[Freedombox-discuss] Freedombox-discuss Digest, Vol 64, Issue 4
pandodev at gmail.com
pandodev at gmail.com
Wed Nov 4 18:35:53 UTC 2015
I'm not speaking in any official capacity, but my understanding is that the
"success" of FreedomBox should be measured similarly to the success of
vaguely similar consumer electronics products, in particular digital media
players <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_media_player> such as Roku
or Google Chromecast. The objective of FreedomBox is to help ensure user's
freedom w.r.t. web services for the "unwashed masses". People should be
able to buy a white-labeled
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-label_product> FreedomBox device (eg
Cubietruck <https://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox/Hardware/Cubietruck>) at an
online store, plug it in to their router, and after answering a few trivial
questions be up and running. It is an appliance, that happens to be built
on libre software and with a noble purpose. If you want to download Debian
and proceed to install and configure packages and wire a bunch of things
together, then you are probably not the target market for FreedomBox. If in
2020, FreedomBox accounts for > 10% of annual digital media player sales,
then I would say that FreedomBox definitely succeeded. If not, then it is
is less clear whether success was attained.
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:55 PM, robert bauer <nybauer at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 20:31:11 +0100
>> From: Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk>
>> To: freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
>> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Let's decentralize: Hardware
>> Message-ID: <144657907186.3470.6705814307640466264 at auryn.jones.dk>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> > As I understand Freedombox runs on any machine that runs Debian.
>> > Nevertheless I really like the idea of using a single board computer
>> > due to its low energy consumption and small form factors (i.e. as
>> > recommended on the Freedombox homepage Cubietruck / Cubieboard3).
>> > Having never used such a device before what are your experiences in
>> > terms of performance with these small machines? What do I need to be
>> > aware of, especially when running multiple services? As I would like
>> > to run / help to get to run the Diaspora app on Freedombox I'm
>> > thinking more power (cpu/ram) is probably better than less.
>> On such tiny boxes you may not only wanna think about performance:
>> The more performing boxes may(!) also be the more energy-consuming and
>> therefore easier getting hot, needing a fan, and therefore noisier (not
>> ideal to leave under your bed) and potentially having a shorter
>> Different kinds of ARM devices perform different with same amount of
>> energy - Allwinner-based boards of same grade (e.g. Cubietruck and LIME2
>> both built around Allwinner A20) roughly perform the same, whereas
>> Sitara-based ones (like BeagleBone Black) is rumored to do some things
>> more efficiently even if superficial specs may seem lower.
>> Performance may be less important on a server than on a desktop system -
>> it might mean more how much stuff you can load concurrently - i.e.
> 1) I'm happy for the inquiry because I too think there is some confusion
> created by the hardware requirements. Some of them seem to be hardware
> preferences and not really related to
> installing/running/debugging/troubleshooting the FreedomBOX software. I
> think there is advantage to the simplicity of saying Freedombox runs on any
> machine that runs Debian. My comments here are as a hw person rather than
> programmer, so I may be missing something, but here goes...
> For example, I don't see why the noise level "must be below 20dB". Isn't
> this merely a user aesthetic preference and clearly unrelated to
> the software?
> Similarly, "should not consume over 15W at full CPU load" seems to be
> unrelated to the software (correct me if I am wrong). At least unlike
> noise level this one is phrased as "should" rather than "must".
> I would also recommend clarifying the "at least one serial interface" as I
> don't know what that means, exactly. Every computer has at least one
> serial interface, broadly defined.
> So these do not appear to be "requirements" in the sense that the hw must
> have them to fully utilize the software, but a suggestion of what hardware
> to use. There is also in the statement that failing computers may be "a
> danger to the reputation of the FreedomBox" an idea that the project is
> more than sw. I think most would not attribute hw failure to sw, but OK.
> 2) More fundamental issue is the query of whether a Freedombox
> is a standalone server only or is it a service that one could operate along
> with other software/services on a Debian desktop computer? Is there a
> technical or security reason or sw development complication why FreedomBox
> sw cannot coexist with other services/sw on a Debian machine? Note that
> even on the hw side there is beginning to be a blending of server/desktop
> technology into Mini-ITX size by Supermicro and others. If the project is
> serious about weaning large number of users from privacy-compromised email
> services, then it should be the latter. Most users are not going to use a
> separate machine for their email, imho, no matter the cost or small size.
> Much kudos to the project as it is a much needed alternative. I hope a
> video of last week's demo will be available online at some point.
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Freedombox-discuss