| 1 |
Hi Ciaran, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> writes: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 22:58:17 +0900 |
| 6 |
> heroxbd@g.o wrote: |
| 7 |
>> It strives to liberate the computers in our pockets with Gentoo |
| 8 |
>> philosophy and style, as an ultimate response to Free Software |
| 9 |
>> Foundation(FSF)'s concerns on the freedom for mobile computing. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Not sure if serious... |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Yes, it is serious. Software has a lot of flexibility for alienation. |
| 14 |
When a mobile device gets more powerful, more of its logic is encoded by |
| 15 |
software. In consequence, it is more likely to be used as a tool to |
| 16 |
control and sabotage its users. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Some vendors do release the source code. But the problems are, |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
1. lack of important instructions to reproduce the running system from the |
| 21 |
code |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
2. devices with tivoization only boots signed kernels |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
3. binary bolbs are needed to talk to specific peripherals |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The project, from Gentoo point of view, attacks these problems by, (1.) |
| 28 |
using ebuilds to document the build instructions, (2.3.) providing |
| 29 |
run-time tools to reverse-engineer the offensive mechanisms. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Cheers, |
| 32 |
Benda |
Archives