Ansgar 🙀 <ans...@debian.org> writes: > Hi, > > On Sun, 2025-03-09 at 15:58 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Ansgar 🙀 <ans...@debian.org> writes: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Sun, 2025-03-09 at 14:19 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> > > Our experience seems to differ, I now run Trisquel and Guix on many of >> > > my home and machines and servers. For my uses they all work without >> > > non-free firmware. You have to be careful about what hardware you buy, >> > > and chose your use-cases. And, yes, I use modern hardware -- i9-14900K >> > > on desktop, i7 1260P and Ultra 155H in my two most used laptops, >> > > ARS-111M-NR and Talos II on the server side, as well as a bunch of aging >> > > Dell R630's. >> > >> > This class of hardware *requires* non-free firmware. Lots of it, at >> > every system layer. >> >> Agreed. > > So we agree that pretty much all hardware requires non-free firmware > these days.
Right, in the sense that they embed non-free software in the hardware. None of those machines require them to be loaded by me as a user for them to be useful to me. This distinction is important to me. >> However none of that hardware require me to load non-free >> firmware from my operating system, which is my point. That situation is >> sufficient for me to accept to use the hardware and install an operating >> system built without non-free software on it. > > What is the point of this then? For me there are several reasons for wanting this, which ought to be understandable for anyone reading this thread. The supply-chain security trust concern of non-free firmware is a hot topic right now. It is fine to disagree that these are concerns worthy spending time on within the Debian project, which is my perception of the vote outcome. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
