Tagging for those who faved, boosted and otherwise expressed interest:
@amolith @sir @rtwx @mgiagante @ironmonkey @erikstl @poetgrant @leadore

If you reply, please do so in the toot attached above in the thread

Purism has posted a few more details regarding their Librem One launch and gave a little explanation as to why they decided to launch the project itself. This post includes links to the apps that Purism forked to create their Librem One mobile clients.

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: puri.sm/posts/how-purism-works

@geniusmusing I'm glad that I could reflect the public's opinion in this post

@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.

@brandon
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 great write up.

branding is a problem in open source though....

ActivityPub network for example....what should it be calledd? the fediverse? what mastodon? pleorama? Confusing naming could quickly throw off people

@tootbrute Thanks for checking it out! I agree. It's kind of like putting a freelancer in a corporate employee position. The politics crush ya

@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

@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.

eg. mastodon.social/@Gargron/10202

And Purism't own repo with the paid feature implemented by Eugen.
source.puri.sm/liberty/smilodo

@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.

@Gargron Thanks for chiming in, much appreciated. Was there no way to refuse that implementation at all? (I had hoped that you're financially backed enough by the community by now that you don't have to rely on that kind of jobs.) @brandon

@MacLemon
Completely agree McLemon, though thanks Gargron for the explanations. What are you going to do with .social?

Well, now they have announced a roll back so its a no use question
@Gargron @brandon

@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
Maybe they could merge with e.foundation and form and evil group of OSS stealers

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Fosstodon

Fosstodon is a Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.