Most 'Free' Linux distro

Post by Allan Irving
What is regarded as the most free linux distro?

See <https://gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html> that lists well known
fully free distributions which are following free system distribution
guidelines:
<https://gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>. Some
other popular distributions aren?t included for the following reasons:
<https://gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html>.

For exemple, a Debian *OS* is *by default* fully free, but Debian
*project* (or at least people too close to it) often encourage you to
install proprietary software, notably through nonfree repository, where
the *distribution* (or at least people too close to it) distribute
proprietary software.

Post by Allan Irving
Would it be Linux from scratch with only free software added to it or
otherwise?

Since Linux from scratch has as purpose of making you compile fully a
Linux-based Unix system (GNU/Linux with more or less GNU, depending of
how you build it) with teaching purposes, it?s quite easy to build it
fully free.

For the basis system you just have to download, compile and install GNU
Linux-libre instead of the classical Linux kernel shipped by kernel.org.

For the rest (BLFS) you have to be aware of the license of the package
you?re installing, but that isn?t so difficult.

Since LFS/BLFS is not a distribution but a *book* it can?t be qualified
of ?free? or not, since *you* determine what will be the final
system. ;)

Post by Allan Irving
Is there an already existing distro that is in line with
the FSF ideals?

Yes, several (even if only a few), as I said:
<https://gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html>.

Post by Allan Irving
I use Debian for servers at the moment and I am looking into Debian or Arch
as a desktop distro.

Debian is fine because it is more upstream, known and stable. Therefore
it is fine *until you don?t use nonfree repository* which ships
proprietary software for ?users who should absolutely use it?, to ?make
them still use Debian instead of something even less free?. Their wiki
even recommend several times to install nonfree software without even
warning the user about its implications.

This approach is wrong and doesn?t even try ?as do Trisquel or Parabola?
to fully base itself on education rather than consciousness (?you have
to buy a free-friendly wifi card to have wifi to stay free, see, it?s
not *so* expensive, it?s quite quick and easy? instead of ?Oh yeah you
can just install the proprietary driver doing this?).

So Debian is fine is you?re a warned user who can know the implications
of using proprietary software and will know to not use them even with
the wiki (and people on IRC) promoting nonfree repo.

Otherwise, if for example you?re advising to switch to GNU/Linux some
non-completely-warned friend, and you fear them to be invited to use
proprietary software, you have gNewSense, a Debian-based FSF-financed
distribution: <http://www.gnewsense.org/>.

And if you think something more ?ubuntuish? would be more adapted to
them but you don?t recommand Ubuntu and derivatives because of the
obvious issues they have, you still have Trisquel, an Ubuntu-based fully
free distribution (very fine): <http://trisquel.info/>

For Arch it?s quite simple, because some simple things allows to
blacklist all proprietary software, with Parabola:
<http://parabolagnulinux.org/>.

Hoping to help :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 948 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140729/8140b66b/attachment.pgp>

Michael Kesper

2014-07-29 08:33:28 UTC

Hi all,

Post by Allan Irving
What is regarded as the most free linux distro?

...

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
For exemple, a Debian *OS* is *by default* fully free, but Debian
*project* (or at least people too close to it) often encourage you to
install proprietary software, notably through nonfree repository, where
the *distribution* (or at least people too close to it) distribute
proprietary software.

...

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
Debian is fine because it is more upstream, known and stable. Therefore
it is fine *until you don?t use nonfree repository* which ships
proprietary software for ?users who should absolutely use it?, to ?make
them still use Debian instead of something even less free?. Their wiki
even recommend several times to install nonfree software without even
warning the user about its implications.
This approach is wrong and doesn?t even try ?as do Trisquel or Parabola?
to fully base itself on education rather than consciousness (?you have
to buy a free-friendly wifi card to have wifi to stay free, see, it?s
not *so* expensive, it?s quite quick and easy? instead of ?Oh yeah you
can just install the proprietary driver doing this?).

For some it's wrong, for others it's pragmatic, I'd say.
The world seems to have a lot more colours than just black and white.

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
So Debian is fine is you?re a warned user who can know the implications
of using proprietary software and will know to not use them even with
the wiki (and people on IRC) promoting nonfree repo.

Yes, Debian goes to great lengths only having Free Software in its main
repository and not making them depend on non-free stuff.

Best wishes
Michael

Werner Koch

2014-07-29 11:31:54 UTC

Right, I am one of those who would encourage on pragmatic reasons to use
the non-free repository to install documentation for most GNU software.
I would never encourage anyone to use Trisquel because that renders any
desktop machine useless due to FSF's layman opinion on the openness of
firmware and hardware.

I have never seen that Debian encourages the use of proprietary
software; that is cheap FSF propaganda.

Debian is the best OS if you want to use _fully free software_ according
to a solid definition established by a large democratic group and not by
some real world blind people who even urge their co-GNU hackers to write
non free documentation.

Shalom-Salam,

Werner (aka dd9jn at gnu)

--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

Garreau, Alexandre

2014-07-29 12:14:08 UTC

Right, I am one of those who would encourage on pragmatic reasons to use
the non-free repository to install documentation for most GNU
software.

Well, a repository for non-free documentation would be better, since
documentation hasn?t to be as free as functional software (for reasons
explained by FSF) and therefore doesn?t cause ethical problems, while
proprietary software does.

Post by Werner Koch
I would never encourage anyone to use Trisquel because that renders any
desktop machine useless due to FSF's layman opinion on the openness of
firmware and hardware.

I noticed a better compatibility than you say. Most of time just wifi
card doesn?t work on laptop (so we need purchasing another at
Thinkpinguin for instance), sometimes graphic card? That?s all. Most of
times it just works.

Personally I find worse to encourage anyone to use the non-free
counterpart to Trisquel, Ubuntu, for same reasons explained by FSF:
spywares, proprietary software promotion, undeblobbed kernel? but also
because it became a big commercial thing, and therefore it?s goal cannot
anymore be the interest of users freedom, but only profit (hopping both
goals don?t go against each other? but it inevitably tends to happens,
and then market laws just applies).

Post by Werner Koch
I have never seen that Debian encourages the use of proprietary
software; that is cheap FSF propaganda.

If not Debian, at least people close to it: people on main IRC channels
regularly do it, and Debian wiki does too. I wasn?t repeating what FSF
said, I was talking of my own experience. Then of course official Debian
project claimed that they can?t work enough to correct everything of
that, and that?s true. They can?t censor irc channel for that, and they
can?t check all wiki edits.

Post by Werner Koch
Debian is the best OS if you want to use _fully free software_ according
to a solid definition established by a large democratic group

Well, no, there?s also the nonfree repository which makes Debian quite
compatible with non-free-software-friendly hardware.

Post by Werner Koch
and not by some real world blind people

Please do not use any handicap, disability or disease as an insult, it?s
humiliating and insulting for really disabled or diseased people. Just
don?t.

Post by Werner Koch
who even urge their co-GNU hackers to write non free documentation.

No, putting invariant sections, afaik, isn?t an obligation, it?s
possibility, because freedom to modify history knowledge doesn?t make
sense. So the documentation stays free for everything that it
should. Stay pragmatic, for once, it?s Debian who applied blindly rules
without thinking to reasons to do it.

Nonetheless that doesn?t make me think these invariant sections *should*
be here, simply because I prefer think to ?what is it useful to
prohibit? instead of ?what is it useful to allow?, as rms/fsf does.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 948 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140729/03b04825/attachment.pgp>

Michael Kesper

2014-07-29 12:21:24 UTC

Hi all,

Right, I am one of those who would encourage on pragmatic reasons to use
the non-free repository to install documentation for most GNU
software.

I wonder whether anyone believes in this, sorry.

I omitted the GFDL sad story deliberately, though, because it's really
just distracting.

Best wishes
Michael

Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos

2014-07-29 13:06:12 UTC

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Garreau, Alexandre

Right, I am one of those who would encourage on pragmatic reasons to use
the non-free repository to install documentation for most GNU
software.

Well, a repository for non-free documentation would be better, since
documentation hasn't to be as free as functional software (for reasons
explained by FSF) and therefore doesn't cause ethical problems, while
proprietary software does.

Well, as the debian stance showed, it causes ethical problems to a
large part of the free software community.

Post by Werner Koch
I would never encourage anyone to use Trisquel because that renders any
desktop machine useless due to FSF's layman opinion on the openness of
firmware and hardware.

I noticed a better compatibility than you say. Most of time just wifi
card doesn't work on laptop (so we need purchasing another at
Thinkpinguin for instance), sometimes graphic card... That's all. Most of
times it just works.
Personally I find worse to encourage anyone to use the non-free

I believe Werner was arguing on Debian. Ubuntu is a different thing.

Post by Werner Koch
I have never seen that Debian encourages the use of proprietary
software; that is cheap FSF propaganda.

If not Debian, at least people close to it: people on main IRC channels
regularly do it, and Debian wiki does too. I wasn't repeating what FSF
said, I was talking of my own experience. Then of course official Debian
project claimed that they can't work enough to correct everything of
that, and that's true. They can't censor irc channel for that, and they
can't check all wiki edits.

Could you be more precise? I've been using Debian for 20 years, and
I've never seen any endorsement or encouragement of not-free software.
On the contrary it encourages the use of free software (see
https://www.debian.org/intro/free).

Post by Werner Koch
Debian is the best OS if you want to use _fully free software_ according
to a solid definition established by a large democratic group

Well, no, there's also the nonfree repository which makes Debian quite
compatible with non-free-software-friendly hardware.

Non-free software is easy to replace by free software. Non-free
hardware or hardware with non-free drivers has costs to be replaced
that may be insignificant to you, but not to many others that want to
join the community. Denying access to the internet because someone is
on a laptop that its wireless card requires a binary blob to be loaded
is absurd and pretty denies access to free software on commodity
hardware.

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
Please do not use any handicap, disability or disease as an insult, it's
humiliating and insulting for really disabled or diseased people. Just
don't.

Please don't force your newspeak. Blindness was a good term to
describe the issue (I refer you to any english language dictionary for
the definition of blind).

regards,
Nikos

Werner Koch

2014-07-29 14:25:41 UTC

Post by Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
I believe Werner was arguing on Debian. Ubuntu is a different thing.

Sure. Ubuntu used the free software community and quite some money to
get a share of the Linux market so to eventually commence the
vacation-on-the-mars plan (aka Thawte-bis).

Salam-Shalom,

Werner

--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

Allan Irving

2014-07-29 15:10:50 UTC

I don't suppose it matters hugely, just I have had most experience with
GNU/Linux but could get my head around BSD if need be, I'm sure.

I was mostly referring to what would be regarded as the most free out of
the box as such. I tend to avoid using non free software unless I have to.
Of course when using a Mac or Windows machine, I usually have little choice
but have never struggled to find anything for my own needs that works with
Linux that is fully free.

If I'm honest, my knowledge of the licenses for Linux/GNU and or just Linux
OSes is limited. I know enough to use it, and enough to know the forks and
what is based on what. That's why I thought I'd put it to everyone here who
could help guide me in the right direction as a base before I install
something at home and get used to it, then get annoyed at myself for what I
have supported whilst doing so.

For servers, I have always deployed Debian...as it's available...and there
are ample guides.

Was just checking if I am as 'free' as I can be within reason.

Thanks everyone for the input so far, it has helped a lot!

*This message, and any attachments to it, may contain information that is
privileged, confidential, copyrighted and exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution,
copying, or communication of this message is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately
by return email and delete the message and any attachments. *

Post by Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
I believe Werner was arguing on Debian. Ubuntu is a different thing.

Sure. Ubuntu used the free software community and quite some money to
get a share of the Linux market so to eventually commence the
vacation-on-the-mars plan (aka Thawte-bis).
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
Discussion at fsfeurope.org
https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140729/ec2a142e/attachment-0001.html>

Garreau, Alexandre

2014-07-29 17:00:42 UTC

Post by Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Garreau, Alexandre

Post by Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos

Right, I am one of those who would encourage on pragmatic reasons to use
the non-free repository to install documentation for most GNU software.

Well, as the debian stance showed, it causes ethical problems to a
large part of the free software community.

The question is not if they find a problem to it, but if there is
actually one, if it is justified.

Post by Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos

Post by Werner Koch
I would never encourage anyone to use Trisquel because that renders any
desktop machine useless due to FSF's layman opinion on the openness of
firmware and hardware.

I believe Werner was arguing on Debian. Ubuntu is a different thing.

He spoke about Trisquel, which is a different thing.

Post by Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos

Post by Werner Koch
I have never seen that Debian encourages the use of proprietary
software; that is cheap FSF propaganda.

I saw several times people on #debian at FreeNode recommanding nonfree, or
pages on wiki saying to just include nonfree, without any discleamer,
warning or even mention to other possibility (the device could be non
completely required, or an alternative could maybe be purchased).

Post by Werner Koch
Debian is the best OS if you want to use _fully free software_ according
to a solid definition established by a large democratic group

Well, no, there's also the nonfree repository which makes Debian quite
compatible with non-free-software-friendly hardware.

Yes. Still the fact is that we can live without wifi (with ethernet,
just connect to some other computer and share connection, or with
powerline, etc.) and that it harms freedom, so if we have no choice of
course we have either to submit to driver editors or not to use the
driver.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 948 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140729/c929b141/attachment.pgp>

Werner Koch

2014-07-29 13:12:11 UTC

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
that, and that?s true. They can?t censor irc channel for that, and they
can?t check all wiki edits.

Debian would never do that - the FSF usually tries to be the MiniTrue.

Post by Werner Koch
and not by some real world blind people

Please do not use any handicap, disability or disease as an insult, it?s
humiliating and insulting for really disabled or diseased people. Just

Come on. There are many usages of the term blind aside from visually
impaired people. But you may ask to put it on the FSF's list of
words-to-avoid (http://minitrue.fsf.org or so) ;-)

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
No, putting invariant sections, afaik, isn?t an obligation, it?s

Fortunately you don't known the personal communication.

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
should. Stay pragmatic, for once, it?s Debian who applied blindly rules
without thinking to reasons to do it.

Nope. There is no general ban of all GFDL stuff.

Shalom-Salam,

Werner

--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

Garreau, Alexandre

2014-07-29 17:11:59 UTC

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
should. Stay pragmatic, for once, it?s Debian who applied blindly rules
without thinking to reasons to do it.

Nope. There is no general ban of all GFDL stuff.

Nope, only GFDL with invariant sections. But the blindly applied rule is
not to refuse all GFDL stuff but to accept only ?100% free? things, even
when the freedom provided is useless (like the right to modify
history/points of view), while the documentation is useful and make no
harm comparable to what proprietary software does.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 948 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140729/7ecf7bbb/attachment.pgp>

Werner Koch

2014-07-29 18:36:51 UTC

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
not to refuse all GFDL stuff but to accept only ?100% free? things, even
when the freedom provided is useless (like the right to modify

Well, there are different opinions on whether freedom is useless or
useful. It sometimes depends on where you are currently living.
Guantanamo or Moscow.

Shalom-Salam,

Werner

p.s.
And now back to the real things.

--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

Mauricio Nascimento

2014-07-29 19:18:02 UTC

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
not to refuse all GFDL stuff but to accept only ?100% free? things, even
when the freedom provided is useless (like the right to modify

Well, there are different opinions on whether freedom is useless or
useful. It sometimes depends on where you are currently living.
Guantanamo or Moscow.

Freedom is never useless. It gives you the opportunity to make your own
choices rather than just have someone else decide for you.
Linux have different flavours for different tastes, so you can pick up
the best one which fits in your own needs.
You have the option to build up your own distribution and optimize it if
you want, but it is a time consuming task.
Personally I use Debian and I have no complains about it. Actually I am
very grateful for the thousands of developers, testers, librarians,
admins and all the community which put a great effort into it, for the
sake of all of us.

Cheers,

Garreau, Alexandre

2014-07-29 20:13:46 UTC

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
not to refuse all GFDL stuff but to accept only ?100% free? things, even
when the freedom provided is useless (like the right to modify

Well, there are different opinions on whether freedom is useless or
useful. It sometimes depends on where you are currently living.
Guantanamo or Moscow.

Freedom is never useless. It gives you the opportunity to make your own
choices rather than just have someone else decide for you.

Ok, so can we say the freedom to change a truth to a lie is a freedom?
Because in that case you?re making choice for someone else, the fact
changing truth.

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
Linux have different flavours for different tastes, so you can pick up
the best one which fits in your own needs.

*GNU/Linux

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
You have the option to build up your own distribution and optimize it if
you want, but it is a time consuming task.

I agree, I experienced it myself :/

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
Personally I use Debian and I have no complains about it. Actually I am
very grateful for the thousands of developers, testers, librarians,
admins and all the community which put a great effort into it, for the
sake of all of us.

I am too :) never said the contrary.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 948 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140729/4b448b9d/attachment.pgp>

Mauricio Nascimento

2014-07-29 21:03:44 UTC

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
not to refuse all GFDL stuff but to accept only ?100% free? things, even
when the freedom provided is useless (like the right to modify

Well, there are different opinions on whether freedom is useless or
useful. It sometimes depends on where you are currently living.
Guantanamo or Moscow.

Freedom is never useless. It gives you the opportunity to make your own
choices rather than just have someone else decide for you.

Ok, so can we say the freedom to change a truth to a lie is a freedom?

Yes ... "Truth is the daughter of time, not of authority." - Francis
Bacon -<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daughter_of_Time#cite_note-1>
Most of the time the truth is relative according to your own perception
of the facts.
For some God is the only truth, for others Love is the real truth. Some
says God is Love, others say Love is Kindness.
And all of them are right but none of them have the Truth because it is
an abstraction.

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
Because in that case you?re making choice for someone else, the fact
changing truth.

People are responsible to make their own choices.
It is like the relation between the teacher and the student.
The teacher can explain something to you, but he cannot understand it
for you.

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
Linux have different flavours for different tastes, so you can pick up
the best one which fits in your own needs.

*GNU/Linux

Indeed, my bad. :)

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
You have the option to build up your own distribution and optimize it if
you want, but it is a time consuming task.

I agree, I experienced it myself :/

I am too :) never said the contrary.

I know, I agree with you.
Sometimes I just want to participate in a good conversation.

Thanks.

Allan Irving

2014-07-29 23:07:58 UTC

Okay. Thanks for all the advice.

So Debian out the box is GNU/Linux?

I understand that the GNU package originally only has ~400 packages listed. If I install a piece of software that is GNU GPL, I presume it remains a GNU/Linux installation although the software itself may not be directly affiliated with the listed packages of the GNU project.

Am I understanding this correctly?

:)

- Sent from my toaster using recycled electrons.

This message, and any attachments to it, may contain information that is privileged, confidential, copyrighted and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, copying, or communication of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the message and any attachments.

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
not to refuse all GFDL stuff but to accept only ?100% free? things, even
when the freedom provided is useless (like the right to modify

Well, there are different opinions on whether freedom is useless or
useful. It sometimes depends on where you are currently living.
Guantanamo or Moscow.

Freedom is never useless. It gives you the opportunity to make your own
choices rather than just have someone else decide for you.

Ok, so can we say the freedom to change a truth to a lie is a freedom?

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
Because in that case you?re making choice for someone else, the fact
changing truth.

People are responsible to make their own choices.
It is like the relation between the teacher and the student.
The teacher can explain something to you, but he cannot understand it
for you.

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
Linux have different flavours for different tastes, so you can pick up
the best one which fits in your own needs.

*GNU/Linux

Indeed, my bad. :)

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
You have the option to build up your own distribution and optimize it if
you want, but it is a time consuming task.

I agree, I experienced it myself :/

I am too :) never said the contrary.

I know, I agree with you.
Sometimes I just want to participate in a good conversation.
Thanks.
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
Discussion at fsfeurope.org
https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140730/2d3b42aa/attachment.html>

Robert Kehl

2014-07-29 23:52:50 UTC

Post by Allan Irving
So Debian out the box is GNU/Linux?

Yes.

Post by Allan Irving
I understand that the GNU package originally only has ~400 packages
listed. If I install a piece of software that is GNU GPL, I presume it
remains a GNU/Linux installation although the software itself may not be
directly affiliated with the listed packages of the GNU project.

On Debian, you don't install something from "the GNU package", but
Debian packages, which are, despite the non-free repository, are all
free software.

Some, but not all of them come from the GNU project, but all are free.

Post by Allan Irving
Am I understanding this correctly?

Partly. :-)

Post by Allan Irving
*This message, and any attachments to it, may contain information that
is privileged, confidential, copyrighted and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution,
copying, or communication of this message is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately by return email and delete the message and any attachments. *

The above cite has no legal relevance, so why not consider letting it go?

With kind regards,

Robert Kehl

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0x96ADD0D7.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 2077 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140730/db2c7ffd/attachment.key>

Werner Koch

2014-07-30 08:27:06 UTC

Post by Robert Kehl
The above cite has no legal relevance, so why not consider letting it go?

You have to ask the toaster vendor.

Shalom-Salam,

Werner

--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

Garreau, Alexandre

2014-07-30 00:47:44 UTC

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
not to refuse all GFDL stuff but to accept only ?100% free? things, even
when the freedom provided is useless (like the right to modify

Well, there are different opinions on whether freedom is useless or
useful. It sometimes depends on where you are currently living.
Guantanamo or Moscow.

Freedom is never useless. It gives you the opportunity to make your own
choices rather than just have someone else decide for you.

Ok, so can we say the freedom to change a truth to a lie is a freedom?

Completely right, you made me reconsider my statement, actually
invariant sections are indeed an ethical issue.

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
For some God is the only truth, for others Love is the real truth. Some
says God is Love, others say Love is Kindness.
And all of them are right but none of them have the Truth because it is
an abstraction.

And what?s about Science which would say ?only sensible experience? ;)

Post by Garreau, Alexandre
Because in that case you?re making choice for someone else, the fact
changing truth.

People are responsible to make their own choices.
It is like the relation between the teacher and the student.
The teacher can explain something to you, but he cannot understand it
for you.

Good analogy, I keep it for later, it is really good?

Post by Mauricio Nascimento
Sometimes I just want to participate in a good conversation.

:D
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 948 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140730/2223ca06/attachment.pgp>

Ben Finney

2014-07-29 01:19:35 UTC