From: Markus Sabadello <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] FreedomBox - "Danube Edition" Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:49:15 +0200
> On 10/22/2014 12:32 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > >> Quoting Markus Sabadello (2014-10-22 02:31:15) >> >> > > > > > On 10/22/2014 02:06 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Quoting Markus Sabadello (2014-10-22 01:29:15) > > > > > > > > > > So the message would basically be "you can get one, you can try > to > > use it and learn about it, but don't rely on it". > > I noticed you just discussed how FreedomBox was not ready for > the > > next Debian stable, but I think some people who don't know the > > command line would still want one. > > > > You think some people who don't know the command line would want > to > buy hardware to learn about it but not rely on it? > > I think some people buy it but ignore the "but not rely on it" > part - > because after playing with it (i.e. clicked on the web interface > - > they don't know the command line) they conclude that if feels > reliable enough despite the warnings. > > I think it is a bad idea to sell something that is not yet ready, > to > someone who don't understand what that means: We are all so very > used > to reading and ignoring disclaimers. > > Thanks Jonas, I had the same thoughts and am also worried about the > same > things. > > Following your argument, I believe people outside the command line / > hacker / developer communities could never use any security or privacy > related tools, because they will never be 100% ready. > > How do you measure "percentage of ready"?!? > > Debian "release when reasy" and have a track record of reaching that > point multiple times. But perhaps your "Danube Edition" has different > concept of "reeady" than Debian? > > I'm sorry, I didn't mean it that way, you are right of course, and probably I > said it > wrong. > Of course it's not "ready" by Debian standards, and not "ready" for use by a > general > public. > > But considering that there have already been releases, and people have paid > money for > its development on Kickstarter, it is "ready" for trial use by an educated > audience, no? > > This is all I meant, > 1. just provide a simple service to send a few packaged boxes to an > interested audience > 2. try to add a few new functions to the project, such as Unhosted, LDP, .. > > Really such a bad idea..? Sorry to chip in -- maybe you could call it a "developers' edition" or "prototype" to distinguish it from proper products. -- maxigas, kiberpunk FA00 8129 13E9 2617 C614 0901 7879 63BC 287E D166 http://research.metatron.ai/ People the switches! _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
