
Libreboot is not GNU Libreboot anymore - kklimonda
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00036.html
======
apatters
The poster levels accusations at members of GNU but does not substantiate them
with evidence (at least in that thread which I can see). I should hope we
still live in a society where the accused are innocent until proven guilty.
Can we see some evidence before any conclusions are drawn?

If it is just one member of GNU who acted inappropriately then I also have to
ask why the poster is attacking the whole organization. Evidence ought to be
presented for GNU's complicity in any sort of bias as well.

~~~
CJefferson
If someone punches hour friend in the face, you should not have to wait for
public evidence and a court conviction before you stop working with them.

More evidence would be nice, but libreboot as a project can choose to leave
GNU for reasons they know.

One obvious reason they are not providing more evidence is that I am sure it
is going to lead to large amounts of public abuse of the person who was fired.

~~~
wruza
As personal reaction it may be reasonable. As a reaction from maintainer of
the software piece, that's childish. Mailing list contains no details, just
literally "Fuck GNU, Fuck FSF". She can tweet, post it in facebook, personal
blog, it is okay. But when it affects software, this is a sign that she cannot
separate conceptions. Your users are never guilty (except when you write
extremist-oriented software), why should they trust someone with that fuck-
fuck on mailing list reputation? I hope they both will get proper respect in
this situation, if her claims are true. But this is another coin into 'don't
use gnu if possible' rule.

~~~
HelloNurse
Suddenly not wanting anything to do with the FSF because of extremely bad news
is a perfectly reasonable personal reaction.

Withdrawing Libreboot from the GNU project is not only a meaningful formal
step but also a practical implementation of that decision, because it means
eliminating reasons to interact with FSF members.

------
newscracker
This is sad in many ways. I can understand that Leah and others would've
suffered a lot of anguish and frustration because of a set of actions and
decisions by some people/office of/in FSF. The frustration would've been like,
"Who needs more of this discrimination since _there 's already so much_ to
deal with in society?"

Without the entire context and all the back stories of the different sides,
this looks like a blanket accusation on the entire FSF/GNU community with a
similar punishment, which, ironically, is exactly what some majority groups do
for classes like LGBT, people of color and other oppressed groups - try to
paint everyone with the same brush and attempt to banish them from their world
on this basis. I personally don't think this is very helpful to all involved,
concerned and affected.

I strongly feel FSF ought to do the following:

1\. Analyze what happened in a neutral way (as objective as possible).

2\. Provide an explanation, a polite and calm one, on this matter without
blaming Leah or others who're in the affected group.

3\. If the findings on the firing of the person show damning evidence of
discrimination, then take appropriate action against the specific people
involved.

4\. Commit to making the environment more open and transparent so that such
drastic actions wouldn't be necessary to draw attention in the future.

Silence on the part of FSF will only help make stronger the impression that
the accusations are pervasive in it, and could trigger more of such reactions
from other people/groups involved with FSF.

~~~
akerro
That thread doesn't prove anything, no links, no other threads mentioned, no
verification, we don't know who was fired from FSF, no justification or
anything. Instead author of the email started it with quickly made decision to
leave GNU, crying, showing their lack of professionalism to at least give them
a try to justify their decision on public forum, ends the thread with fuck
FSF, and "fuck GNU" in commit message. How can this be taken seriously? 4chan
trolls behave the same way. I expected much more from people behind libreboot
(, FSF and GNU).

[https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0003...](https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00038.html)
[https://notabug.org/vimuser/libreboot/commit/b204a20ba798301...](https://notabug.org/vimuser/libreboot/commit/b204a20ba79830188695b61ab899dd45f8b009ef)

------
djaychela
I don't know the details of this, but I think the first response in the thread
makes sense and reflects what I thought straight away:

"I'm sorry to hear about this unacceptable prejudice, as you've described it.
My question is: should this be taken as an indictment of the entire GNU
project, or those individuals managing personnel at the FSF's offices? I would
hate for the intolerance of one or a few people to be construed as a reason
for the entire GNU project not to exist"

~~~
rtpg
There is a more forgiving interpretation. Even if the FSF has not actively
discriminated, it chose not to help support one of its members from the
effects of discrimination. This can be seen as a protest against inaction.

How big is the FSF? If the organisation is pretty small, I would be concerned.

Matt Levine recently had a piece on the Wells Fargo events:

>“The 1% that did it wrong, who we fired, terminated, in no way reflects our
culture nor reflects the great work the other vast majority of the people do,”
he said. “That’s a false narrative.”

>You hear bank CEOs say that sort of thing all the time when a few rogue
employees do bad stuff that incurs a big fine for the bank, but there are
never 5,300 of them. It is the sorites paradox of "a few bad apples": If one
or two or eight rogue employees don't reflect the broader culture, why should
5,300?

At one point actions do reflect on the entire project, though the line is
fuzzy.

I think the last line is a bit strong. I've seen much worse language
elsewhere, of course, but I don't know if it serves the point. Though empathy
should be had for Leah, I imagine it was not a decision taken lightly.

~~~
flukus
> There is a more forgiving interpretation. Even if the FSF has not actively
> discriminated, it chose not to help support one of its members from the
> effects of discrimination

Where did you get that from?

------
Tomte
"I do not believe that the FSF or the GNU project deserve to exist."

I understand the sentiment, but this sentence alone has the potential to
devalue everything the author has to say.

------
michaelmrose
I have a former friend who developed a drug habit and exploded nearly
violently at his neighbors with no provocation in the lobby of his apartment
building making a huge scene which resulted in the gentlemen in blue having a
talk with him. He turned his reaction to too much meth into a wholly
fictitious trans hate scenario in which he was victimized. None of this
actually happened.

People lie and the presumption of innocence isn't just the law its a
reasonable reaction to the imperfect, screwy world around you.

Expecting people to back up accusations with proof isn't hate.

~~~
sanxiyn
Presumption of innocence is reasonable because most people are innocent. It is
not because the world is imperfect. It follows from the base rate, which is
experimental, not from any fundamental principle.

For example, if most officials are corrupt, you should not presume the
official you are dealing with is not corrupt. That's just stupid. Legal case
still should be backed by evidence, but your personal presumption should
consider the base rate, not just presumption of innocence.

~~~
michaelmrose
A presumption of innocence decreases the value in telling damaging lies which
in turn disincentives lying. It would be valuable in the face of most people
being guilty.

------
bArray
The email strikes me as strange within itself, it doesn't appear to be a calm
and collected decision. Forgetting whether it's the right or wrong decision,
never write angry - you always make yourself a fool.

That said, I would like to know more about what actually happened. If somebody
was singled out for whatever reason, that's unacceptable. I'm not LGBT, but my
position on that stands regardless. It is possible for somebody from the LGBT
community to not be a good person to work with, so that should also be
considered.

Lastly, it doesn't seem right from the outset that the entire GNU project
suffers from the actions of one individual. This seems like an ill thought out
demonstration who's intentions aren't completely transparent.

------
bodkan
It's sad that something like this happened, but I have to agree with one of
the following posts [1]:

 _" [...] as an FSF volunteer and a GNU maintainer, I'm also sad to see all
FSF employees, volunteers, and GNU maintainers being blamed collectively. I
don't agree with collective punishment, and don't think that it is ever the
right choice."_

[1]
[https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0003...](https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00039.html)

------
yenda
"some transphobic cissexist people"

Funny how one can only see the hate on one side.

Other than that, really childish and pathetic post. Fork and forget this huge
ego.

~~~
cpach
What was hateful about Rowe’s letter?

~~~
thescribe
[https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0003...](https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00038.html)

~~~
mike_hock
> Fuck GNU > Fuck the Free Software Foundation

Signature: > Use a free operating system, GNU/Linux. > Support freedom. Join
the Free Software Foundation.

lel

------
amyjess
This is par for the course for libreboot. The developers have been known to
fly off the handle in highly unprofessional ways.

For example, their FAQ states this:

> It is extremely unlikely that any post-2008 Intel hardware will ever be
> supported in libreboot, due to severe security and freedom issues; so
> severe, that _the libreboot project recommends avoiding all modern Intel
> hardware. If you have an Intel based system affected by the problems
> described below, then you should get rid of it as soon as possible._

That's some of the most unprofessional editorializing I've seen from a
software project.

The FAQ then goes on a lengthy rant where they elaborate on how it's because
they have moral objections to the Management Engine and AMT, ending with:

> In summary, the Intel Management Engine and its applications are a backdoor
> with total access to and control over the rest of the PC. The ME is a threat
> to freedom, security, and privacy, and the libreboot project strongly
> recommends avoiding it entirely. Since recent versions of it can't be
> removed, this means avoiding all recent generations of Intel hardware.

The Management Engine is, by the way, intended to help large enterprises
automate administration of PCs on their network. Calling it malicious is
intellectually dishonest.

With that said, I don't think a fork is feasible, or even a good idea.
Libreboot is already a fork of Coreboot, and it's a fairly small fork that's
not particularly in demand; in fact, the project goes out of its way to be
hostile to anyone running modern hardware. Most forks are a result of the
community being fed up with the intransigence of the developers; I'm convinced
that libreboot doesn't even have a community. As someone else mentioned, Leah
is by far and above the most active developer, and there are maybe 3-4 other
people who have contributed. Unless GNU is just going to mirror her git repo
and slap a different name on the tarballs, you're not going to have a fork.
And, developers aside, how many people actually _use_ it? Are there enough
people who specifically insist on libreboot over coreboot and care about how
it's developed to fork it?

~~~
tzs
> For example, their FAQ states this:

>> It is extremely unlikely that any post-2008 Intel hardware will ever be
supported in libreboot, due to severe security and freedom issues; so severe,
that the libreboot project recommends avoiding all modern Intel hardware. If
you have an Intel based system affected by the problems described below, then
you should get rid of it as soon as possible.

> That's some of the most unprofessional editorializing I've seen from a
> software project.

How is that unprofessional? Recent Intel hardware does contain binary blobs
that you cannot disable and that have full system access, which does raise
both security and freedom issues.

>> In summary, the Intel Management Engine and its applications are a backdoor
with total access to and control over the rest of the PC. The ME is a threat
to freedom, security, and privacy, and the libreboot project strongly
recommends avoiding it entirely. Since recent versions of it can't be removed,
this means avoiding all recent generations of Intel hardware.

> The Management Engine is, by the way, intended to help large enterprises
> automate administration of PCs on their network. Calling it malicious is
> intellectually dishonest.

I didn't see them call it malicious in their FAQ. Yes, it's purpose is to
provide a backdoor for legitimate owners of the computers to administer them.
That something has a legitimate use that does not threaten freedom, security,
and privacy doesn't mean that there is no risk that someone will find an
illegitimate way to use it.

What it comes down to is that they value having only free software on their
systems, and you cannot do that on recent Intel hardware. Hence, they
recommend avoiding said hardware.

------
allendoerfer
> I do not believe that the FSF or the GNU project deserve to exist.

I would say "Extremism does not deserve to exist.", but then I would be
extremist.

------
Yetanfou
One person does not an organisation make. One claimed instance of
'discrimination' \- I use quotes on this word as it is often used in
circumstances where other terms would be a better fit - does not a policy
make. One person who feels violated in some way does not an indictment against
a whole organisation justify.

If someone at FSF knowingly and willingly acted in a discriminatory way
against someone and said discriminatory behaviour was sufficiently serious
that the person being discriminated against can be assumed to feel violated in
a real sense, action should be taken against that person at FSF. If FSF as an
organisation has a policy promoting such discrimination this policy should be
held to the light and discussed in the open so the reasons for that policy and
the instigators thereof can be revealed. If the policy turns out violate basic
human rights it should be changed or repealed. If FSF refuses to do so...
_then_ is the time for actions like this one. Assuming that the claims made in
this thread are serious and provable the end result might be the same, or it
might not. Maybe FSF would change its ways instead and remove any such
policies and/or people from its organisation?

Sending accusatory messages to a mailing list and 'taking your marbles to go
home' is not the best way to induce change in society, no matter how aggrieved
you feel.

------
mariuolo
Are there details about this? I couldn't find anything in the thread.

------
erkose
I have no understanding of what occurred, but what a childish response.
[https://notabug.org/vimuser/libreboot](https://notabug.org/vimuser/libreboot)

~~~
the_common_man
"NotABug.org is powered by a liberated version of gogs"

What does that mean?

~~~
akerro
gogs without non-GNU blobs.

~~~
the_common_man
What non-GNU blobs are in Gogs? (I use Gogs, so just curious)

~~~
flukus
This thread reads like something Dr Seus would write.

------
buyukakyol
RMS:
[https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0005...](https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00052.html)

------
corndoge
Perfect example of indignant cathartic reactionism. Regardless of the veracity
of Leah's claims I look forward to a fork, GNU-affiliated or not.

~~~
clacke2
If only one person stepped up to run the project (which is my impression from
another thread), it's not very likely someone would suddenly fork it now.
Especially since this changes nothing about the project, except reverting the
comments to the non-GNU state of May this year.

------
verytrivial
What a curious reaction. Fork.

But seriously, even the fragments of an argument presented on the original
message do not support that response. I hope they sort it out.

------
no_protocol
Aha, but even if you accept no support from GNU or FSF, they can continue to
promote, support, and maintain this project, including any future work you do
on it. Maybe with a different name or slightly diverged feature set, but the
same project.

Imagine the agony of knowing every time you publish new work on the project,
it will be quickly slurped up by the machine and distributed by the villains
you so despise.

There's no escape.

------
CJefferson
I don't know the answer, but GNU has really lost its way.

My main connection with them is through GCC, where I believe years of bad to
level decisions has lead to a huge movement of to talent to clang ,(requiring
copyright assignment then taking months to complete the forms, forbidding
plugins for years, etc)

------
sqldba
Evidence?

Also FSF <> GNU.

------
thescribe
Is their list of contributors small enough that they can actually change
licenses without a fork? I was under the impression it could take a ton of
finding people and getting their sign off to move a project like this.

~~~
quadrangle
Nobody mentioned license change. Just affiliation change.

------
themihai
I'm wondering if the license will be changed too.

~~~
no_protocol
It would be difficult because the project appears to have accepted
contributions from many authors under the GNU General Public License. One of
the terms of the license is that any derivative work must be released under
the same license terms. I'm not an expert, but I believe changing the license
would require a sign-off from all copyright holders within the project.

------
billwilliams
No comments yet supporting the maintainer? She experienced real prejudice from
issues at these orgs. No matter what the cause likely needs to be changed. But
of course, I'm sure the super diverse community of core fsf and gnu did
nothing wrong.

~~~
themihai
Actually it seems a friend of his/her was fired not the maintainer. Now, how
do we know the facts? I don't think blind support is a good thing. Without
full disclosure I hope GNU will just fork the libreboot project and take
further measures to protect itself from such situations.

~~~
bwindels
Don't see what good forking would do since AFAIK Leah Rowe is by far the
biggest contributor to libreboot. I think the contribution of the GNU project
was more in project infrastructure than actual code. I only see 3 - 4 people
appear in the libreboot commit logs, and as long as they all agree with Leah's
direction, a fork doesn't mean anything and is still born.

Also, there is no reason for the GNU project to fork libreboot since they can
still use it as before. The beauty of free software.

~~~
bwindels
As additional information has appeared recently, I add it here. Allegedly,
some contributions from others have been committed in Rowe's name, and at
least one contributor published his opinion of Rowe's leadership:

[http://zammit.org/libreboot-screwup.html](http://zammit.org/libreboot-
screwup.html)

------
Tomte
Denouncing GNU/FSF, but not removing the advertising links from the mail
signature also points toward a heat of the moment reaction.

