[Dev] Let's revert and move changes introduced by bugs #645 and #677 on Iceweasel

[Jorge Araya Navarro]

More over, I don't see anything intrinsically evil in not having different choices of service
providers (this is not a violation of any of user's software freedom), so this is neither a reason to
ban features from free software.

El domingo 01 de noviembre del 2015 a las 1710 horas, Isaac David escribió:

> My 2 cents: I think Shackra is right. To me the distinction between 
> explicitly partnering with a bad service (like Mozilla did) vs only 
> using a bad service that already existed (MSN) is largely irrelevant as 
> far as privacy recommendations are concerned. Sure, intentions matter 
> unless you are a consequentialist, but both scenarios are equally 
> unacceptable for privacy. I would discourage Shackra from using MSN as 
> much as Firefox Hello.
>
> This is not equivalent to saying the current Icecat and Iceweasel 
> packages don't comply with the policy or something. They clearly are OK 
> and I appreciate Emulatorman or whoever did it for washing that Mozilla 
> mess away, but there's room for moving them to [nonprism] if somebody 
> wants to maintain a less stripped-down version in [libre].
>
> Offtopic:
>
> Le dim. 1 nov. 2015 à 10:33, Florian Pelz <pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de> 
> a écrit :
>> libre is for free software
>
> Not just [libre], all the Parabola repositories strive to contain only 
> free software. What [libre] really is for is modifications or 
> replacements for Arch packages bearing freedom issues (not all of them. 
> The blacklist documents which ones get fixed in [libre] and which ones 
> we completely discard. your-freedom is built from the blacklist). 
> [libre] also contains a few original packages that would rather stay in 
> [core] or [extra] if they came from Arch.
>
>> 
>> Then again, some things on the libre blacklist are blacklisted because
>> of support for Skype / non-privacy search engines / ….
>> 
>> What I want is no SaaSS. Right now the description of nonprism in the
>> Wiki isn't very clear ("nonprism contains packages provided by the
>> Parabola community without services under global data surveillance
>> programs like PRISM.") and I'm not sure its policy is what I want, 
>> even
>> though the de facto changes are what I want.
>> 
>>>  SSAS is evil, but if Firefox Hello falls in such category, as some 
>>> are suggesting, then it seems to me that any XMPP service should too.
>>> 
>> 
>> For XMPP, you can choose which provider to use, like e-mail. You can
>> switch to a different provider whenever you want to. You can also host
>> your own. XMPP is not as restrictive as Hello.
>
> [nonprism] does not actually deal with SaaSS, much less it 
> discriminates networking programs that give you "choice" of service 
> providers from those which don't. It really only does what you read in 
> the Wiki. your-privacy bans perfectly free software packages known to 
> use online services which in turn are known to engage in mass 
> surveillance; and [nonprism] patches some or all of those packages so 
> that you can use them without worrying. Yet if you want to avoid SaaSS 
> then activating [nonprism] is a reasonable step in that direction 
> because of the correlation between SaaSS and mass surveillance. 
> However, [nonprism] doesn't guarantee you that even the most obscure 
> free software client program meant to be used with SaaSS will be 
> blacklisted. There's nothing a distro can do to make sure the user 
> never connects to SaaSS; you still need to think about your online 
> practices.
>
> It's also worth pointing out that online communications don't strictly 
> classify as SaaSS because while they are services and potential privacy 
> threats they don't substitute local computing. Communication is a joint 
> activity.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

-- 
👋 Pax et bonum.
Jorge Araya Navarro
https://es.gravatar.com/shackra