HyperWiki

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision 		Previous revision
en:philosophy:cooperation_worktogether [2024/06/10 13:46]
throgh [The issues with "make it just works"] 		en:philosophy:cooperation_worktogether [2024/06/12 02:30] (current)
throgh [So what is the solution?]
Line 24: Line 24:
 Everyone using computer-systems for a longer period of time knows this point for sure: There is a service or any application needed, but not running correct or not even starting out of unknown reasoning. In general this is the end when we as "users" reached our individual maximum of tryouts. What is it? The application and / or service is going to be removed. But this can be quite different when we talk about free, libre licensed software: There "users" have always the chance to look into the source-code and also configuration. But why is therefore nevertheless the most known habit again the removal? The "externalized responsibility" is here to be named: As "user" I am focused on my current and wanted use-cases, but do I imagine to really debug, test and develop or configure further my installed software? Do I see the need to document perhaps this so others may also see and have possible advantages? Everyone using computer-systems for a longer period of time knows this point for sure: There is a service or any application needed, but not running correct or not even starting out of unknown reasoning. In general this is the end when we as "users" reached our individual maximum of tryouts. What is it? The application and / or service is going to be removed. But this can be quite different when we talk about free, libre licensed software: There "users" have always the chance to look into the source-code and also configuration. But why is therefore nevertheless the most known habit again the removal? The "externalized responsibility" is here to be named: As "user" I am focused on my current and wanted use-cases, but do I imagine to really debug, test and develop or configure further my installed software? Do I see the need to document perhaps this so others may also see and have possible advantages?
  
-And here is the momentum of "externalized responsibility": We are most time to much focused on our selves. We differ too much within such sets of "roles": User, developer, maintainer, administrator and many more. Anyone else should solve the current issue, while I wait as I have done enough with reporting. But is it really that enough and leaving others perhaps even with insufficient information?+And here is the momentum of "externalized responsibility": We are most time to much focused on ourselves. We differ too much within such sets of "roles": User, developer, maintainer, administrator and many more. Anyone else should solve the current issue, while I wait as I have done enough with reporting. But is it really that enough and leaving others perhaps even with insufficient information? In the end we wait while done the issue. Sometimes we even not think of reporting any issue and support projects, we even do not think to offer time for testing or support the people giving their time financial. Why? Because we think it is just done "gratis", done "free" and it has to be "free" because it is called "free software". 
 + 
 +===== The issues with "free software" ===== 
 + 
 +We have already written down major problems in the spectrum of free, libre software in a [[https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:philosophy:logic_failures|separate article]]. But to mention again here one major problem is the common misunderstanding and misguiding of the naming: Free, libre software for sure does not mean that projects, resulting software and system-distributions / operating-systems with packaged software are done also gratis and "for free" when it comes to demands. Yes, people engage within all those projects, out of different motivations. To draw here the point for Hyperbola: We do it with the intention to ... 
 + 
 +  * provide an operating-system oriented on basic UNIX design philosophies of minimalism. 
 +  * create real technical emancipation as users have always complete insights in their system, running processes, services and applications with all data included. 
 +  * not further differentiate as we want users be also developers and maintainers at minimum for their own software and reinvent their system as they want and need. 
 + 
 +So all of this is part of an altruistic engagement. Without further support in time, helping hands and heads and also financials we cannot go on further. **But the claim that "//free software is always free and gratis//"  is not fully working: It needs cooperation and working together, always and on-going.**
  
 ===== What are the major points causing those issues? ===== ===== What are the major points causing those issues? =====
Line 54: Line 64:
 So as "user" keep in mind that you can also be maintainer and developer at the same time. Please let us work together under the philosophy of Hyperbola, which finally includes **do it yourself**. You miss a package? Build it and share your insights. You found an issue? Share your insights and support people supporting you more. You have interests to help? Raise a hand and get in touch. But do not await only others to help you without giving something. Not only report and await afterwards movement. That is not the mood and interest of Hyperbola as project, as said: We want to break up with the named problems of "user as common role". All of the named points "users" await are not self-evident and in fact hard work the smaller a project is. Asking for support, for donations and time helping others is a generic point free, libre projects did and need to do also today as it is their most important point: Giving "users" a point back, but also "users" should slip out of the generic role seemingly pre-defined. **It is not, it should not as everyone can be user, developer and maintainer.** So as "user" keep in mind that you can also be maintainer and developer at the same time. Please let us work together under the philosophy of Hyperbola, which finally includes **do it yourself**. You miss a package? Build it and share your insights. You found an issue? Share your insights and support people supporting you more. You have interests to help? Raise a hand and get in touch. But do not await only others to help you without giving something. Not only report and await afterwards movement. That is not the mood and interest of Hyperbola as project, as said: We want to break up with the named problems of "user as common role". All of the named points "users" await are not self-evident and in fact hard work the smaller a project is. Asking for support, for donations and time helping others is a generic point free, libre projects did and need to do also today as it is their most important point: Giving "users" a point back, but also "users" should slip out of the generic role seemingly pre-defined. **It is not, it should not as everyone can be user, developer and maintainer.**
  
-And a short note in the end: We should be honest with each other, not only project-wide but also let alone wider for the whole spectrum of free, libre software and culture. The deep hypocrisy many are following gets clear when looking just strict enough: Yes, somewhat free and libre, somewhat free, but please no further restrictions or we name it "censorship" - which is not, for sure not and it is not working to describe it that way. Yes, free software, but the data is not really important or we name "non-functional". And who is asking about the complexity of a project? Oh, it is just free and permissive licensed. Well, of course nothing is or can or even better should not be meant any way problematic. Or is there any problem when monolithic projects are not even near to get a review and concrete audit? And what happens with the next security-breach? Well, this is dishonest and we should be more clear to each other. If there is no real interest for free and libre culture, for software following this ways, let us call this "open-source" and Hyperbola is not following this course. This fails immediately with the wording "gratis": This does not include that no helping hand is needed giving back something. And exactly this "something" can be defined, can be filled further. It just needs the will doing so, instead of just "using" why not do more at a given time? Energy is not coming from thin air and data should be handled with caution, not with self-evident ignorance. Collecting data in masses is unethical and providing packages including more and more just out of convinience is the same: Unresponsible towards all beings. So why exactly are those packages and projects including unethical principles "free and libre"? Exactly out of convinience and ignorance, shortened with answers or easy looking explanations for a cheap discourse ending most the time the same - yes, there are issues, but license is free and libre, so in the end "it just works". Isn't that enough?+And a short note in the end: We should be honest with each other, not only project-wide but also let alone wider for the whole spectrum of free, libre software and culture. The deep hypocrisy many are following gets clear when looking just strict enough: Yes, somewhat free and libre, somewhat free, but please no further restrictions or we name it "censorship" - which is not, for sure not and it is not working to describe it that way. Yes, free software, but the data is not really important or we name "non-functional". And who is asking about the complexity of a project? Oh, it is just free and permissive licensed. Well, of course nothing is or can or even better should not be meant any way problematic. Or is there any problem when monolithic projects are not even near to get a review and concrete audit? And what happens with the next security-breach? Well, this is dishonest and we should be more clear to each other. If there is no real interest for free and libre culture, for software following this ways, let us call this "open-source" and Hyperbola is not following this course. This fails immediately with the wording "gratis": This does not include that no helping hand is needed giving back something. And exactly this "something" can be defined, can be filled further. It just needs the will doing so, instead of just "using" why not do more at a given time? Energy is not coming from thin air and data should be handled with caution, not with self-evident ignorance. Collecting data in masses is unethical and providing packages including more and more just out of convinience is the same: Unresponsible towards all beings. So why exactly are those packages and projects including unethical principles "free and libre"? Exactly out of convinience and ignorance, shortened with answers or easy looking explanations for a cheap discourse ending most the time the same - yes, there are issues, but license is free and libre, so in the end "it just works". Isn't that enough? No, it is for sure not enough.
  
 ===== Conclusion ===== ===== Conclusion =====
  
-Hyperbola as project has the essential goal of **technical emancipation** and by all further interpretation this also includes the essential point of **do it yourself**. Sorry not sorry, but as a small system-project we need to underline and explain this point in depth as we have thought it would be enough to motivate. As one point of failure is the missing analysis of historic responsibilities (please read [[https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:philosophy:logic_failures|here]] more about this) and there is no conclusion up until today while a majority of the free, libre community claims to be "free" without further definition what exactly this kind of "freedom" means or needs. Responsibility, cooperation and working together is too important than to trust reason and wait for a better outcome.+Hyperbola as project has the essential goal of **technical emancipation** and by all further interpretation this also includes the essential point of **do it yourself**. Sorry not sorry, but as a small system-project we need to underline and explain this point in depth as we have thought it would be enough to motivate. As one point of failure is the missing analysis of historic responsibilities (please read [[https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:philosophy:logic_failures|here]] more about this) and there is no conclusion up until today while a majority of the free, libre community claims to be "free" without further definition what exactly this kind of "freedom" means or needs. Responsibility, cooperation and working together is too important than to trust reason and wait for a better outcome. **The community helps the community and is steady working side by side to welcome also everyone interested in the values and principles Hyperbola is using as project!**