We should go back to barrel plug charging ports like on old dumb phones.

@phnt My GNU/Phone has a barrel charging port.

@Suiseiseki Everything can have whatever you want, when it exits only in your mind and not reality.

@phnt It's literally sitting right next to me, with the barrel charging port plugged into the GNUbooted ThinkPad X200s.

@Suiseiseki Post pic or it doesn't exist.

@Suiseiseki Also your Chinkpad is not a phone.

@phnt @Suiseiseki He’s probably talking about a dect phone or something.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki That is not GNU approved. Pretty sure nobody bothers to make free software firmware for those.

@phnt @Suiseiseki Most of these are non-upgradable.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki Still proprietary. No amount of mental gymnastics will change the fact you don't have the source for the firmware.

@phnt @Suiseiseki The free software movement is not a movement about source code but it is about freedom.

You can call it mental gymnastics all you want but the philosophy behind it is consistent and logical.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki My philosophy is simple. If I don't have access to the source code and no ability to get it, it is proprietary and not freedom respecting. The fact that I'm more extreme on this than FSF/RMS is another thing.

@phnt @Suiseiseki Why do you even want the source code for a read only chip? How does that help you? You can’t modify it anyway.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki Doesn't matter, I can replace the chip with a writeable one, if it is a standalone ROM and not embedded in something like the processor.

@phnt @Suiseiseki I mean I agree it is nice to have and probably interesting to look at, but having it does not give you any practical benefits.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt gee why would I want to analyze and verify the device does what it claims it does and doesn't have hidden backdoors or other nasty stuff, it's a scooby doo mystery

@romin @Suiseiseki @phnt Even if they gave you the source code that doesn’t change anything. How do you even verify the source code on the device is the same as what they gave you?

If hardware has built-in anti-features that is still bad of course, but it is outside of the domain of free software.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt but they just lock you out of modifying it in even more ways than hiding the source code. Is it like multiplying negatives?

@snacks @Suiseiseki @phnt Most hardware designs don’t “lock you out” but simply don’t have rewriteable memory. That’s a simple hardware limitation and not a deliberate attempt to curb your freedom.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt you decap the chip and inspect the ROM cells match the compiled source

@romin @Suiseiseki @SuperDicq Or you know, dump it and disassemble it.

@romin @Suiseiseki @phnt That is not a practical thing an average user would do. This essentially destroys the hardware.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt i'm pretty sure the memory is rewriteable on most of those if you get to the right contacts inside or they blow a fuse to deliberately block rewriting. Actual roms are very rare nowadays afaik

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt
>that is not a practical thing
since when the free software foundation has been about practicality, it's about freedom sweaty

@romin @Suiseiseki @phnt The claim that the free software movement is not pragmatic is a false narrative by the open source corpo bootlickers.

Maybe things in the free software movement are already an imperfect middle ground solution because true freedom has not yet been achieved.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt look at him cope

@romin @Suiseiseki @phnt It’s not cope, it’s true.

I mean the FSF could start complaining that my SSD has proprietary firmware on its controller because that’s just issues the movement ignores for now because if they did nobody would even be able to use a computer in the first place. It is acceptable for now until a solution exists.

@phnt Here you go fed.

It does phone calls and SMS's - it's a phone.

@phnt @SuperDicq The FSF did in fact use desk phones running free software when they had an office, but I wasn't able to find the model details.

@Suiseiseki @phnt Can’t you just ask them?

@snacks @phnt @SuperDicq Every processor that runs software is required to contain ROM for at least the bootloader.

DECT phones either use one time programmable ROM, or some SPI flash, but even if there is a SPI flash, the manufacturer never offers an update.

@SuperDicq @phnt Who exactly am I meant to ask?

@Suiseiseki @phnt Also slightly unrelated, I’m looking to get a DSLR camera without proprietary software.

The best I can do here in this segment of hardware is to get one that is supported by MagicLantern, right? It doesn’t fully replace the camera’s software but it piggybacks off of it.

@Suiseiseki @phnt Literally anyone who used to work at the FSF office. Or just email info@fsf.org and they will probably forward you to someone that knows.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt
>if they did nobody would even be able to use a computer
you are probably saying this with a straight face when the list of `endorsed hardware` by the fsf is mainly decades old junk chinkpads

@romin @phnt @SuperDicq >The best laptops ever made.
>Seriously calls them junk.

@SuperDicq @phnt Great, now I need to get the email server working.

@romin @Suiseiseki @phnt Yes because these “decades old junk chinkpads” are the best that’s currently available.

If the requirements were more strict and required full software freedom then they wouldn’t be able to recommend a single computer at all.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt
>Yes because these "decades old junk chinkpads" are the best that's currently available.
oh you're just trolling, bye

@romin @Suiseiseki @phnt There is literally no hardware available that requires less proprietary software. That is a fact and not a cope or a troll.

@SuperDicq @phnt @romin SDD's run proprietary software without firmness and HDD's are the same.

There are some ancient HDD's that only use proprietary hardware, but the practical result is the same, as for the control software, if you refuse updates and thus don't agree to any proprietary license and mitigate issues with data tampering with FDE, the problems can be mostly mitigated.

Yes, a free SDD, or a free SATA/PCIe ramdisk with battery-backup is something that is needed, but there is a lot of lower-hanging fruit to deal with first.

@Suiseiseki @phnt @romin I believe @lxo once said that the only truly free computer is a PDP-11 or something ancient like that.

@SuperDicq @phnt @romin @lxo Yes, the PDP-11 with free software was fully free, as it even ran a free software microcode.

Still, you will likely get better performance using a microcontroller with free software, like the pre-qualcomm Arduino's (the bootloader is free software and the boards are a free hardware design - the onlg proprietary parts are the AVR CPU and the power-regulation circuitry).

@Suiseiseki @phnt @SuperDicq why would bootloader code be required to be on rom? And if i don't release updates to my proprietary software it becomes free???

@snacks @Suiseiseki @phnt

And if i don’t release updates to my proprietary software it becomes free???
No, you misunderstand. If your hardware has physically no method updating the software doesn’t become free, but the software becomes hardware, because it is an unchangeable part of the it just like the circuitry.

@snacks @Suiseiseki @phnt You can avoid the need for software freedom by making the software part of the hardware. That makes sense, right?

@snacks @Suiseiseki @SuperDicq Yes, if a company builds a backdoor to your ethernet NIC's firmware and makes it so you cannot upgrade it, it is actually free software and respects your freedom according to the FSF.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt how does the software become part of the hardware or not depending on whether or not there's a trace to the write pin on my eeprom or not? It is again just deliberate choice by the manufacturer to lock you out. Not to mention that even writing to such a chip in system isn't that hard

@phnt @snacks @Suiseiseki The fact that it does not take away your freedom does not mean it is in inherently good and not malicious. We’re not arguing for that.

@snacks @Suiseiseki @phnt That really depends on the type of hardware. Not everything is eeprom.

@SuperDicq @snacks @Suiseiseki It is enough for the FSF to declare the backdoored device with the weird RYF or whatever certification. That's more than enough I need to know.

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt and if it is?

@SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt that's just the easiest case for me to argue here tbh

@snacks @phnt @SuperDicq Since how else is the processor going to get initialized and then start loading software if the lowest-level bootloader isn't stored in circuits and therefore is readable as soon as power is applied?

Only if the lowest-level bootloader contains circuits that implement's SPI or NAND reads, can a next-stage bootloader stored in SPI flash or NAND can be loaded.

Even though a lot of proprietary hardware technically contains proprietary software, a lot of the time that software is only programmed at the factory and never updated and the user is not asked to agree to a proprietary license.

The practical result of such situation is identical as to if that functionality was implemented as a proprietary circuit.

If would be good to have free hardware designs, but unfortunately hardware is inherently proprietary.

@phnt @SuperDicq @snacks What device?
- Realtek NIC's for only come with ROM and loading software is optional.
- 1000BASE-T Intel NIC's appear to only contain ROM - I haven't found a program for such.

RYF will not certify a device with a malicious circuit like a backdoor, if that backdoor is not disabled.

@Suiseiseki @SuperDicq @snacks And how do you know that the backdoor doesn't exist?

@phnt @SuperDicq @snacks The backdoor for the Intel NIC's on the GNUbooted ThinkPads was implemented in the Intel ME program that runs on the NIC - eliminating such program eliminates the backdoor.

Why bother implementing 2 backdoors in the same place?

The microcode updates clearly add another backdoor, but those are eliminated too.

@Suiseiseki @phnt @SuperDicq if you can read a rom you can read a parallel eeprom

@phnt @Suiseiseki @SuperDicq
The goal of the FSF/RMS aren't even extremes, it's just normality, it's perceived extreme because of how unbalanced the market was and worsened over time went after it started to apply copyright on software.

@snacks @phnt @SuperDicq Parallel EEPROM needs 28+ pins and doesn't tend to be made in large enough sizes for the bloat.

In the case of parallel EEPROM in a processor, like for example the EEPROM in AVR microcontrollers, there's still a zeroth-stage bootloader ROM, to allow reprogramming the first stage EEPROM, so it isn't possible to brick the device.

Everything now is SPI EEPROM, or more rarely I²C EEPROM, which are annoying protocols.

@romin @SuperDicq @Suiseiseki @phnt freesoftwareextremists when freehardwareextremists walk in

@phnt

Microusb was invented by big micropenis to hide their shame when the superior barrel connector properly peneteates and locks on the socket without breaking or confusion

@hakui @phnt @SuperDicq @romin Free hardware that's a computer hasn't yet been done.

@Suiseiseki @SuperDicq @phnt @romin just like Real Communism

@hakui @phnt @SuperDicq @romin True, but real communism simply isn't possible with proprietary people.

@meeper @phnt any charging port is a 6.3mm jack port if you're strong enough

I doubt that was me, I didn't even know about this lovely aspect of the PDP-11. now I wish I'd experienced one.

CC: @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @phnt@fluffytail.org @romin@shitposter.world

@lxo @Suiseiseki @phnt @romin I am probably remembering a quote from someone else then. Sorry.

when it comes to hardware, the big difference is when the manufacturer locks even itself out.

then it all becomes technically and ethically equivalent to hardware circuits.

without that, enshittifiability remains.

see https://www.fsfla.org/~lxoliva/#Unshittify

CC: @phnt@fluffytail.org @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo