**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Sat Nov 11 03:00:02 2017 Nov 11 05:47:08 well, that too Nov 11 05:47:49 but actually I think it's pointless to get that done Nov 11 05:49:55 the problem starts earlier: with tivoization (locked bootloaders, forbidding reflashing with unsigned software images) and hardware manufs not providing proper datasheets/schematics. When you got a complex circuit for e.g. battery management (let's assume it been made from a Silego GP5 mixed signal matrix 'FPGA' and a few analog components like regulators, current limiters, thermosensors and so on) then it doesn't matter if the Nov 11 05:49:57 manufacturer provides the software needed to make that stuff work in form of a userland closed blob or a customized kernel driver or even upstreams their drivers to mainline kernel. Nobody will really be able to do anything about that "gibberish" even when plan C sourcecode, since the datasheets and schematics for the hardware are missing so a FOSS sw developer could understand *what* to do about the code and *how* it's actually Nov 11 05:49:58 supposed to work. Pretty much exactly same for GPUs where the drivers are worth nothing even in FOSS sourcecode when you don't have decent docs about how the internal gear in the GPU actually works. Same for cameras and you-name-it Nov 11 05:50:35 in the article linked above - and the comments there - some folks insinuate that such lockdown like tivoization was a regulatory requirement for phones. That's BS, it's not. Only the modem's radiostack is really subject to FCC et al approval Nov 11 05:50:47 it's a pity that guys like Kroah-Hartman and Torvalds seemingly fail to understand this Nov 11 05:51:11 btw the Librem5 is following exactly same broken approach of providing their "own firmware" which despite they explicitly claim willingness to upstream stuff to mainline, is worth nothing since they obviously cannot (or don't want to) provide the schematics and datasheets for their hardware Nov 11 05:52:06 ok, a FOSS driver makes it easier to RE the hardware, but it's only gradually different in its brokenness, while the correct approach would be to provide schematics and datasheets first and only on next lower priority provide some software reference implementation demonstrating how to use the hardware *in a limited selection of operation modes* (no sw implementation ever can cover *all* operation modes of hardware, only the Nov 11 05:52:07 datasheets + schematics can do this) Nov 11 05:54:37 pabs3: ^^^ Nov 11 05:55:42 I need to correct myself to avoid ambiguity: but actually I think it's pointless to get that done THAT WAY Nov 11 06:22:04 good point, I guess that is why OpenBSD folks rant about Linux folks signing NDAs Nov 11 06:55:05 ooh yes. didn't know about this but it's exactly to the point Nov 11 07:24:44 two of their release songs mention NDAs: https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#41 https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#42 Nov 11 07:50:59 nice advice: >>...we simply urge those developers caution -- they should ensure that the path they are being shown by those who have positioned themselves as leaders is still true. Run for yourself, not for their agenda.<< Nov 11 07:52:54 I come to realize that openBSD calls out linux spot-on on the exact issues I always felt were wrong in linux and GPL and the way those "leaders" act on it Nov 11 07:56:44 linux approach: "vendor, you are *obliged* to provide source code for your GPU drivers since they link against kernel *.h", BSD approach: "take the kernel code and do with it whatever you like, we hope you will act similarly with your own code base and share it to us", my approach: "F*CK the sourcecode, it's a nice-to-have at best. Give us DATASHEETS" Nov 11 07:59:39 a simple law would fix all this: no device / item may get sold without complete documentation Nov 11 08:00:45 and while we're at it: NUKE THE PATENT CONCEPT! COMPLETELY! Nov 11 08:04:15 instead consider "buy-in disclosure schedule" approaches, where the IP owner sells scheduled know-how transfer to all interested parties, who pays more gets access to the IP sooner and thus has longer headstart to prepare monetizing the IP Nov 11 08:06:39 this way your IP will complete it's ROI in very short time, and patents become a non-issue Nov 11 08:08:43 I'm still pondering if this is a viable approach, after all I invented it a 3 minutes ago. Dunno if it had worked better for e.g. laundry detergent manufs buying the patent of ultrasonic washing machines Nov 11 08:09:14 ...just to let it rot in a locker Nov 11 08:12:35 obviously without further regulations my "buy-in disclosure schedule" approach would result in exactly that NDA mess we see today. Maybe the whole blockchain idea could help design a better system Nov 11 08:15:08 maybe... NDAs are legally mandated to expire after 6 months. You can *register* for 12 or 24 months at a legal entity that will disclose all the NDAed stuff after expiry Nov 11 08:19:29 still tricky. Since then the rogue NDA issuer will split the data into raw numbers covered by NDA and eventually disclosed, plus a free to publish but completely uninteresting structure description (think XML) that's not getting bundled with the raw data and insted gets handed over to the NDA signer informally Nov 11 08:20:36 *sigh* Nov 11 08:21:39 customers simply should appreciate more education to make them aware they shouldn't buy stuff that doesn't honor their needs for proper documentation Nov 11 08:22:57 Joe Average-Luser just doesn't care what's happening inside his leete devices, as long as they "just work" Nov 11 08:26:18 seems in USA the end user already could do time in jail until they are willing to hand their passwords to the authorities to allow them access to smartphones, whatever. They should do exactly same to companies for disclosing their tivoization root keys and their datasheets Nov 11 08:30:35 see apple: they said "no we won't decrypt that iPhone for the FBI(?)" - they raher should have designed their stuff in a way so they could have said "we CANT decrypt that iPhone since only the user owns the keys to decrypt it" Nov 11 08:31:47 then the FBI demands all source code to verify that assertion, and everybody (except FBI) happy Nov 11 08:40:44 anyway it's a saddening observation that https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#42 is from 2007 and only little has changed since Nov 11 11:44:04 DocScrutinizer05: hey doc Nov 11 11:44:12 DocScrutinizer05: are you receiving usb id ml messages? Nov 11 11:45:30 PaulFertser: occasionally. alas they pile up on my heap of "to do" items Nov 11 11:48:02 last time I tried to evaluate the licensing, I failed to understand git to access the sources Nov 11 11:48:30 git or github or whatever it been Nov 11 11:48:50 DocScrutinizer05: oh, too bad. And I'm completely loosing traction lately... Nov 11 11:49:47 same here **** ENDING LOGGING AT Sun Nov 12 03:00:02 2017