Hi Carsten, I largely agree with what you write, but let me challenge you on one point.
> *Proprietary* JavaScript, however, as served by Google or Facebook or other > proprietary software vendors, are another matter altogether. They do indeed > violate users' freedom. By and large, I believe *where* a certain piece of code runs is immaterial to the question, and what matters is the interface the user of a service is subject to. As we know, throughout the history of computing, we've constantly moved the processing power between the client, and the server, and back again, time and time again. That Google or Facebook happens to have JavaScript that, today, runs on the client side, should not affect whether it's considered to be violating my freedom or not. Let's imagine for a second that Google and Facebook rewrote their frontend to use only CSS/HTML, and avoid JavaScript. Would that magically make their service more respecting of my freedom? I do not believe so. It would still be a proprietary service. And similarly, if they licensed and made available all the corresponding source code for their JavaScript, that would not make the service more respecting of my freedom either. It would still be a proprietary service. Best, -- Jonas Öberg Executive Director FSFE e.V. - keeping the power of technology in your hands. Your support enables our work, please join us today http://fsfe.org/join _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
