[Freedombox-discuss] Why plug servers and not smart phones?

Jonas Smedegaard dr at jones.dk
Wed Jul 17 13:24:23 UTC 2013

Quoting Eugen Leitl (2013-07-17 13:34:32)
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:23:49PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > From the FBX's point of view, what are the residual dependencies 
> > > on centralist architecture? Ok, it's a Debian project, but 
> > > depositories can be substituted by a self-hosted environment 
> > > (BitTorrent, or related swarm delivery). It does use DNS, but it 
> > > also uses hidden services, and can span up own namespace.
> > > 
> > > What else is there that needs not to be there?
> > 
> > What I am talking about is the project we are working on here in 
> > Debian.
> So do I.


Then your answer above to your own question makes no sense to me, 
however: The project we are [both] working on cannot substitute its 
Debian packages with something self-hosted, and still be "in Debian".

> I seem to detect some unnecessary antagonism in a few of your past 
> emails.

That stems from frustration.  Frustration that I felt unable to explain 
myself to you.  I kept feeling that you where trolling - deliberately 
sidestep or misinterpret what I wrote.

Really great that we are on the same page.  Sorry for my lousy attitude.

> I'm not used to the Theo light treatment from the Debian side of 
> things. That would be a novel experience I'm not sure I'm looking 
> forward to.

What do "Theo light treatment" mean?

> > You are free to take inspiration from this project and make 
> > something else.  You may then want to consider calling it something 
> > more distinctive than "FBX" to avoid confusing the separate 
> > projects.
> FBX is FreedomBox. If you consider FBX to be brand dilution, and 
> officially deprecate its use I'm not going to use it. Are you 
> considering the FBX a bbreviation brand damage to the Debian project 
> Freedombox?

If anyone were to control "FreedomBox" as a brand, that would be the 
FreedomBox Foundation, I suspect, not this Debian project.

I do not speak on behalf of the FreedomBox Foundation and therefore is 
not talking about "brand damage".  I simply find our varying choice of 
words/abbreviations confusing, that's all.  Especially when used to 
describe things that does not fit my understanding of what it is we are 
doing together here - e.g. that this Debian project need not use Debian 

> > I find your question interesting, but find it rather confusing to 
> > discuss on this particular mailinglist how to make something else 
> > than
> I'm not trying to make something else, at least not yet.
> I'm still waiting for a project milestone mature enough to
> pitch to less technical users. The project looks somewhat
> stalled, but I'm far from giving up on it yet.


> > what we are working on here.  I would therefore appreciate you 
> > cc'ing me if raising such question elsewhere.
> I don't intend to raise such questions everywhere. In fact, I think 
> I'll stop mentioning Freedombox as a generic existing project, in 
> order to avoid any potential confusion.

I fail to understand how not talking about it can help avoid confusion.

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20130717/9e2c464e/attachment.sig>

More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list