On 09/05/2010 03:59 PM, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> On Sat Aug 28 21:11, paxcoder wrote:
>> On 08/28/2010 06:30 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>> We should not forget that as we're promoting the technology for people
>>> to maintain their own information, we also want to promote business
>>> models that are compatible with that information.
>> You're missing the aim of the project entirely. We will make FREEDOMbox
>> to enable more private, secure networking for persons. Have you watched
>> Moglen's talk? It's not about making a cheap server and selling it to
>> companies. If it were, we'd probably be non-free and provide services
>> like UbuntuOne. We won't.
> Well, I was in that talk at the time (as was Sam) and actually I agree with Sam
> here - but of course there are some provisos.
> Firstly - this is a project to build an actual device which we want to ship on
> store shelves - of course there is going to be business involved somewhere.
I'm pretty sure Eben didn't think of us as the ones who are shipping the
device, but the ones who are writing software for it. The businesses
will probably be exactly as involved in FB as they are in Debian in
relations to web servers which are running it. You can yourself decide
how much/little you think that is.
> Secondly - the aim of the project is to enable privacy, freedom and choice for
> the users - but that does not constrain it to not use the cloud or commercial
> services, as long as it still meets those goals.
Once more, we're going for decentralized services, as highlighted by
Moglen. If you want to run or write a cloud client, I won't and cannot
stop you from doing that. Whether that client will be included in the
distro and by default in Freedom Box, is a different question - one that
is up to the community to decide. I don't think we should spend energy
writing and shipping software for services that cost money, and I'm
skeptical what "commercial services" would meet our needs and standards.
That is all.