From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Nov 29 11:06:11 2019 Received: (at 38360) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Nov 2019 16:06:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33465 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iaimW-0004NE-KS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 11:06:11 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.14]:50047) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iaimP-0004Ma-JH for 38360@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 11:06:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=dbaedf251592; t=1575043537; bh=NVishWP8Kr+bqyWnLAWZH8SAgdi6w9v0ou5mz3oQBRw=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:References:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-reply-to:Date; b=G7+BMjLQ2iQVVeg0I70VGb4CrtyWxAlNhbcWIREUEJS2eNMX+TInUcgHRROKXStM2 16ar0abkFy07hbAQgMrfwJhxpHVyCnFdRb5HCvf2gRAXQEhK8DS3yAqOAxIRFqw+WB TkMVJYYtaTxa8RXkqSy1vhJZJeq2Ny22anIJ+lsE= X-UI-Sender-Class: c548c8c5-30a9-4db5-a2e7-cb6cb037b8f9 Received: from fluss ([80.136.28.233]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb004 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M8L3a-1hoxff2Cyg-00vvL4; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 17:05:37 +0100 References: <87d0df7wpv.fsf@gnu.org> <87zhggt186.fsf@gnu.org> <87wobj953k.fsf@nckx> <87h82m908a.fsf@nckx> User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.1 From: Arne Babenhauserheide To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Subject: Re: bug#38360: Retroarch might violate FSDG In-reply-to: <87h82m908a.fsf@nckx> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 17:05:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87tv6mzn06.fsf@web.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:MOQOkdCFflidak2FXvARCfg/0nHVBRRQCqIOhFE1aPLIzWdIOcp eN/M3lblNQQLgZ+aEeQDL7fdHJbrwHsxJNZaiWaw27YN613qW7aFh+Ifnu276rVkPleY/Ix 9BrPNwSOagl+hpkDGAdSx59yGh/MaZSw/EVfHc5+/Ep0IyyBOOIPHvhFomeagZSCL7WR5tT kMR104GDNv1mJTnT+eUCw== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:QW1YlV4Rrec=:2kkGK1DTsFd7lWtCYNulgK zwbpTzGHhV12RoJDDvfDFEnq0OodHknv/zaofebZK5S/allPeuoXQ6KizKo5eM6wGJVtY5+90 faAIhmGtudpXoeGjl6CdhzSCNhd0GhKINL6btAElAHL5UtMP1ricecYCDGZlV67bKwKZ9NZiw gQ+2PEvMAb1KY6lIZtj+qMtVYswhZQYsbXfE6agX2g73/faXXmZb1rrxONPPfzXC+ECk3wu44 p6cy9x1sj6T7ZlsBH+rBE/yyD7QK61OMlz2B1m4jX1ajpyOQjjMgf7dQu8Aga6uUJrrj+2iYG 9IGvhW4IW50Q9smdMoWKZ8G7EMzSLWF8UEx/xPaeXZiDGtVPOXs7azcH7CvAMAGq4FCocWXYD 4CqgxnjhR5iACFVsMAGRuPUwvovlXCWxRiNdsEwCEW+Cev7I+AxLZJyVWBBOfz7B60j1LI8k6 STEyXnJx8b8TBQ9TMur5Mz/faetpfZVS4TDbHFY5h9U/auCrfLBtrY/BVuO+g3tM0+80A8EzF tjS2TQijRVzZaJdyJTAz+AzWfREqEndTfZ/GgQz7tTA+vqrN9+us0m66MoEDG5p3GGn/CBIMP OeZ9FUfI9YlPD/xYgYzDZ4JwTRCVsD4D38R11hG/ZtzoPSvws9S7cSOXWz1nrPX4pehn2jeEx xts7ce5JFGhvzm46M2X+ORlTee5x1xWuFao1yFB7RH0J1fmAoTrperpNNOry9YlIz8WL40VPK npUfaYXOd/1rQARH1R/5c2dKTd+9Uy0y5AjONjjAQWQS0TTMOIPDaluBrZkV+Q++9qh61mKQF aVTKIAc3dLk0Hw2OqkY4uU6vPcJkWf/nSD87D3CFOyYNN1tnHzh1+8vgF0SP/cL/rNJwlmdiF GgTsmdC/SEdFPA5sArDjrByocdbzlYa/kbNuE2ddQg1HqqtwZbMpuWFwvysLaJlj7diHq54tW LtSvq9IEslXBBv8SnWg76qFmgRc/PJSGnOxUrXDpNATHldWaoFkPomOMZ12AWe8cSoQ458t7v co7CMmPrWzYiUKeQgyYSZjLJ9mkFQoyw4wq3qxmzTbomB5ifO1Or6c0UJMGAij9S/4MS34CfP nKn3jDtkjolrwrxKs79HNQEE3Hq4qlhrGi0qi2cnTb5LW6T2UBbfz2bE+ZE1ykbtnojwPLiXn HM3qHfiExAWMRolvskmrDZPf5rw+on1x0TZB9S0k3XRUfosn9zjF5fVnOnUqtrcDyJbLeBSkr qcfOjMAHMrPa3Khby7JGj9gkEcqAtW9+N8Uuu0w== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 38360 Cc: 38360@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix write= s: > They patch[0] it to hide the Updater by default but it's trivial to > re=C3=ABnable (tested): > > $ echo 'menu_show_core_updater =3D "false"' >> \ > ~/.config/retroarch/retroarch.cfg > > This does not appease me. I'm implementing more incisive measures. > > Thoughts? Am I an anti-choice extremist? I do not like to put people into boxes. I can judge actions, not people. Implementing more extreme measures than changing the default uses practical power against users. It limits user freedom. As committer to Guix you are in a position of power over users. You can use that position to liberate them from shackles, or you can use it to limit their freedom. When I look into ethical decisions, I need a basic goal. The mission of GNU is "to promote computer user freedom". This is too vague to use on its own to check an action, therefore I=E2=80=99m using the more actionabe mission of the Hurd: =E2=80=9COur mission is to create a general-purpose kernel suitable for the= GNU operating system, which is viable for everyday use, and gives users and programs as much control over their computing environment as possible.=E2= =80=9C Giving programs as much control over their environment is not relevant to the discussion (it is only relevant for a kernel with the assumption that the program acts on behalf of the user). For this ethical check I=E2=80=99ll therefore simplify the mission to: =E2=80=9COur mission is to give users as much control over their computing environment as possible.=E2=80=9C Does it give users as much control over their computing environment as possible if you make it harder for them to re-enable the updater? By making it harder, you limit the number of people who can take the decision to re-activate the updater, therefore fewer people have the practical freedom to do so, though they can still do so in theory. But using a license like the GPL is all about practical Freedom. If we were only talking about theoretical freedom, then any binary blob (without DRM) would give as much freedom as an AGPL program. Game modders have been demonstrating that for decades. Therefore theoretical freedom does not suffice: The goal must be practical freedom. The freedom to hack as easily as possible. Giving as many people as possible the freedom to change the operation of as many parts of the system as possible. Implementing measures to limit user freedom beyond choosing defaults that ensure that they do not accidentally fall into a trap they do not see goes against that. It limits the practical freedom of users. As committer to Guix you have practical power over every Guix user. When you use that power, it is your responsibility to further their freedom, not to create new chains. That would be consistent with the mission to give users as much control over their computing environment as possible. Best wishes, Arne =2D- Unpolitisch sein hei=C3=9Ft politisch sein ohne es zu merken --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE801qEjXQSQPNItXAE++NRSQDw+sFAl3hQcwACgkQE++NRSQD w+tnfQ//aXarehFIyf4jxB/0SaVAbxWAzjCRjOvXrI2aNjfsqYbP7Kt79GRYCKnW r42Z852Q3c11uLA9hXlGEzS7LRECEjs7YRIeRcwEfudnug3TUyJmIa33TUOXA7sC jM+DKyZJDHkmlgNlC6Zwe38KzT5J5tAhhnj/8wiQMtvri7i9NBETrFAxuD3IgB2o aRDAUP114y6/7a6NvsyerWSxrh2fCHe64aqX408No9vOrS6aDTcgBuXlUR6eNLrQ 4dwrLjLltppz9LITo9oYZkF/zbiaeWOS/W7yQT9ya5Iey5BL4ftn/zmiPvrsMLxi y4K8bZSRI9ogC37OVB5yl4or2fl3jYW6AYQ8GT/G1O++H7BlmcozAgut9d1rxID3 nDZVg0gvO50fG6mXU7ieWFX/LrzSjzbf62HJ7dMCtbwWD8GEyjhPJ/kusVwaeOud qwZMbJWQKHFWqKwoQsJ/v949to9aItRpTps4cspBdW/nbn79pXAPwVDjKiLGUFBD lW8nJ2jOVrkHg02qb0CM1U7blYCisGkGI4Di+BV4lbcNO3SUJgmA6Lvs3UUZ/YaW MI3Ek3tcIJRt4LJkO1QrbSmaChdsEddZuV6UFbs1b+MLKJAQ5l6Q27WIzgKwAcEF fqPeoCc0ji0AgoBnCh25jTPuOS6/Fh4BmYKD5T1C/8y8g5OSgo2IswQBAQgAHRYh BN0ovebZh1yrzkqLHdzPDbMLwQVIBQJd4UHMAAoJENzPDbMLwQVIoVkD/iUXR+Kn SX4YUHf63k+kdAOXFKO4xCvLFfRwFa7JXvpkQc7LlwW2dpXc4gXTeR0vuHkguf0m sAT4wZM21Pt0/zV8N4GlziCEIj9La9gMLQp4ay+IYwFph3J3ZareqVpMC6Gn/9rQ m6Q0ZfuL+GCOfR0n6kAx57Pe9Lnf+VlCQ7yI =SiZv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--