ASUS Chromebook C201 now supported in libreboot - ARM CPU
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
From IRC:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/libreboot.git/commit/?id=d8b597f33e75d04b84be7c9d7081a3b97821617d
ASUS Chromebook C201 support in libreboot
issues:
* Needs blobs for video acceleration (in linux kernel) - optional, can do most things without acceleration
* Needs blobs for wifi (in linux kernel) - optional, can use ar9271 usb dongle or similar
advantages:
* Free EC firmware
* smaller than an X60, more portable
* long battery life
Disadvantages:
* No FSF endorsed distros available on ARM yet. Mark Weaver of Guix has expressed interest in porting Guix to these laptops
* Libreboot will (for now) recommend Debian or Fedora, with blobs removed, for these laptops
This uses the rockchip rk3288 SoC
there are many other laptops in coreboot that use the same SoC, so things are looking good
btw, I didn't do this, talk to paulk if you have questions.... I need to get myself one of these laptops
it's not RYF ready (probably won't be), but it's more free than an X60/X200 if you do without the video/wifi blobs (so, use linux-libre instead of linux)
this is way more RMS-friendly than an X60/X200 :)
Kind of disappointed that I had to post this myself ;)
About the wifi, the built in wifi needs blobs (chip is soldered) but you can use a USB dongle. ThinkPenguin and Tehnoetic sell these, there are also other AR9271 dongles that you can find online. So, at least some choices there.
I've not used this laptop yet, but will get one soon. Paul Kocialkowski from the Replicant project ported it to libreboot. He's working on documentation (including installation instructions) at the time of writing, last I spoke to him on IRC. The actual board support is in libreboot, and it builds (and works).
It'll likely be some time before next release, but you can build it from libreboot.git. Follow the instructions on http://libreboot.org/docs/git/index.html
the video a mali GPU, there's the unreleased lima driver that we hope we can convince the developer to release and polish (ask paulk about that). Until then, you have to use it without video acceleration (just software rendering) to keep your freedom
Amazing work PaulK! The device costs roughly in between 193-277€ on Ebay w/o shipping incl.
0.) https://www.asus.com/us/Notebooks/ASUS_Chromebook_C201/
1.) https://www.google.com/chromebook/find/#?device=asus-chromebook-c201
Sadly.. https://gitorious.org/lima
// atm Trisquel 7.0 @ Samsung R580 (5yo hw piece)
Thanks, nice, one more!
But I think, that buying that trashbook (piece of VIH), it wasting your money. So, too blobed hardware, soldered proprietary wifi, ARM, bad support for ARM, proprietary GPU...
It would better getting a Thinkpad x60, t60, Macbook 2,1, and flashing it yourself. Or buying T400, x200 from MiniFree/Gluglug.
So, I can not understand, why this Trashbook/Proprietarybook is more free that Librebooted Thinkpads? ARM cpu?
vita_cell, because free EC firmware.
http://libreboot.org/faq/#firmware-ec
Thanks! understood.
On the other hand, it fails to meet RYF criteria because users would be too tempted to install the blobs for wifi and video acceleration. There are RYF endorsed laptops sold by Minifree (gluglug) and Libiquity which come with libreboot preinstalled.
And the list of supported hardware keeps growing :)
I removed mention of Debian and Fedora on the C201 page. It seemed like an acceptable compromise, if we explained how to avoid blobs, but I had a few conversations with people and came to the conclusion that I had made a mistake.
The page in question is http://libreboot.org/docs/hcl/c201.html#os
It no longer mentions any non-endorsed distributions, and instead more aggressively calls for porting from libre distros.
I'd love to see Trisquel running on these laptops.
A good decision!
I am a member!
This isn't the answer. It's a half-baked dead end. People need to be patient. Adding more systems is just going to undermine real efforts to design and develop a properly supported 100% free system. There are multiple people in the community working to get code released within various companies and design proper ARM systems. If we start buying random Chromebooks those efforts will not continue because there will be no money to actually get those designs manufactured nor resources for those within to continue pushing things forward.
ARM is probably not going to be the future farther out anyway- it's the upcoming immediate way to go (ie 6-12 months). It's probably only going to be a stepping stone for 100% free laptop project though. The 'real' freedom-respecting hardware is yet to arrive and won't arrive if we all jump on this dead-end solution. We don't control the design. We don't control anything with this. In fact we don't have much power within the ARM world at all. It's just at the moment the most promising immediate architecture to build off for a temporary intermediate phase between non-free, mostly free, and completely free.
I can't see why you'd have to choose! I think it's a great advancement for every new board that is freed, but this doesn't exclude the work on designing freedom-respecting hardware from scratch. We need to fight on all fronts to push libre computing.
Completely agree, while a new system like this isn't very complete and still has issues - it is a great step gap until we have a even more free solution.
I am a member!
You don't get it. It's conflicting with the work others are doing. There is a certain amount of money that people who care about free software have to spend on laptops. If those who care about these issues are spending it on this laptop (which as far as I know Francis isn't even selling which means it'll end up going torward evil companies who do not care about user freedom at all!) then that money won't be going toward those working on designing ARM laptops that can be easily adapted in the future and maintained. We're in the boat we are in because we're not doing it right. I'd rather hold off on selling a 100% free machine than see us fail at maintaining our freedom moving forward.
There are 2-3 groups which are working on designing entire laptops that won't have integrated non-free wifi components in them for example and can be adapted easily when better graphics and CPU options are released. There is no reason to think that Lenovo or Google will come out with a design that doesn't have integrated wifi- but we could- if only we didn't sabotage those working on these projects. If those groups can't get the funding they need to manufacture these laptops because everybody is off buying Lenovo and Google laptops then the real efforts to produce a more future-proof freer and more resistant design may fail.
And because Francis is spouting BS about me and ThinkPenguin I want to clarify some things.
1. I was in communications with coreboot developers all the way back in 2009. I decided the approach wasn't good and didn't go down that road. I did reconsider it more recently because of his and others actions. I didn't ultimately go down that road for a few reasons: I didn't want to step on Francis's turf (he was playing games with us telling us he'd work with us and then refusing to release code, etc), I didn't like the idea of selling a laptop off refurbished parts anyway (high failure rate/support nightmare), I REALLY DISLIKE Lenovo, HP, Toshiba, Apple, and Sony because these companies are actively implementing digital restrictions, and lastly I don't like the idea of giving people product that has the names of companies and a look that uniquely identifies it of another company which is actively working against us. It's difficult to disguise a Lenovo branded notebook and using it publicly is promoting it.
3. Yes- ThinkPenguin computers are not ideal. They're not as freedom friendly as they could be. This is no secret. We have been at this a lot longer than Francis. These efforts are a lot more enormous than Francis or ThinkPenguin to fix. It's not possible to release a modern laptop with the resources we or Francis has under the current circumstances. You have to either accept that or buy a refurbished Lenovo. Those are your choices.
3. The more immediate 'right' approach in my opinion is to design a laptop 'from scratch' based off ARM. That would be progress because we would then have designs for which can be adapted for future generations without having to rely on companies whom are designing laptops that are difficult or impossible to fully free. Even with a laptop designed from scratch you can't free everything if upstream companies are not cooperative. *WE ARE THE ONES* working with those companies to get sources released. So stop attacking us. No. We don't have a fully free machine yet- but it'll come when the conditions are right.
4. The laptops we sell right now are 3rd, 4th, and 5th generation Intels. These systems aren't perfect although are a bit better than the 6th generation Skylake. We've avoided adding said models although there are good reasons to continue selling these models. If we stop the majority of people wanting to switch away from proprietary software will be unable to do so. That doesn't help the situation. We'll continue doing everything in our power to free what we have and get sources released upstream of us for components where it seems to move the goal post forward.
Anyway- I don't see any good reason to focus on this project now. Bob has had two different model Chromebooks free'd before and one had 100% free graphics chipset (we think anyway) in one and the other had a 100% free wifi chip. The time isn't right to do these projects though. There were/are problems with both models in terms of hardware availability. Your not in control and trying to keep up is just counter-productive in the long term when you can be working on other projects that enable you to do things right at a later date (designing a laptop 'from scratch', etc).
Chris, you're missing the point about libreboot entirely. Without it, there would be *zero* viable options for systems that respect the users' freedom. You're also dismissing the hard work that we put into the libreboot project, every day. We've done more than your company has done, in the last 2 years, compared to your company's entire ~6 years of existence.
About the "promotion of Lenovo" argument that ThinkPenguin puts out; this is spin. We're not promoting Lenovo. We're providing free boot firmware. It makes no difference which laptop we use.
Once again, I call slander on your comment that the libreboot project is somehow undermining other efforts, or taking money away from them. That's not what we do in the libreboot project. What ThinkPenguin is doing here is spreading what's called "FUD" - fear, uncertainty, and doubt. They are doing this, in order to confuse people and steer them away from the Libreboot project.
There's something that the community should know about ThinkPenguin. They've now motivated me to tell the story.
Chris,
Regarding point 1 that you made: I did indeed "play games with you" and "refuse to cooperate", because you were actively opposing me and I thought you were hypocrites. Here's the full story. When Gluglug started (company that sells libreboot preinstalled laptops), libreboot was also founded. The idea was (and still is) to provide users with computers that respected their freedom, including at the BIOS level. ThinkPenguin was unhappy with this, criticizing it at every turn because they felt that it was a bad idea to "promote Lenovo" and that "x86 was a dead end". They had been trying to steer people away from it, because they were worried about not being able to continue selling their so-called "free" systems which actually had a non-free BIOS. What did they then try to do? They wanted to *sell the Libreboot X200* before Gluglug did, and get RYF before Gluglug did, to drive them out of business. Gluglug was (and still is, now as Minifree Ltd) what funded the Libreboot project. But worse than that, it was hypocritical of ThinkPenguin to want to sell these laptops, given everything that they had said in the past.
Some background:
I had been working with Steve Shenton, a British software developer who had heard of the libreboot project several months before then. He wanted to port the ThinkPad X200 to libreboot. Back then, it had coreboot support and could be run blob-free, except for the Intel Management Engine. See http://libreboot.org/faq/#intelme - older generations of Intel hardware can have the Management Engine firmware removed, where the Management Engine itself is permanently deactivated, and still work without any issues. The Management Engine was the only obstacle preventing that laptop from being added to libreboot. At that time, the newest laptops supported in libreboot were the ThinkPad X60, T60 and MacBook2,1 (all using them same 2006-era hardware: ICH7 southbridge, i945 northbridge, etc).
I worked with Steve (sgsit on freenode IRC) for months on solving the ME issue. It wasn't as simple as just removing the ME firmware and then flashing that, there were also other changes that you needed to make. Initially, he found out how to disable it in hardware, by soldering a pin on the motherboard called "GPIO33" to ground, but this also meant that the user had to actually solder. We both decided that this was unacceptable. We wanted a software method instead, and that's what he found. He spent weeks reverse engineering Intel's proprietary utils for manipulating what's called a "flash descriptor", trying to find what's called a "soft strap" that could be used to disable the ME firmware.
On those (and newer) Intel systems, the flash chip is divided into regions. On the X200 (without libreboot), these regions are: Descriptor (4KiB), Management Engine / ME (2008KiB or 6100KiB), GbE (8KiB), platform data (32KiB), BIOS (2MiB). These regions are defined in the descriptor, which the hardware uses when booting the machine.
Steve wrote a proof of concept utility, called ich9deblob, that did the following:
* Set bits in the descriptor, called "soft straps", which he found through reverse engineering, that disable the ME and TPM.
* Disabled (removed) the ME and Platform Data regions, leaving only: Descriptor, GbE and BIOS.
* Modified the descriptor so that it defined a GbE region just after the descriptor, and the BIOS region to fill the rest of the space
The GbE region is non-copyrightable non-executable configuration data for the onboard Intel ethernet chipset, for networking. It contains everything, including MAC address.
It sounds simple from the above summary, but it was weeks of solid work just to find out how to do that, and to come up with a proof of concept, which wasn't even very usable at the time. While this was in progress, I read the same datasheets that Steve had access to, and learned everything from him. Based in his proof of concept, I then spent *2 months* modifying the ich9deblob utility. The first major thing that I did was reverse engineer the format of the GbE region, writing code for ich9deblob that could generate it from scratch.
At the time, in order to do this, you needed a dump of the original Lenovo/Phoenix BIOS, from ich9deblob would extract the descriptor, make the required modifications and then extract the GbE region, and create a 12KiB Descriptor+GbE file, which you then inserted into a coreboot ROM image for the X200 and then flash. At that point, you had a laptop where the ME was entirely disabled, and not present at all. I should mention, that Steve made this possible, and this was the first time that anyone had done such a thing.
However, ich9deblob in its form back then was unsuitable if we wanted RYF endorsement, because the descriptor+GbE image that it generated was still a "blob". However, the format of the descriptor and GbE regions were both documented in datasheets.
Based on Steve's work, I spent *2 months* working flat out, on the following modifications:
* reverse engineered the format of the GbE region, based on datasheets
* polished ich9deblob, made it easier to use, added the ability to change the MAC address
* wrote a new util, from scratch, based on ich9deblob, called "ich9gen", which could generate a fully libre descriptor+GbE file from scratch, without an original firmware dump.
With the Descriptor and GbE fully reverse engineered, and with libreboot flashed in the BIOS region, we then had a fully free system, upon which we could install an ath9k wireless chipset and fully free GNU/Linux distribution (such as Trisquel). The X200 was ready for FSF endorsement at that point.
During those 2 months, I also worked every hour of every day integrating all of this into libreboot. This included documentation, integrating ich9gen, testing, bug fixing, and more. I worked almost every hour of every day, without breaks. I even worked on christmas day. Check the libreboot git logs from around December 2014 and January 2015, and you'll see.
Chris and Bob are both incompetent when it comes to firmware development, and would not have been able to contribute anything substantial to libreboot. Not only that, but they were (still are) overly hostile towards the libreboot project and the company that I had at the time (and still have, under a new name) which funds the project. I saw it as hypocritical that ThinkPenguin wanted to take the hard work of me and Steve, then profit from it without giving anything back in return, at least not code wise. Chris did email me to offer "donations" to the libreboot project, but this would have been very little and not enough to sustain the project. I actually saw that as an even bigger insult. It's like, they want to break your leg, and then offer help to fix it for you.
No! I refuse to have masters. ThinkPenguin will never control me. Basically, it was the biggest insult ever, and I wasn't about to lay down idly and accept what they (ThinkPenguin) were proposing, which meant going out of business and living in poverty, working for almost nothing.
ThinkPenguin was (and still is) a threat to the libreboot project. This is why, I withheld everything X200-related, instead developing it on my own (and working twice as hard). At the time of this development work, I was also working with the FSF for RYF endorsement. Certification was granted, and on January 24, 2015 I made a surprise libreboot release for the X200. 4 days later, I went for a product launch on Gluglug (now minifree.org). On January 29, 2015 the announcement was made public. This concluded the months of hard work that me and Steve put into it. I offered to pay Steve for his work, but he thanked me and declined. He did it just for fun, and because he wanted to help the libreboot project.
ThinkPenguin got everything they deserved. They tried to put me out of business, and tried to directly undermine the work of the libreboot project. I fought back, and won. That's all, really.
Minifree (and it's former incarnation, Gluglug) exists only to fund libreboot development. I use it to pay for development work, infrastructure, research and so on. It's getting to a point where the company is going to be able to fund the very work that Chris has called for over the last few years but hasn't done anything about (getting hardware actually manufactured). My work on those ThinkPads is not long-term, and *will* come to an end. It's only a stop gap, serving as a means towards an end. I don't care about Lenovo, at all.
I am a member!
> Chris, you're missing the point about libreboot entirely. Without it, there would be *zero* viable options for systems
> that respect the users' freedom. You're also dismissing the hard work that we put into the libreboot project, every
> day. We've done more than your company has done, in the last 2 years, compared to your company's entire ~6 years
> of existence.
This isn't entirely true. There are other options coming out in the near future that will be a lot better than the Lenovo or Chromebooks here and we're the *ONLY* entity funding said projects. We've been working on various projects that have been leading up to this for a very long time. Your Chromebook only works because of the *work we were involved in*.
Have you ever even talked to Allwinner? Did you work toward getting the code released at all? No. You didn't. We did.
I've got nothing against you working on free'ing X86. I just don't think it is the right approach. I think it is a wasted effort when we have *other* more important projects that need to be worked on that'll make the difference between the community having a more permanent solution and never having one ever.
Free'ing coreboot is not a huge task relative to porting coreboot to new models. You got lucky with the one Lenovo- it's not something easily repeatable. The other models were already ported to.
> About the "promotion of Lenovo" argument that ThinkPenguin puts out; this is spin.
It's not. I've stuck to my words that Lenovo is a horrible company I'd rather not be promoting. The promotion is not intentional on your part. And I'm not blaming you for it. Just I think its the wrong direction.
> We're not promoting Lenovo. We're providing free boot firmware. It makes no difference which laptop we use.
You had no choice but to use Lenovo or Apple because those were the only real options. The work to port coreboot to them was already done (except apparently one model, but you got lucky, because of illicitly obtained info, which implicates anybody who bought your laptops or downloads libreboot). It's no different than us building off Intel. There aren't any good options.
> Gluglug was (and still is, now as Minifree Ltd) what funded the Libreboot project. But worse than that, it was
> hypocritical of ThinkPenguin to want to sell these laptops, given everything that they had said in the past.
Not by any means. We didn't want to do it- you pushed us into it. If any of this was remotely an accurate description of it then we probably would be selling these systems today. You played games with us and I didn't want to do it in the first place. I still disagree with the approach! There are plenty of people who disagree with me. And thats fine. But you don't need to attack me for it.
> it without giving anything back in return,
We've given hundreds of thousands of dollars back to to the community and various free software projects and *HAVE FUNDED THE CORE WORK* to design and free components. That is the most critical thing of all. You can't design a laptop that is free if upstream companies are uncooperative. I don't care what-so-ever about libreboot and if we ever wanted to use coreboot we'd probably free it ourselves. Acting as if this is some great project to benefit man kind is a joke. It's not. It's a small project that might matter more in a different universe.
Just because we haven't released a 100% free laptop doesn't mean squat. We will when the time is right. We're funding multiple people to work on related software development projects and engineers to actually design the hardware which will be significantly more important long term.
We don't need libreboot or coreboot *at all* and never have. A number of people who are actively working on designs that will lead to genuine free software laptops are funded by us. Not hacks that indirectly hurt our community.
I'm not discrediting the work coreboot developers did. I think that work was worthwhile. I even think libreboot is worthwhile to a limited extent, but it also has a down side to it in distracting people from where the real progress is being made/needed.
Also reverse engineering is not the ideal solution. We should be in control of our hardware to whatever extent that is even remotely possible. We don't get to that from Lenovo/Chromebooks/etc. That's fine as a baby step. It's not fine long term and I don't want to see those baby steps interfere with the long term viability of free software laptops or other hardware getting off the ground.
I am a member!
1. Chris could you show how we can help those Projects? If not why not? I find that kind of interesting.
2. Libeboot, please keep on supporting older devices, I hate e-waste, that´s the reason I like Libreboot.
3. At this point in time, I think Libreboot is the only viable option for Free Server and free high performance computing (or even distributed computing) Arm just isn´t there jet. (There for I like to read about the next supported Serverboard)
4. Think Penguin sells refurbished MP-3 Play, which are good by the way. And to show that it runs Freedoom is fun.
I am a member!
1. I could, but rather not at this time. It's not or only partly public knowledge. There is a video demo'ing the laptop actually. Early stages. I've talked about the project before, but never associating ThinkPenguin with it. In the press release / fund raising efforts / etc we'll be credited at a minimum for having funded the design / work for a very long time. Basically my main concern is it's not ready for a ton of publicity.
2. Yes- that's a great reason to support libreboot!
3. It is right now which is why I'm talking longer term. ThinkPenguin has always thought more longer term. Although ARM is not entirely ready it is catching up. I wouldn't push ARM on anybody unless the understood its limitations. At the same time if your in a position to support free software I'd highly encourage you to buy one of these when its available. I'd like to try and recoup the cost. It probably won't happen because like other projects we sponsor they're not ready for the masses and thats where the real money is. We'll never get to that point focusing on the wrong projects though.
I am a member!
<-I'd highly encourage you to buy one of these when its available.
-> I would, it depends on the cost and peformance.
I´m not really in a good position to support, but not the worst.
I like to beta test. Maybe even beta test Trisquel 8.
It's all very well to tell people to sit tight, stop whining, and content
themselves with non-free boot software until the holy grail of a free ARM
laptop arrives, but in the meantime, I will take the option that allows me to
be as free as possible. Currently (and I'm sorry to say this) that option is
the computers sold by Minifree, not ThinkPenguin. When the mystical ARM
computer you keep promising arrives, I'll be happy to get one, but until then
Librebooted x86s are the *free-est* option. That's why the FSF endorses them,
and not ThinkPenguins.
I still fail to understand how Libreboot is counterproductive to the long-term
development of a fully free computer. Your argument seems to rest along the
lines that since they take away your business, they're taking away money from
the long-term development of the ARM platform. If so, why don't you start
selling Librebooted computers as well? If x86 is a dead end, but you sell x86s
anyway because that's the best we have, why not actually *make the best* out of
what we have and Libreboot them? Then no one would be detracting from anyone
else's projects and ThinkPenguin would look a lot less hypocritical. This bitch
fight you and Francis have just been having paints your company in a very bad
light.
Both ThinkPenguin and Minifree sell x86-based computers, awaiting the holy
grail. It is hypocrisy of the highest order to sell computers based on x86, and
then criticise another company for the doing the same thing! The difference
between your companies is as follows: ThinkPenguin = x86 without Libreboot.
Minifree = x86 with Libreboot. To me, and to all others who actually care about
freedom in the present, Minifree is a far better option, despite your curious
line of reasoning that "things will be better in the future so ignore your
freedom in the present".
I am a member!
I'm not telling people to buy ThinkPenguin computers over Mini free's. I know that is hard to believe, but I didn't say that. I'm perfectly fine with people buying Mini free's systems. They are better in this respect at the moment. They won't be forever, but they are right now.
We have plenty of business to keep us going in the direction we're going. Mini free is a tiny tiny tiny competitor who really isn't worth my time to even respond to. However it bugs me to have him saying half-truths about a company and me personally. I've been focused on and attacking these problems for *years*. We've even been working on these problems and developing a *real* more permanent solution- just nobody even knows we're doing it because I haven't said anything about it publicly.
However if we spent time free'ing our current computers (which isn't even possible) it would be wasting resources. We already made an investment to ensure people can avoid moving to Skylake (which is worse than prior Intel based technology). It's not a great answer, but it's better than doing nothing at all. And we're still working on 100% free routers and other devices. We have multiple projects going. Not just one project.
It's a matter of limited resources and directing those resources where it'll make the most difference. It makes more sense to direct those resources at designing ARM laptops and torward various other projects than it does to direct those resources at free'ing X86. You can't use the work Francis is doing today on what is going to be the future of free hardware. Well, you can maybe, but it's a duplication of efforts, which is a waste.
Have you made any progress on the ARM front? If so, I'd be happy to donate.
Well, I have a suggestion for ThinkPenguin, MiniFree, and LibreBoot:
I know this can sound counter productive and really annoying for some
people, but could you please forget the differences and work on joint
efforts... DON'T CLOSE THE TAB YET!... Read on...
1. As far as I can tell from my tiny universe called "e-mail", I have
seen people from ThinkPenguin being skilled on public relations, that
includes reaching other organizations/groups/people, and negotiating
joint efforts and support with this public. That's a great skill. :D
2. People from MiniFree are skilled on getting information regarding
hardware and using that information to build something.
3. Both MiniFree and ThinkPenguin seem to be skilled on hardware-related
subjects. I know that I'm just seeing it from the top of what each can
do, that's because I have very basic knowledge in this area, as I
attended a course of desktop computer maintenance, that is, those old
babies with the computer tower. Besides that, I don't do experiments
with hardware since I'm still unemployed and I'm visually impaired to
see those tiny characters in the circuit boards. If you ask me what
computer I'm using, I would say a notebook, that I have no idea how to
fix, let alone open up or reassemble.
I have told everything that you have read so far based on my view as a
graduating manager, AND DO KNOW THAT BOTH ORGANIZATIONS have different
views on each other's position. It's just a mater of sitting in a nice
place and establishing a joint effort along with what each will do or not.
I am a member!
When we have tried to work with Francis despite my dislike of his approach he's (his words) 'played games' with us. How do I respond to that?
I've been very reserved in my *slight* criticism of the project/Francis because I know how Francis has reacted in the past. Not everybody agrees with my opinion. It's fine. I can live with that. However he has taken my opinion on the approach as an attack on him personally.
Francis is making the claim I tried to donate to the LibreBoot project. It wasn't an insignificant amount of money ($500 I believe), but it was in all honesty a token gesture, and I'm pretty sure I said that.
Then he says we tried to work with him- which is true- but he then goes on to agree that he 'played games' with us. I repeat how are we suppose to work with people who 'play games' with us and then use that to attack me/ThinkPenguin?
We can't trust him. He thinks everybody is out to get him. And he is turning himself into this victim which he is not.
I've not had *any* other individual / project respond negatively to our involvement.
I do think this entire thread is childish and I'd rather not feel forced to respond.
You seem to assume that you have the right to just get involved wherever and however you see fit, on whatever terms you decide are appropriate, regardless of how it affects those involved. ThinkPenguin has always been this way. This kind of arrogance disgusts me.
I didn't want to work with you in the first place. I never asked you to approach me. Your CTO approached me out of the blue and told me what ThinkPenguin planned to do, and asked me to help ThinkPenguin.
When you publicly criticize my company for what it does, and then try to do the very same thing in the exact same way that you criticized, that makes me think you are not genuine, and it makes me want to not only not work with you, but actually hold things back from you, which is what I did.
I otherwise work with many people, regularly.
Yeah, $500? What a joke. You wanted to put my company out of business, and expected me to accept it. Fuck you.
You can't trust me? Of course, ThinkPenguin can't trust me to do things that are against my interest. That much should be obvious. Asking anyone to do something that is against their interest is almost guaranteed to get a very predictable response.
And I don't think that everyone is out to get me. Now you're putting words in my mouth. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt, until they prove to me that they are treacherous, as your company did.
And your the one who said I played games with you. I just appropriated your use of language in my response. I actually saw it as an opposition to a ruthless enemy (ThinkPenguin), which it what it was.
I am a member!
1. First of all we didn't need your help. Bob's personally been hacking at embedded systems a lot longer than you.
2. Bob offered to help *you* and you accepted- then turned your back on Bob/ThinkPenguin. Twisting it to suggest he is incompetent is ingenious.
3. All I did was suggest you add a donate button to the libreboot project, and said I was prepared to donate a small amount to the project. It was mostly a token gesture. Not insignificant although not enough to live off either. You rebuffed me (I guess?). Your response to the suggestion was mostly incomprehensible.
4. I wasn't a fan of contributing to the project as I felt it was a wasted effort. However when you basically said yes- and then ran off and hid for a month to get it finished. Then turned around and basically tried stabbing us in the back for no good reason. I honestly didn't care because it's not worth the time and effort anyway. This is not how you make friends.
5. I didn't criticize your company. I criticized your approach to a free software laptop. I have *directed people to both Gluglug and Mini free*. If we really thought you were some sort of threat I'd just start selling these things myself. But we didn't. We GAVE Patrick (your partner) a source for the Lenovo systems so he could cooperate with you on selling them in the United States. This was *after* you stabbed us in the back. hmm and your saying we're attacking you? No. We're not.
6. How on earth would contributing $500 put you out of business? It didn't. There weren't any strings attached to that.
All that would have happened would be you'd have had another avenue to sell these machines. We'd have contributed *back* money to your project just like we do for plenty of others. This idea I/we/bob/somebody else wants you out of business is absurd. I would on the other hand like you to stop making baseless accusations against us. You can have an opinion about our approach, but don't attack us.
Now you're just blatantly lying to people. I'll respond to your points.
1. What? You didn't ask me for help, and I never offered it.
2. But he is, in this area.
3. No, what you did was try to destroy me, and then offer to "help" me. I responded to your offer with a link to wikipedia articles about people who had invented things during their life, who only later were exploited by people like you and taken for a ride, then discarded like old newspapers. Yes, my response was indeed cryptic.
4. I didn't say yes to anything, and you didn't offer any help at all. What you did was try to compete. Now, I have nothing wrong with competitors, but when the company in question has been highly critical of my work and my approach, then tries to copy it verbatim, that makes them a hypocrite, and a dishonest one at that. I don't work with such people, which is why I refused to cooperate with (read: give in to) you.
5. This isn't actually a problem. The fact that you did criticize it so much is irrelevant. The fact that you then tried to do the exact same thing is what annoyed me. And yes, you were attacking me at the time and still are. Your attempts to drive a wedge between me and Patrick will not work.
6. You tried to undermine everything that libreboot does, and then offer to "support" me. I didn't (and still don't) want your "charity".
If I'm wrong, I'll apologize to you, but you gave pretty loud signals at the time that this is not the case. What you're doing now is lying to save face, which is even worse.
I am a member!
> 3. No, what you did was try to destroy me, and then offer to "help" me.
> I responded to your offer with a link to wikipedia > articles about people
> who had invented things during their life, who only later were exploited
> by people like you and taken for a ride, then discarded like old newspapers.
> Yes, my response was indeed cryptic.
Your delusional. You haven't explained in any sane way how I tried to "destroy" you. Your grasping at straws. Donating money is certainly not something one does to destroy another. There weren't any strings attached to any donation offers. You weren't even accepting donations at the time and it was nothing more than a friendly suggestion to raise money for the project. If I had attached some sort of strings to the money then I could understand why one might get upset. There weren't however any strings attached.
> 4. I didn't say yes to anything,
OK- that's not true. You and Bob were talking on IRC about it, said yes, or led us to believe that, and then you went into hiding for a month prior to release. I can only imagine it had to do with the fact you didn't actually want Bob or ThinkPenguin involved. I was fine with dropping it. We didn't actually do any work on it ultimately because you were uncooperative. That's the feeling we had at that time despite your words. Later (including here on this thread) you even said you 'played games' with us. Which is exactly what this was.
> Your attempts to drive a wedge between me and Patrick will not work.
What are you talking about? What does Patrick have to do with any of this? I don't even think Patrick had anything to do with Libreboot at that time. If you were working with him it was not something I was aware of.
I do find it humorous though that you said yes to us and then went and worked with Patrick. In terms of selling these in the US. Though it's not surprising after you inserted Patrick's Protein OS into LibreBoot given you had already given me/bob the feeling you didn't want to work with us. I'm still not seeing what the point of that was (inserting Protein OS). It seems like it was little more than to thumb your nose as Bob.. maybe. Though it seems like a waste of time/effort for jab we might not even have gotten.
> If I'm wrong, I'll apologize to you, but you gave pretty loud signals at
> the time that this is not the case. What you're doing now is lying to save face,
> which is even worse.
I haven't lied about anything. I don't have to. I will admit it is possible I or Bob misunderstood you when you said yes. I seriously doubt that is what happened though as you've never given a very warm welcome to us and I know you have told me you've used deception with others (specifically to get information out of Todd of the Librem laptop, which I don't like either, but none-the-less, personally have just ignored for the most part).
I think you had other ideas in terms of approach (obviously) and believed I/we were out to get you because I dislike Lenovo. Then you reacted by lying to us when we tried to work with you (because of Jason/Josh/others pushing us to do so). You misconstrued all this and tried to get an edge over us on something I wasn't even all that interested in doing.
And I certainly don't think I have done anything wrong to you. I've done nothing wrong and you can't even point to anything other than offers of donation / support. I even did tried to make amends with you just to deal with what I perceived was this warped perception of us. I have tried to tell you that repeatedly, in nicer words, but you'll have none of it.
You can say whatever you like (and even lie, as you are once again doing), and it won't change my mind about you. My mind was made up a long time ago.
What you're doing in your responses is to try to appear courteous and thoughtful to the public, so that you don't look bad, but none of what you have told me is genuine.
"Never gave a warm welcome to us" - of course I didn't. What else would you expect, given what happened back then? I never agreed to work with you, and never have. You just showed up out of the blue, expected me to do things your way and assumed that I would agree (which I didn't). Then when I rightly opposed you for it, you took it as a sign that I had somehow "cheated" you, even though I didn't owe you anything at all.
You've always been hostile to the libreboot project, in public and in private, so I want nothing to do with you.
Regarding your Purism comment. We both dislike Purism, but for different reasosn. I dislike Purism because I think that they are malicious (intentionally or not), talking to people about so-called "free hardware" while selling with proprietary BIOS components and being utterly incapable of doing anything about it, changing their goals all the time and breaking their promises. I have similar criticisms of your company, though you are more honest (and a bit more competent) than they are (you don't talk about coreboot, for instance) and you actually do do useful things (like LibreCMC, and negotiating with hardware vendors to free wifi firmware). You dislike Purism mostly because they are a direct competitor to you (they do a better job of selling, compared to ThinkPenguin), even if you do also have some ethical concerns about them; I dislike Purism on purely ethical grounds (I don't even think Purism is competition to MInifree, and they are actually quite irrelevant to me), but you dislike them on commercial grounds. That's the difference between Minifree/Libreboot and ThinkPenguin, in this regard.
And yes, I did contact Todd Weaver, to try to get information, because I was genuinely curious about what his company was actually doing. I'd hardly describe that as "deception". That being said, I am highly skeptical about them, and doubt that they'll ever get anywhere at all. In fact, looking at their campaigns pages it seems like they've stalled for some time now so it looks like they might just end up as another dead project, like many others before them.
> You dislike Purism mostly because they are a direct competitor to you
I've never seen Chris say anything to this effect. All of the criticisms I've seen him make are around ethics and, in particular, dishonesty. Actually, the accusation that Chris disliked them because of competition was one the guy behind Purism made, if I'm not mistaken.
I am a member!
> You just showed up out of the blue, expected me to do things your way and
> assumed that I would agree (which I didn't).
On the one hand you say you never worked with us and on the other you say we made you do things. Which is it? Did we work with you or didn't we?
The truth is we didn't work with you in any real way in the end and we never made you do anything because you said yes- and then went into hiding. Only to release the product without us. Which I already figured was going to happen when you disappeared. I was given the impression by others that you were basically doing that to 'get it done' and somehow out compete us on something we weren't even doing (without your permission / cooperation so to speak).
I got Bob a Lenovo laptop and he flashed it with libreboot (despite that you weren't releasing the code to any one yet, although the actual flashing might have happened toward the very beginning of your release, not prior to the going into hiding bit you did) and we setup sourcing for the hardware and everything (within a few days of you saying yes). We didn't spend much time on it- but we did do something after you said yes. And then after all that we even gave Patrick our contacts for sourcing the refurbished units (I don't know if he used those contacts or not, but we did give them to him).
Suggesting Bob is incompetent and that we couldn't have sold these without you is just wrong. We didn't sell them in part because I didn't want to push things and get you upset. If you weren't going to cooperate I was just going to let it go- which we did.
> And yes, I did contact Todd Weaver, to try to get information, because I was
> genuinely curious about what his company was actually doing. I'd hardly
> describe that as "deception".
You created another email account just so he wouldn't know who you were! How is that not deceptive? You pretended to be someone else entirely and you even CC'd Josh on that at the FSF. You didn't go up to him and say "Hey- we have the same interests, will you work with us?". That's the honest approach to take. We did that with you and you shunned us. For no good reason. You didn't even give us a chance to work with you.
I can see that you're not going to give up on attacking me (or lying about me, for that matter).
What's interesting is that you're now doing it a lot more aggressively, and a lot more publicly for the first time. It's also interesting that you seem to be defending Purism somewhat in your post, despite what you previously said about them yourself.
> Have you ever even talked to Allwinner? Did you work toward getting the
> code released at all? No. You didn't. We did.
So far, we've lacked the resources, not the intention. This is a legitimate concern, but what you're doing here is trying to make it look like we lack the intent. Once again, you are attempting to slander the libreboot project.
Did you release something tangible that people can actually use? No, you didn't. We did, and we're about to do it a whole lot more. Just you watch.
> I've got nothing against you working on free'ing X86. I just don't think
> it is the right approach. I think it is a wasted effort when we have
> *other* more important projects that need to be worked on that'll make
> the difference between the community having a more permanent solution
> and never having one ever.
I don't give a fuck whether you're for or against the libreboot project. It will continue, with or without your approval.
Libreboot is not wasted effort. We are providing a solution today, and almost noone else is. We're working every day to push things forward, in ways that you are intellectually and creatively incapable.
> I've stuck to my words that Lenovo is a horrible company...
I agree with this part.
> ...I'd rather not be promoting. The promotion is not intentional on your
> part. And I'm not blaming you for it. Just I think its the wrong direction.
It makes zero difference. Lenovo will continue to exist, regardless of what we do in the libreboot project. I doubt that our "contribution" to them, if any, is more than a tiny drop in a vast ocean.
> You had no choice but to use Lenovo or Apple because those were the only real options.
> The work to port coreboot to them was already done (except apparently one model,
> but you got lucky, because of illicitly obtained info, which implicates anybody who
> bought your laptops or downloads libreboot). It's no different than us building off Intel.
> There aren't any good options.
Illicit? I'm pretty sure RE is legal in Europe, but whatever.
We're doing what we can to improve things, and I would like to see more people contributing to libreboot directly. I work every day to try to make this happen.
> Not by any means. We didn't want to do it- you pushed us into it.
What? I'm pretty sure that's not the case. But OK, have it your way.
> There are plenty of people who disagree with me. And thats fine. But you don't need to attack me for it.
That's right, but they don't call you out on your BS, like I'm now doing.
> Acting as if this is some great project to benefit man kind is a joke. It's not.
You see, this is why people should stop taking you seriously. The libreboot project is doing what you failed to do, and what the FSF has called for for many years. We're making progress, and we'll get to where we all want to be in the end.
The difference is that we just do it. We don't wait. This is why the libreboot project is so successful.
> I don't care what-so-ever about libreboot
Yep. That much is certain to me. Another reason why I don't take you seriously at all.
> We don't need libreboot or coreboot *at all* and never have.
Tell that to the FSF. And I dare you to say that to the coreboot developers. They'll shoot you down, for being the ignorant, misinformed twit that you are.
> Also reverse engineering is not the ideal solution
Agreed. See my previous comments about producing own hardware (it's also listed as a priority task on the libreboot website).
What I see in your comments, is that you clearly aren't the type of person that we need to push things forward. Libreboot is one such project that has pushed things forward, and is continuing to do so. There are also many others, none of which you are involved with.
I am a member!
>> Have you ever even talked to Allwinner? Did you work toward getting the
>> code released at all? No. You didn't. We did.
>
>So far, we've lacked the resources, not the intention. This is a legitimate concern, but what you're doing here is trying to >make it look like we lack the intent.
Your putting words into my mouth. I've said you don't have the ability or resources. It's not a matter of intent.
> Did you release something tangible that people can actually use? No, you didn't.
> We did, and we're about to do it a whole lot more. Just you watch.
First off we have release *lots* of products people can actually use. Your laptop isn't 100% free either. It's just mostly free. You were shipping non-free winmodems and hard disks with proprietary bits as well. Our hardware isn't perfect, but it's still going in the right direction.
Your taking short cuts and getting *nowhere* in the scheme of things. We're working on harder problems to solve and its going to take more time and money to solve those problems. In the mean time we've worked on lots of smaller projects and its the *same* thing I suggested you do. One of my primary objectives has been to develop the revenue sources to actually work on a 100% free laptop. But not one that was a hack or based on other companies products that I'd consider to be actively working against the free software community. I want a design that can actually be reliably manufactured in successive revisions over the long haul. Relying Lenovo or Google to come out with products that we can free is a dead end. Intel's added digital restrictions and Google's not exactly producing (or the companies building off Google's stuff, ie chromebooks) systems that are easily free'd (in there entirety).
> Illicit? I'm pretty sure RE is legal in Europe, but whatever.
Reverse engineering is not illegal if its done right. You didn't do it right and admitted it privately. You took leaked confidential Intel documents and used that to get coreboot working on newer Lenovo laptops. That is *extremely* stupid and you compromise the entire project and any other free software project that incorporates your improvements.
This was another reason to *not* ship these Lenovo laptops based off your efforts. It was a liability nightmare. It doesn't matter if you did it in the United States or the United Kingdom/Europe.
> failed to do
We didn't fail to do it because we were already working on it. It's just a more difficult task when your doing it legally, properly, and actually have plans to manufacture the laptops long term.
We chose *not* to work on dead-end projects. As I said I considered doing this back in 2009 and concluded it wasn't worth the effort. I still think it's wasted resources when we can do it right and produce a more cost effective solution that will continue to work down the road. Short term thinking leads to dead ends which you've already stated is what happened. You said yourself that X86 is a dead end on these very forums!
> Yep. That much is certain to me. Another reason why I don't take you seriously at all.
Just because I don't care about it what-so-ever doesn't mean I wasn't willing to fund it. It wasn't me you should have taken seriously anyway. Bob was more than cooperative and interested in taking this on. He ultimately let it go when you weren't cooperating. Personally I think his current attitude is a little hypocritical, but alas, his intent is good and doesn't get quite as upset over minor criticisms.
> Tell that to the FSF. And I dare you to say that to the coreboot developers. They'll shoot you down,
> for being the ignorant, misinformed twit that you are.
Interesting. Considering we have had multiple devices up and running without coreboot or libreboot that were completely free AND RYF certified.
> There are also many others, none of which you are involved with.
Yea- I don't agree. Considering the most promising project as far as a 100% free ARM laptop is concerned is *sponsored* by us and there aren't any other major sponsors... yea.. OK. Again. Your not going to convince me of this.
There are other projects- but they don't have the ability to pull it off. One wasted a year trying to communicate with I forget who only to utterly fail. Mean while we're practically done. Prototypes and all.
I thought you said you were done with this?
> Your taking short cuts and getting *nowhere* in the scheme of things
For this and the following text in that paragraph: again, you're missing the point. Libreboot is providing a solution that people can use, right now at this very moment, meeting the FSF's original calling for such a project (free BIOS replacement) serving as inspiration for others to get involved and push things even further forward. As also previously stated by me, I'm building up the funds necessary to back manufacturing of own hardware.
As also stated, this will take much time, and I don't claim that it will be easy.
> Reverse engineering is not illegal if its done right.
What you said about libreboot using leaked docs is factually false. It was pure RE, the rest was based on public datasheets.
If you want to continue slandering the libreboot project, please feel free to do so, but you only hurt your reputation each time you do.
> We didn't fail to do it because we were already working on it. It's just a more difficult task when your doing it legally, properly, and actually have plans to manufacture the laptops long term.
Seriously?
Are you seriously saying that libreboot is illegal?
Are you really going down that path?
> We chose *not* to work on dead-end projects.
There you go again. Libreboot is not a dead-end project, at all. We're working all the time on adding new hardware support.
I did say that x86 is a dead-end, yes, but that that doesn't mean libreboot is a dead-end. We're currently focussing on ARM. RISC-V is also interesting, but it'll likely be a few years before anything usable comes out of that. There are a few more x86 targets that we're also interested in, in the short term.
> Just because I don't care about it what-so-ever doesn't mean I wasn't willing to fund it.
For the paragraph that this sentence is from: no. You had absolutely rotten intentions, which I've already talked about in this thread, and will not repeat again.
> Interesting. Considering we have had multiple devices up and running without coreboot or libreboot that were completely free AND RYF certified.
It's insulting. It's insulting to the work that we do on libreboot. It's insulting to the work done in coreboot. The fact that you are able to say that coreboot and libreboot don't matter, shows that you are *not* serious about free software. Coreboot is even considered a *high priority project* by the Free Software Foundation, as is libreboot.
You are opposing the very movement that you claim to be supporting.
> Your not going to convince me of this.
I don't need to convince you of anything. You are quite irrelevant to me, in fact.
After taking part in this forum thread, I've come to the conclusion that ThinkPenguin is as bad as Purism, especially after their comment that coreboot is "not needed".
I am a member!
> What you said about libreboot using leaked docs is factually false.
> It was pure RE, the rest was based on public datasheets.
Your lying.
> If you want to continue slandering the libreboot project,
It's not slander when it is true and I'm 99.5% certain since I've seen the logs. I believe I can get the logs of you stating you used confidential documents that were leaked for the one laptop in which you actually ported coreboot too still.
This is a big no no. I'm not the only person you have a grudge with and I'm pretty confident the person who has those logs will be happy to provide them.
I've not said anything until now explicitly because I have *no interest* in attacking you, your work, or libreboot, and see little value in compromising the integrity of any of it- or other projects for that matter (despite the stupidity of *your* actions and utter attack on me).
However that said I will try and get my hands on those logs if you want to keep pressing me on this.
> Are you seriously saying that libreboot is illegal?
I didn't say that. Libreboot in itself is not illegal. You did compromise the legal integrity of the project though and probably coreboot now.
> There you go again. Libreboot is not a dead-end project, at all.
> We're working all the time on adding new hardware support. We're currently focussing on ARM
Yea- I don't think that you think that Libreboot is a dead-end project. You only think x86 is. It's a small point in either case. I do think libreboot is a dead-end project though given it's utterly useless for other architectures which we actually have a chance at completely or near-completely freeing. You can do it, but that doesn't mean it adds any value to a free software laptop as we don't need libreboot for ARM and other architectures. We have other bootloaders under free software licenses that we (and others) can use. In fact we're already using them!
I also wanted to point out that the FSF isn't going to laugh at us like you implied previously. For one the majority of people support and respect what I have to say (even if I am wrong about something). Nobody is perfect.
> For the paragraph that this sentence is from: no. You had absolutely rotten intentions, which
> I've already talked about in this thread, and will not repeat again.
You NEVER pointed to any rotten intentions. All you did was say we/I had rotten intentions at best. You did misconstrue events to try and produce rotten intentions- that much I will agree with you on.
> Coreboot is even considered a *high priority project* by the Free Software Foundation, as is libreboot.
It's been that way for a long time and hasn't gotten anywhere. There aren't any significant laptop deployments using it . It's now quickly becoming irrelevant. The only systems we can completely free are using architectures for which it's irrelevant.
We don't need the excessive baggage that comes with coreboot/libreboot. We can reduce the size of the bootloader significantly via the use of other free bootloaders.
In any event it shouldn't be insulting to coreboot/libreboot developers. It is a good project. It's just that its time has come and gone. Didn't you even say five minutes ago that it was dead or dying?
> You are opposing the very movement that you claim to be supporting.
No. That is your interpretation of it. I've done everything in my power to further advance free software friendly hardware.
> I've come to the conclusion that ThinkPenguin is as bad as Purism, especially after their
> comment that coreboot is "not needed".
The reason Purism is bad is because they're lying and misleading people into thinking they have or are about to have a 100% free laptop. We've done no such thing. Anybody who has ever asked us "do your computers computer with coreboot/libreboot?" has gotten a response saying something to this effect:
No, but coreboot is not entirely free, and libreboot is, but it is not possible to port it to modern computers without the cooperation of Intel and unfortunately Intel is not cooperating. There are digital restrictions in newer Intel hardware and we're working on solving these problems. However it won't be possible to do so with the current laptops. We are working on other projects though so hopefully some day we will have a better answer to this problem.
!!!...Sometimes we've even linked people to minifree/gluglug...!!!
Go listen to Freedoms Phoenix with Ernest Hancock. I know at least one of the shows I did with him (I did several, find the ones with me or thinkpenguin listed) I even mentioned gluglug on the air in a *positive light*. That isn't something someone who is out to get you does. There is *zero* benefit for me to do that on a program that nobody here or in the free software community is likely to even be listening to.
> It's not slander when it is true and I'm 99.5% certain since I've seen the logs
I have the same logs. The early work was not done by me, and I assumed that Steve had used leaked datasheets, but I was wrong. It was pure RE, from publicly available utilities and datasheets.
> However that said I will try and get my hands on those logs if you want to keep pressing me on this.
You are not a threat to me, but sure, whatever. Consider this: if you are making such threats (even idle ones), what does that say about your dedication to free software?
You have now, at this moment, threatened to attempt a very aggressive attack on a well-known and respected free software project, one which is breaking new grounds and pushing the free software movement forward, one that even has the backing of the FSF. What does your threat against it say about you, as an individual?
Consider this, very carefully.
> I didn't say that. Libreboot in itself is not illegal. You did compromise the legal integrity of the project though and probably coreboot now.
No, I didn't. What you're doing here is to try discredit the libreboot project by, once again, spreading FUD. It's not going to work, and it's only going to hurt your reputation.
> Yea- I don't think that you think that Libreboot is a dead-end project. You only think x86 is.
I've always said that x86 is a dead end, much like you. The difference, is how I deal with it. I still use x86 hardware, as a means to an end (raising funds for future work, work that will be more long-term beneficial to the community). I'm well aware of how hopeless x86 is, especially with Intel. AMD is also going in a bad direction.
Hell, I even wrote this FAQ about Intel (I even called them "bastards"): http://libreboot.org/faq/#intel
> It's a small point in either case. I do think libreboot is a dead-end project though given it's utterly
> useless for other architectures which we actually have a chance at completely or near-completely freeing.
> You can do it, but that doesn't mean it adds any value to a free software laptop as we don't need libreboot
> for ARM and other architectures. We have other bootloaders under free software licenses that we (and others)
> can use. In fact we're already using them!
What makes you think I won't start integrating u-boot into libreboot? The build system that libreboot uses makes this incredibly easy.
In fact, I'm currently contemplating this as we speak, and have done so for some time. It was also mentioned briefly on the libreboot website, though I'm not sure if I left those notes intact.
Libreboot is short for "libre boot firmware", and has nothing to do with coreboot. The mere fact that it currently uses coreboot as one of its modules, for a few systems, is simply a coincidence. It's merely the case, that coreboot is what libreboot started out with, but there's nothing stopping it from expanding to incorporate other software alongside that.
> I also wanted to point out that the FSF isn't going to laugh at us like you implied previously.
> For one the majority of people support and respect what I have to say (even if I am wrong about something). Nobody is perfect.
I don't want the FSF or anyone else to laugh about you. I just want you to stop attacking the libreboot project and me personally. Nothing more, nothing less.
> We don't need the excessive baggage that comes with coreboot/libreboot. We can reduce the size of the bootloader significantly via the use of other free bootloaders.
This is a question of practicality and implementation, not ethics. There's nothing wrong, practically speaking with coreboot, and I disagree entirely that it is an irrelevant project. The number of code contributions to coreboot has more than *tripled* in the last few years, and more hardware manufacturers are starting to use it. It's a long battle, mostly due to the concentration of monopolies (IBVs, ODMs, OEMs and so on) but we'll get there in the end.
Once again, I challenge you to go into the coreboot mailing list or IRC channel (or both. probably the mailing list) and say these things. They will shoot you down, as the ignorant and misinformed person that you are. You are ignorant, precisely because of your comments about coreboot in this regard.
> In any event it shouldn't be insulting to coreboot/libreboot developers. It is a good project.
> It's just that its time has come and gone. Didn't you even say five minutes ago that it was dead or dying?
Far from it. Libreboot is expanding. In fact, check the libreboot website over the course of the next month. I dare you.
> No. That is your interpretation of it. I've done everything in my power to further advance free software friendly hardware.
I don't doubt it, but that also doesn't excuse your blatant attacks on the libreboot project (or the coreboot project), both of which are working extremely hard and doing everything that they can to advance freedom (less so in coreboot's case, not all of them are in this for free software activism).
> The reason Purism is bad is because they're lying and misleading people into thinking they have or are about to have a 100% free laptop.
> We've done no such thing. Anybody who has ever asked us "do your computers computer with coreboot/libreboot?" has gotten a response saying something to this effect:
Yes, and that is commendable, that you are honest with people.
> !!!...Sometimes we've even linked people to minifree/gluglug...!!!
I don't care. I appreciate any good will that people can give towards the project, but no amount of good will excuses hostility at other times.
> Go listen to Freedoms Phoenix with Ernest Hancock. I know at least one of the shows I did with him
> (I did several, find the ones with me or thinkpenguin listed) I even mentioned gluglug on the air in
> a *positive light*. That isn't something someone who is out to get you does. There is *zero* benefit
> for me to do that on a program that nobody here or in the free software community is likely to even be listening to.
If this is indeed true, then I thank you for that. I hope that you can continue to redeem yourself in the future.
I am a member!
> is breaking new grounds and pushing the free software movement forward,
Your not 'breaking new ground'. Coreboot wasn't always full of non-free pieces and we have other bootloaders that are free. And with ARM coming out we don't even need libreboot. You've at best solved a temporary problem. If you had started *years* earlier then maybe I'd say you contributed something of significance. That isn't how things happened though. You showed up just as X86 was dying and took credit for what is largely the work of others. There was some work involved to free that code no doubt- and that is deserving of credit- but it's not more than 2 years worth. I've been working at this for several years comparatively and so has Bob, Rubén Rodríguez, and a lot of other people. Your one small part of the puzzle just like the rest of us. It's great to be able to glamorise what one is doing- but sometimes its best to do it *privately* amongst people who are your friends and not do it when your attacking other people's reputations.
> What does your threat against it say about you, as an individual?
I didn't threaten anybody. I've taken no action against any person or entity. I haven't even said anything bad about libreboot! The logs only reveal that your lying about this and that is purely defensive. Your actions are what compromised the project- not the revelation of those actions. Even if I do not reveal the logs (I don't really care to do that!) libreboot is *still* at risk and so are all the users who utilize it and any other projects which incorporated your code.
Definition of a 'threat': express one's intention to harm or kill (someone)
I have no intent to harm you or libreboot. If I did I'd have already done something. I'm being VERY mellow about taking any action that even has a slight chance of creating a problem despite the hostility.
> No, I didn't. What you're doing here is to try discredit the libreboot project by,
I'm not trying to discredit libreboot. To do that I'd have had to say libreboot contains non-free pieces. To discredit you on the other hand I'd have to show that you were lying. Which is the only thing I was trying to do. But every time I bring something up you go out and admit it. So I don't even need to do so.
> You are ignorant, precisely because of your comments about coreboot in this regard.
Your completely warping everything I'm saying. I'm applying it to the future of free laptop systems. It has no relevance here in terms of freeing ARM and other architecture based systems.
In other contexts coreboot/libreboot probably does have value and a future. For instance in an ARM server environment there is value in coreboot/libreboot likely. For example I believe coreboot had some remote control capabilities. Porting coreboot/libreboot to ARM within that context has value. I don't think it has value within the context I've been speaking.
I might have just answered the question I keep asking you: Where is the value in libreboot on ARM? It's not quite within the scope of a free software laptop... it still has no value here as far as I can see... as we don't need it... but it does have value elsewhere. Maybe. I'm not entirely familiar with servers and how its used or how critical this is in those environments. From a value perspective it still might make sense to skip it if there are other projects which are more critical within the context of free software. For instance if you don't need libreboot because you can get away with uboot within a server environment and there are other components which are non-free that are critical in said environments then you just very well may be doing something destructive here by wasting resources on something we don't even really need (again within the context of freedom, outside those contexts it has value, it's just not as valuable if your focus is freedom).
"You don't get it. It's conflicting with the work others are doing. There is a certain amount of money that people who care about free software have to spend on laptops."
I believe your thinking is too narrow and you are too overprotective of the small market that you see before your eyes. Instead of seeing other RYF hardware-projects as contrary to your business you should put your effort into supplying and marketing your own, like that very good refurbished router, that will help the public to escape proprietary solutions today.
What you don't get is the following: One person always has limited financial resources but s/he might know other people who are out looking to buy hardware. I always recommend and help install free software for friends and try to teach them to accept no less than 100 % freedom. Then, when they use this system (since I quite often manage to persuade them), which might be a thinkpad or a macbook2,1 with Trisquel, they usually feel very good about themselves in that they've chosen freedom over convenience. This, I believe, will affect their thinking in the future and they will influence others as well. So the "people who care about free software" will become more in this way.
The most important thing about the libreboot project, in my view, is its strong principled stance and showing that complete freedom in your computing is not just a dream but something very real that can and should be demanded today. Your routers are actually similar in this respect, but your case is not at all as strong since you're also recommending non-free distros like Ubuntu. Most people I know who have used Ubuntu in the past have later moved to OSX, because Ubuntu never taught them to value their own freedom but only to hate Windows.
Finally, I would recommend, for your own sake, that you stop attacking important projects like libreboot, because this only reflects badly upon ThinkPenguin. If you don't have an RYF laptop, then continue to sell routers and adaptors. When you do have a laptop, then get it RYF certified and regain much of the respect that you've just lost. Oh, maybe you should rename your business then as well, to start fresh.
I am a member!
> Instead of seeing other RYF hardware-projects as contrary to your business you should put your effort into
> supplying and marketing your own, like that very good refurbished router, that will help the public to
> escape proprietary solutions today.
We only sell one refurbished product and that's an OGG / FLAC audio player. The routers are new. They're not properly branded although we should have out something better shortly. Our main objective was to get the router to a point where we had more control over the manufacturing process. We succeeded.
> Your routers are actually similar in this respect, but your case is not at all as strong since you're also
> recommending non-free distros like Ubuntu.
Yea- that can't be helped. I'm not about to say "we won't help you move off non-free operating systems because your not 100% pure". If we took that approach then we would have zero (including Mini free's systems) systems we could recommend. These Lenovo systems running libreboot are not 100% free. They are just a major step in the right direction. None-the-less they are a dead-end as we can't keep refurbishing Lnnovos as Intel's not cooperating.
> Most people I know who have used Ubuntu in the past have later moved to OSX, because Ubuntu never taught them to
> value their own freedom but only to hate Windows.
This perspective isn't quite seeing the whole picture or even a big chunk of it. While I agree Ubuntu fails to get people to understand and value freedom it's not something we generally succeed at doing anywhere. A lot of people try Trisquel, but ultimately most people don't stick with Trisquel either. Did Trisquel not teach people to value there freedom?
The large majority of people using Ubuntu don't know better, but it's still better that they use Ubuntu or another distribution over Microsoft Windows or OS X. I get to see it from a larger angle and there are a lot of people moving from Ubuntu to other distributions including Trisquel. There are also a lot of people who are *not* returning to Microsoft Windows or Mac OS X.
Most of the people on Trisquel today have moved to it from a distribution with non-free pieces. I think to say we shouldn't help people move away from non-free operating systems is a mistake. I don't expect free software projects to recommend Ubuntu or Debian- In fact I don't think they should which is why Bob and I think Libreboot recommending Debian and Fedora was a mistake. However ultimately I also don't think turning people back to Microsoft Windows is the answer either. There is middle ground and that's where ThinkPenguin lies.
Chris, the overall problem in all of this is still that you are selling the very kinds of systems that you are so critical of in public. You tell people that we need to move to fully free systems, and criticize the libreboot project for being a "dead end" focusing on certain hardware that you identify to be a non-solution freedom-wise, all while you are selling systems on ThinkPenguin that have *proprietary BIOS*.
If I were in your position, I would not be selling those laptops and desktops that you sell. You are saying that the money raised helps fund future work on free hardware, but at the same time you're also selling systems to people that do not adequately respect their freedom, while preaching to people who do supply such systems for being "imperfect".
This is why you're a hypocrite.
> recommending Debian and Fedora was a mistake.
I came to the same conclusion, and stopped that. It was a temporary error of judgement, and you know it.
The reason was, that we considered ChromeOS to be the worst possible choice: it invades privacy (SaaSS web services), while coming with proprietary software. We wanted to recommend to people the least evil replacement, since there are currently no FSF-endorsed distributions available on ARM. The idea was, that this would lessen the problem.
It was decided that it didn't matter how "lesser evil" another non-endorsed distro was, that it was still just as bad. We decided instead to more aggressively call for libre distros to be ported to ARM. I'm going to be adding more ARM chromebooks to libreboot as a means to that end (more hardware being available with libreboot means that there's more incentive to port these distributions), which use the same rk3288 SoC as the ASUS C201. I'll soon be contacting all of the major libre distro projects (Trisquel, Guix, Parabola, etc) to see what can be done. I've contacted them already about it, but I will keep trying again and again.
Mark Weaver of GuixSD is already interested. I talked to him about it at the FSF30 day in Boston, MA. I also spoke to him on IRC about it before that, and have spoken to him on IRC since. He says that the basic code is already there, and Guix should easily be able to support ARM.
I contacted the Parabola project via their IRC channel, and it turns out that they already do have ARM support for u-boot systems, so it should be trivial to get them working with depthcharge (the payload that is used in coreboot/libreboot on these laptops). I'll be trying this myself at the earliest opportunity.
My contact with the Trisquel project has been inconclusive so far.
At present, Parabola and GuixSD look like they will be the first libre distributions available on this hardware.
With this in mind, it's wrong of you to criticize libreboot for a mistake that it no longer makes. As I said, recommending Debian/Fedora as a "temporary" solution was a serious lapse in judgement which I quickly rectified.
I am a member!
> Chris, the overall problem in all of this is still that you are selling
> the very kinds of systems that you are so critical of in public.
That's an utterly misleading statement. Your clearly referring to the Librem and I'm critical of it not because it's any more or less freedom friendly than our systems. I'm critical of the guy behind it's claims that it is/was 100% free or would be or could be in the near future.
However we knew that couldn't happen. He originally designed it with *NVIDIA* chips without a good reason to do so for we all know are dependent on a non-free NVIDIA driver. Earlier versions of the chip didn't even work with the free nouveau driver.
ThinkPenguin *HAD* the best systems for years. We're only slightly behind. However even if we release an ARM based laptop/desktop it won't matter for the majority of people out there. It won't be a good option for helping these people move off of non-free software. To that I say I'm not going to stop encouraging people to move away from non-free software just because some people are more abled and determined to get away.
Anybody who says they won't use any non-free software is a hypocrite. Until recently all systems were dependent on a non-free BIOS and/or other pieces and even still there are non-free pieces hiding in our devices including Mini free's.
The person *most* opposed to non-free software in the entire universe is even using some non-free pieces. We're all just doing our best to avoid as many of those non-free pieces as is humanly possible- short of abandoning any technology altogether.
> You
> tell people that we need to move to fully free systems, and criticize
> the libreboot project for being a "dead end" focusing on certain
> hardware that you identify to be a non-solution freedom-wise,
I never said it was a non-solution I said it was a dead end going forward. Which it is when you can't load it onto any modern X86 system because of digital locks that prevent it. The only solution is to move away from Intel and at that point you don't need libreboot.
> all while
> you are selling systems on ThinkPenguin that have *proprietary BIOS*.
>
Yes- and that doesn't change anything. We're still working torward systems that are more free than what even you've released. And the difference is we'll actually be able to continue to release newer models. Your systems aren't 100% free either. You even stated here that the ARM systems will be more free than the Lenovo's your currently selling! And even after all this the ARM systems aren't perfect either.
Trying to make it out as if I'm some sort of hypocrite is ridicules. I'm no more a hypocrite than anybody else in the movement. I don't care if you talk about Richard Stallman, Rubén Rodríguez, Jason, myself, Bob, you, or any other person. We're all using some non-free software. I don't argue it's somehow 'right' to use this software, but short of getting off these forums your as much a hypocrite as I am.
> If I were in your position, I would not be selling those laptops and
> desktops that you sell. You are saying that the money raised helps fund
> future work on free hardware, but at the same time you're also selling
> systems to people that do not adequately respect their freedom, while
> preaching to people who do supply such systems for being "imperfect".
>
> This is why you're a hypocrite.
First off we were selling systems that were as free as it got long before you were even around. It's hardly hypocritical to suggest we should just stop because your here now. Your not in a position to keep anything going. We are very close on the other hand.
2nd the people we are primarily selling to are on *proprietary systems* and anything that we sell them even if our systems were more proprietary than then they are now would still be *more free* than they would otherwise have been. It's still a net benefit.
Life isn't black and white as your trying to make it out to be. We're just doing the best we can with what we have to work with.
> With this in mind, it's wrong of you to criticize libreboot for a mistake that it no longer makes.
*YOU JUST FIXED IT*
You claim we're making mistakes and yet you yourself are making the same mistakes. I on the other hand don't agree that the mistakes we are making are the same or even mistakes. The difference is one is targeted at people who are technical, capable, understand, etc free software and aren't going to revert to a proprietary OS because they don't understand that there are less difficult choices if things don't work. I'd never try and sell Debian or Fedora to someone who is already on a 100% free OS. However if someone is on a proprietary OS I'm going to try and help them get onto something that is a realistic more free option even if it is less than perfect. The majority of people here came to Trisquel and free software from such operating systems. Chances are they wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for the fact they were presented with a distribution that worked that they could first try before taking the time and effort to move to something that was more free. And again- none of us here are on 100% free computers. We're just on more free systems than most people out there.
If people were "patient", they'd get nowhere. We're all doing what we can right here and now.
Chris, I'm going to have to disagree with you entirely. Libreboot as it is and as it has been, is absolutely vital. Without it, we'd still be where we were 2 years ago. What you're missing is that the mere existence of libreboot (not to mention, the ideas of freedom that it promotes) serves as inspiration for others to push things forward, and to improve. It also provides a solution *right now* that people can actually use, which previously *did not exist*, aside from a few examples (e.g. OLPC and Lemote) which didn't actually work out in the end.
I'd like to see proof that libreboot actually undermines these efforts with manufacturers, as you seem to be claiming. I don't even see how libreboot is relevant in this regard.
A long-term goal of the libreboot project is in fact to produce our own hardware, completely free from the factory. We're not there yet, and probably won't be for some time, but I'll be the first person to back such an effort. This is where I agree with you. I'll work with anyone who can deliver. I founded the libreboot project and work on it every day, precisely because I want this to happen. I'm a hardcore free software activist. Libreboot will even soon be an official component of the GNU system (I'm working with them to get it in). I'm also currently working with a company to add a new server board to libreboot (and paying out of pocket, by the way).
I tend to think that the way you write is very dismissive, almost condescending. It actually surprises me that people take you seriously. And by the way, while I don't endorse Google (and certainly don't advocate use of ChromeOS), you should look into coreboot in a bit more detail. The project was almost dead.
Google itself isn't actually that interesting, but what they did do was provide jobs for coreboot hackers, so that they could work full-time on the project, and give them the resources that they need. That puts them in a good position. Chromebooks themselves aren't actually that interesting. What's more interesting are the people who contribute code to coreboot.
Actions also speak louder than words. ThinkPenguin (the user "Chris" in the above post that this post replies to, is ThinkPenguin's CEO) preaches to everyone about freedom while selling laptops and desktops which have a proprietary BIOS (and even the Intel Management Engine!).
This entry in the libreboot FAQ describes, in detail, all of the problems with the computers that ThinkPenguin sells:
http://libreboot.org/faq/#intel
All I see is hypocrisy, in everything that Chris writes on this subject. He has a huge conflict of interest. He and his company profit from the very thing that they are publicly condemning. The mere fact that they use this money in other good ways (LibreCMC and the work that they did to get the ath9k_htc firmware freed for those AR9271 USB wifi dongles) does not justify the harm that they are nonetheless doing, and it does not excuse their hypocrisy.
In fact, Chris from ThinkPenguin even dismissed the BIOS as "irrelevant". I'm paraphrasing here, he actually described the BIOS as "outside". And he got it out of the way as quickly as possible. Watch him talk in this video (use youtube-dl to download it, or paste the URL in VLC when hitting ctrl+n), at 56 minutes and 43 seconds into the video. The video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI6XB7YQDdk - he also mentions Linux Mint, a GNU/Linux distribution which includes proprietary software such as Adobe Flash, by default.
I am a member!
> If people were "patient", they'd get nowhere.
I disagree. Being impatient can hold us back and that is what I'm arguing. There are other projects which are also important that nobody is working on. Instead of focusing on a 100% free laptop project when your not in a position to do it right you could focus on another project you can do right. That's what we've done. And in places we haven't been in a position to work on said project more directly we have funded others to do so. I'm not though about to waste significant amounts of money funding dead-end projects. Did I offer you a small amount of money? Yes - in that same email I said it was a token gesture though. It was never intended you live off it.
> Chris, I'm going to have to disagree with you entirely. Libreboot as it is and as it
> has been, is absolutely vital. Without it, we'd still be where we were 2 years ago
libreboot is little more than coreboot and ARM doesn't require either. It hasn't moved the goal post any further. It was great you free'd coreboot, but it's not a step that is moving things forward. It's merely a temporary measure for people who are concerned about non-free software. It has no widespread benefits outside the free software community.
2nd Bob's already free'd two Chromebooks to this extant and has not released anything. It's a futile effort and is a time sink (supporting it, etc, for too few people). These Chromebooks disappear from the market fast and nobody is able to get a hold of enough of them to make it worthwhile. It's little different than the Lenovo's you've free'd. It is at best a fun hobby project. The Chromebooks are poorly designed for users concerned with non-free software (as much as I'd love to sell people a USB wifi adapter you shouldn't have to stick in a USB N wifi adapter in on a new computer you bought). This is ridicules. Yet near all the Chromebooks and I believe all the recent ones are dependent on integrated wifi chips that need proprietary blobs to function.
We can do better, but we have to stop wasting time on projects that go nowhere. I know this sounds extreme and maybe even hypocritical, but ThinkPenguins not ignoring the problem, just working on smaller projects that are actually moving things forward.
There are other smaller projects you can jump on or even start that would be more worthwhile.
> I'd like to see proof that libreboot actually undermines these efforts with manufacturers,
> as you seem to be claiming. I don't even see how libreboot is relevant in this regard.
I didn't say it undermines efforts with manufacturers. It undermines other projects that most people here don't know about that are in the works though for which are trying to design boards, laptops, and other components which hopefully will give us a fully free machine in the coming years.
It is undermining those projects by depriving them of cash that they'll need when they are announced. A first generation ARM anything isn't going to be perfect. There will be no 3d acceleration because of upstream. But there wouldn't be an issue with wifi and there *would* be a platform to build off which is cost effective to manufacture in smaller quantities than is generally possible now. For that reason alone this is progress. Freeing coreboot is not progress when you don't even need it! It's a temporary measure for X86 that has no long term benefit.
In some respects free'ing coreboot is not totally worthless in that it might be inspiring to some people. I'm not sure who though has actually moved the goal post forward as a result of that inspiration. Those I'm aware of working on other worthwhile projects have done so independent of you Francis and libreboot. They clearly did not get that inspiration from you. They've been working on these projects for years. One person has been working on such a project for 4+ years and is currently putting the final touches on it.
> Actions also speak louder than words. ThinkPenguin (the user "Chris" in the above post that
> this post replies to, is ThinkPenguin's CEO) preaches to everyone about freedom while selling
> laptops and desktops which have a proprietary BIOS (and even the Intel Management Engine!).
This is no secret and we haven't backtracked at all. We always had a proprietary BIOS because it isn't possible to free. It's a non-trivial task and at the current time won't get us anywhere anyway.
If the audience I'm talking to can't practically utilize Trisquel I will tell them to go use something that is more freedom-friendly than Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X. That's not counter-productive for those users/audience.
> In fact, Chris from ThinkPenguin even dismissed the BIOS as "irrelevant".
That was an on the spot interview, cut up for there audience, and taken out of context. I'm sure I could do the same thing for you if I really wanted to. Obviously the BIOS is not irrelevant from a freedom perspective. It is partly irrelevant in the context of ThinkPenguin machines from a compatibility perspective. I was talking to a non-technical audience which likely didn't fully understand anything I said. Dumbing stuff down has that effect.
I'd like to know how I can give back the hardware I bought at ThinkPenguin, obviously they're hypocrites and I don't want to have to do anything with them.
Long live free software.
"obviously they're hypocrites and I don't want to have to do anything with them."
what do you base this on?
I am a member!
*Now I have real work to do* >> if nobody noticed the FCC and other world regulatory agencies in Europe and Canada are passing laws/rules that will essentially make free software illegal. Particularly projects like ours that are trying to produce completely free devices. The FCC and equivalent agencies in Canada and Europe are or have passed rules that will mandate (in practice) locks on laptops, routers, phones, and similar devices. We very well won't be able to legally free them if/when the rules pass. That is a significantly bigger hindrance than anything else right now.
If you have *any* question as to who is behind the work go look at:
https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Save_WiFi
Particularly scroll down to the bottom of the page. You'll see just how much time I've spend talking with dozens upon dozens of reporters, radio shows, and similar to turn the FCC wifi issue into something massive. The majority of which isn't listed here because I don't have the time to add it. We're succeeding in these campaigns, but we won't win if people like Josh @ the FSF, myself, Bob Call, and others don't fight this fight.
Notice whose absent from all this: Francis! I didn't even see your name on any of comments or even sign any of the letters for these campaigns. Not even the bufferbloat / cerowrt or the FSF campaigns. Libreboot isn't even signed on. You haven't even added anything the libreboot or minifree sites in *BIG BOLD LETTERS* like other concerned projects (www.librecmc.org), ThinkPenguin, jxself.org, the FSF, and dozens of other projects many of which aren't even directly tied to free software hardware.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires