[Discuss] Free Hardware

Matt Maier blueback09 at gmail.com
Wed Mar 11 20:18:52 UTC 2015

It's also confusing that in an argument based on pure morality, the
conclusion is somehow that because something is too hard it is not a moral
imperative. I never understood that part of Stallman's argument.

He always said that hardware wasn't relevant to Free Software. It looks
like he's changing his mind because proprietary hardware might make it
impossible to run Free Software.

I've never heard a good argument for why a thing MUST be libre. Taking it
to that extreme seems like it just discourages creation. It means that the
creator has to give up control of their creation or they're inescapably
immoral merely because they didn't give up control. I don't think there's
much of a precedent in philosophy for the idea that it's inherently wrong
to control the thing you created. If you add something to the world the
only reason anybody can have a discussion about whether or not you should
give it away is because you made it in the first place. Seems like creation
is a prerequisite to sharing.

Of course, I strongly encourage sharing :)
On Mar 11, 2015 1:01 PM, "Emilio Velis" <contacto at emiliovelis.com> wrote:

> Not to mention the lack of viability in most cases of jumping right into
> that definition without any context. I think that any 'free' endeavor of
> the sort should not be derived from a philosophical standpoint on
> intangibles, but rather on the study of philosophy behind private property
> (perhaps an anti-Lockean view). Drawing a software-hardware parallel is
> confusing to say the least.
> On 11 March 2015 at 13:57, Drew Fustini <pdp7pdp7 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> hmm, just saw this on Slashdot:
>> "Why We Need Free Digital Hardware Designs"
>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/15/03/11/1648243/why-we-need-free-digital-hardware-designs
>> Links to Wired:
>> http://www.wired.com/2015/03/need-free-digital-hardware-designs/
>> It appears to me that Richard Stallman wrote this article.
>> Here is a quote:
>> "the concept we really need is that of a free hardware design. That’s
>> simple: it means a design that permits users to use the design (i.e.,
>> fabricate hardware from it) and to copy and redistribute it, with or
>> without changes. The design must provide the same four freedoms that
>> define free software."
>> I do like the philosophy behind it, but I am afraid the introduction
>> of the term "Free Hardware" will increase confusion about hardware
>> licensing.
>> cheers,
>> drew
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20150311/24b2212a/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list