On 06/08/2012 06:37 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 18:14 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 06/08/2012 05:42 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: >>> And - though it pains me that this next thought might actually be >>> unpopular, though closer investigation might reveal that I'm giving the >>> feature too much credit, and without considering or conceding whether >>> such a machine would be non-free - I'm pretty sure I am willing to >>> sacrifice a minor technical point of software freedom for real gains in >>> human freedom. >> >> I suppose I don't know what minor technical point of software freedom >> you're talking about. I presume it's not the freedom to change a >> program so it does your computing as you wish, which is scarcely a >> minor anything. > > It's more like "is building or supporting a machine with this kind of > lockdown intrinsically non-free". Well, that depends. Can you change the program (in this case, a kernel) and run it, or not? It's not a difficult or obscure question. > I didn't intend to make it sound like you were advocating that kind of > objection, I apologize if I put words in your mouth there. I'm not objecting, I'm just trying to find out what's up. Andrew. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
