Therefore its unproblematic to not have the word "recommended" with the list, since that falls squarely in the "recommended"-stear towards category. Staying impartial about the choice of the user, which many proponents speak out in favour of, (kami retros author for one), is a good line to follow.
And grench, no, that doesn't mean FOSS is anything but an option...
I think software that display the device's abilities should be credited, not so much for advertising the software in itself, but its a nice way of giving back for providing that.
Last edited by a moderator:
Grench
Forum Addict!
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 6,629
Please examine your statements above. Claiming, "Its about choice", "has to be usable without proprietary software", "doesn't mean FOSS is anything but an option..."
All of those statements imply that the FSF/RYF certification allows choice. It does not. It requires exclusivity for FOSS on the device, in the package, on the advertising, in statements, etc... It excludes offering a choice for non FOSS alternatives - regardless of whether the device includes a truly FOSS alternative.
Restricting to a single solution is not true freedom and it does not allow options to be presented to allow actual end users an actual choice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_choice
comradekingu
Glowing ember
context, please revise.
Edit: also, before attempting to understand what other people write, try to make sense of your utterances.
You are repeating lies without any foundation in reality. I even spelled it out for you and you failed to get it...
Barking up the wrong tree trying to patronize me. You draw your own lies into the conclusion, in turn proving little else but your own invincible ignorance.
Edit: also, before attempting to understand what other people write, try to make sense of your utterances.
You are repeating lies without any foundation in reality. I even spelled it out for you and you failed to get it...
Barking up the wrong tree trying to patronize me. You draw your own lies into the conclusion, in turn proving little else but your own invincible ignorance.
Last edited by a moderator:
comradekingu
Glowing ember
sswam: Please dont take things out of context, read it again. You will find it has, 1, nothing to do with RYF, its a strawman attack on FSF. It is also impartial towards the use, from a users viewpoint. Which ironically _isn't_, something the RYF does or is concerned with. We call this logical fallacy in norway "skin-holy"
It also states "GPL-compatible", in lieu of using the word free, in turn ending up with something that isnt the essence of free.
Imposing views on others is a douche move. No matter what side of the fence you are on. You assume a third position where you take things to mean something they don't. Suggesting you take that out of your sig.
Then it ends with a false assumption about why mp3 playback is allowed.
Since it also proves grench wrong in his futile propaganda attempts i'll quote it:
It also states "GPL-compatible", in lieu of using the word free, in turn ending up with something that isnt the essence of free.
Imposing views on others is a douche move. No matter what side of the fence you are on. You assume a third position where you take things to mean something they don't. Suggesting you take that out of your sig.
Then it ends with a false assumption about why mp3 playback is allowed.
Since it also proves grench wrong in his futile propaganda attempts i'll quote it:
Making an emulation device for old games is a perfectly honorable task. It frees up those games rather than making them native to their now semi-defunct platforms. As such, displaying its abilities in that regard is perfectly fine. The FSF was always a "bring your own hardware" kind of project. Whereas now its trying to go beyond having a base platform with for example proprietary EFI bios and suchlike. An emulator is capable of playing homebrew just as well, so there is no stance taken on the users behalf. Like if one wants to purchase one of said games, homebrew or re-released, illegitimately download, dump from old stock, etc, its up to the user.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
Can we get a "dislike this" button for the forum?
You go off on a rant about how emulators are honorable and then accuse me of strawman arguments (god I'm getting sick of hearing people say that and all the other internet argument cliches)
Sorry if I don't feel like putting your precious ideology on a pedestal in not wanting to say "Free." It's like they recognized that the word "free" was ambiguous and decided to capitalize it not just to differentiate it but to elevate it. There's nothing inaccurate about my saying GPL-compatible in that sentence (note nowhere did I try to tell other people what words to not use). Asking him to take it out of his sig is really pathetic.
You go off on a rant about how emulators are honorable and then accuse me of strawman arguments (god I'm getting sick of hearing people say that and all the other internet argument cliches)
Sorry if I don't feel like putting your precious ideology on a pedestal in not wanting to say "Free." It's like they recognized that the word "free" was ambiguous and decided to capitalize it not just to differentiate it but to elevate it. There's nothing inaccurate about my saying GPL-compatible in that sentence (note nowhere did I try to tell other people what words to not use). Asking him to take it out of his sig is really pathetic.
GPL-compatible is not the same as "Free" (however douchebaggy that word makes you feel). In fact, it is not even clear what it means, since the GPLv2 is not compatible with the GPLv3. There are several Free licenses (using the FSF definition of "Free") that are not GPLv2 nor GPLv3-compatible.
I agree that distinguishing Free from free is perhaps a bit silly. We could not use the word at all and talk about libre and gratis instead. Or free-as-in-speech and free-as-in-beer, but that will probably only invite another rant from Grench about how the FSF is disrespecting his freedom of speech.
I agree that distinguishing Free from free is perhaps a bit silly. We could not use the word at all and talk about libre and gratis instead. Or free-as-in-speech and free-as-in-beer, but that will probably only invite another rant from Grench about how the FSF is disrespecting his freedom of speech.
Similar threads
