On Librem One's Announcement: https://linuxliaison.org/on-librem-ones-announcement/
There's still no news on why they modified their Mastodon instance the way they did (they also removed the ability to report and to directly message others), or as to where the source code for their branded clients are (though we found it ourselves) and a link to the clients' source code repositories. The Librem One project homepage has not been updated to reflect this post as of writing.
Link to Purism post: https://puri.sm/posts/how-purism-works-upstream-and-gives-back/
@brandon Thanks, this is very good.
@leadore thank you Lea! I really appreciate it :)
@brandon Thanks for checking into the details on this!
@geniusmusing I'm glad that I could reflect the public's opinion in this post
@brandon Well written, thanks.
@nebunez Thank you for reading, it was a pleasure, and a rush, to write
@brandon perfect summary of the feeling we all seem to share!
@yarmo Thanks dude! I'm happy that you checked it out
@brandon I was under the impression that the point of the service they were offering was simply hosting a federated instance of these existing free software tools, a totally valuable service, in my opinion. Now that I realize they are being shady about it, I'm less than excited. I would have absolutely paid $7.99/mo to use hosted versions with solid integration. Why'd they have to screw that up!?
@hawkinsw I think the thing that you're paying for is the managed hosting, which is not something to scoff at considering what you get for $7.99, especially considering the implications.
That being said, it could all fall tomorrow if there's a glaring privacy/security issue that isn't taken care of.
There was already a bug, but it was quickly solved due to responsible disclosure.
100% agreed. I was simply echoing your concern about their rebranded forks. I was saying I just wished that they were a little more transparent about the tools they were using to provide the infrastructure. Thanks for provoking such an important discussion.
@brandon Nice post man. Their response looked kind of brief to me. I could be wrong but something tells me that if users didn't bring this up they wouldn't care much about it themselves.
@mgiagante The fact that up until now they've basically dodged questions or ignored them completely leads me to believe that they were rushed by something. It seems kind of haphazard
@brandon Smells like a too aggressive business strategy. They must be desperate for revenue but they should also pay attention to the PR side of things, especially since they claim to hold a set of ethical values.
@mgiagante Good point on the "especially" part. I feel like if you're claiming you're on the moral high ground you kind of have to pay special attention to what people are saying about them
@mgiagante to what people are saying about you**
@brandon Considering, that @purism even paid to turn off all abuse and moderation handling in Mastodon, their Instance can only be regarded as exploiting users by actively supporting abuse through their users.
Likewise they removed reporting of abuse by others for their own users. That's pretty exploitive if you ask me.
More and more instances on the Fediverse are completely blocking their instance because of that and rightfully so.
@MacLemon How do you turn off the ability for ME to report one of their users?
I mean, you could always just have the reports go to a token account, but how do you verify that?
@brandon They paid @Gargron to implement that this API call will be refused.
So their users cannot report on their instance. You cannot report their users, because their instance refuses that API call.
Sadly, Gargron implemented that and took their money, instead of refusing their request. (That was unexpected to be honest, since he did think a lot about what features may support abuse and turned them down. This time money was more important it seems.)
@MacLemon Where did you see this? I know I might seem a little pedantic but I need a reliable source.
The only excuse I could see Purism and Eugen giving is that well it's a paid service and trolls don't generally pay money to troll.
Obviously that's not universally true.
@brandon Checking sources is fine. I guess Eugen's own toots are credible enough, as well as the git history.
And Purism't own repo with the paid feature implemented by Eugen.
@MacLemon @brandon Correction: You can report anyone all the same, their server just won't save the reports, but yours will. I don't think their policy is sensible and have explained to them why, but in the end it's their business and their server and the worst case scenario is that everyone will domain-block them.
@brandon Would you still recommend Librem.One? Are these just some minor discrepancies to an overall positive idea?
@kyle11c I can't say I would put my faith into it 100%.
I think it's a great idea and I've even considered enrolling my mom into it if it'll get her into the right mindset but at this moment I wouldn't recommend jumping on just yet.
That being said, this may simply be the "early adopter's tax" but only time will tell.
@brandon That was my thought, I was going to pitch this for my parents to use because it is a nice all in one of open source applications. I did sign up for the Librem.One because I highly support what they are trying to accomplish with the Librem 5 that I was like “Why not”.
I do think your concerns are valid and would like some more information from Purism about everything. Great article btw!
@kyle11c I would sign up myself but I already self-host a lot of my stuff so I didn't see much use in it
Thanks for the kind words! I'm trying to keep updated as much as possible and I'll update the post as time goes on and developments are made
@brandon Really interesting, thanks for sharing.
Also reading Purism's blog on the subject: https://puri.sm/posts/how-purism-works-upstream-and-gives-back/
Maybe they could merge with e.foundation and form and evil group of OSS stealers
Fosstodon is a Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.