We have some exciting news! The team at Purism are thrilled to announce the launch of Librem One https://librem.one Private and secure email, chat, social and VPN. No ads! No tracking! No data sharing! Just the best end-to-end encrypted communication and social. Join the revolution today and take back control of your data and life #LibremOne
@purism I like the idea but what are you paying for (outside supporting you lads and using your cloud)?
- LibremChat looks like a modified Riot.im
- LibremSocial looks like a (barely) modified FediLab
- LibremMail looks like a modified K-9 Mail
- LibremTunnel looks like a modified OpenVPN app
It's nice to that you have put the effort into this, but wouldn't it have been easier to just promote those specific apps?
Or am I missing something?
I'm guessing Purism is trying to make it as easy as possible for non-technical people to make the leap into decentralised services.
If you promote separate apps and separate services under separate brands, it can (rightly or wrongly) seem confusing and overwhelming, especially on decentralised networks where there's no central site.
A lot of people aren't that interested in computing, and don't want to have to think too hard about who to sign up with.
@switchingsocial To be honest, a lot of people that aren't interested in computing, aren't interested in this stuff either.
They just stick with WhatsApp, Facebook and Google.
Not saying they shouldn't move but more that they don't care to move...
Also not saying that we shouldn't make it accessible for "non-tech" people to get into this but doing it like this kinda feels wrong...
Hi can you try now?
@purism This service is quite new and its ios apps is newly added. Maybe some tutorial helps.
@purism @Purism While I'm all for decentralisation and moving away from malicious corporate entities, I don't really like how it's made to seem as if every service on librem.one is something made by Purism. The technical specifications do say what protocol is being used but not the underlying software and I think that's an underhanded way to go about it.
At least say LibremSocial is Mastodon, LibremTunnel is PIA, LibremMail is any old mail server with tight GPG integration & K-9 Mail from Android, and that LibremFiles and Contacts will, I assume, be Nextcloud.
I really don't like people that come along, take a good open source project, rebrand it, and pass it off as their own. Transparency is a good thing and I don't really see any on the front page of https://librem.one
If you were operating this as a non-profit, that would one thing. It's an entirely different matter to be making money from free software without giving credit where credit is due.
@jeremiah_ People do indeed want things that "just work", however, I think it's unhealthy for the ecosystem to just rebrand and "claim" without giving credit where due.
In the end, giving the credit to the original project would also benefit you as now people will start looking into the original project and contribute to it.
@finlaydag33k Do you call it Linux, or GNU/Linux?
@jeremiah_ This actually depends :p
When I give credit, I call it GNU+Linux (note that I use a "+" not a "/"), this is because I feel like it gives appropriate credit to both while still kinda staying away (read: middle ground) from the whole "Linux vs GNU/Linux" debate.
When I type messages like these, I say "Linux" (just to keep it short).
When I teach people about Linux (just to pique their interests in it), I call it "GNU and Linux" (so similar to the "GNU+Linux").
And I would like to say that that is exactly the kind of thing I would expect from Google or Apple. Not from a company like Purism. I didn't say they should link to the GitHub repos in the header of each listing. I didn't even say that they should link to the project anywhere. Just that they should, at the very least, say what software they're using. Otherwise, it's inadvertently putting the users in a walled garden because they don't realise that there are other options and other people running the same applications. For example, there's an entire network of people running these services (any many many more) for free on http://libreho.st
@amolith @purism @Purism I find your comparison to Google or Apple specious. We supply ethical, fully free, privacy supporting software and hardware. We're fundamentally different from those other companies you mentioned. Yes, we build on the work others have done, just as any modern software company must. The internet is built on FOSS.
My comparison is an exaggeration. I don't have a problem with Purism at all. In fact, it's quite the opposite; I quite like everything you guys (I assume you're part of Purism?) do to further privacy and security. My problem is ONLY with librem.one and ONLY with the fact that Purism is not giving (what I deem) proper credit to the people whose work they're using.
Yes the internet is built on FLOSS but I think it is wrong to pass others' work off as your own regardless of who is doing it. From what I can see, all Purism has done is rebranded FLOSS services so "passing others' work off as your own" is precisely what they're doing.
@amolith I hear your criticism loud and clear. I will bring this in to my colleagues on the Librem One team.
As scathing as this criticism is, other than giving credit to the projects, I'm a big fan of what Purism is doing. If I had the money, I would have been one of the first backers of the Librem 5 and I would have a Purism laptop. Unfortunately, I'm a college student as well as a musician 😆
@jeremiah_ Whether the end user cares or not is incidental. The point is giving credit where credit is due. It's standard practice when open source projects build on the work of others to give them a hat-tip on their homepage. But #LibreOne is a new project and these are minor comms teething problems.
@amolith @purism @Purism
@amolith @strypey @purism @Purism I realize that I'm giving your a rationalization or an excuse and that your criticism is valid. However, I seriously believe that sometimes de-cluttering apps from extraneous information can actually benefit the user. It's my assumption that this was the attempt here in this case. We provide resources and code to a whole host of FLOSS projects so we know how important credit is.
that seems to be irelevant to the critic.
framasoft, to make a counter example as everything as "their" software stack, incl. having every service they offer branded as "frama..." and still explain what software they use to do so, educate and sometimes aso help to fund it's development.
@amolith I think this is a fair point. Have a look at the way #Disroot.org give credit to the software they used to run their services. The other thing currently missing on the librem.one front page is the words "source code" linked to a page the explains all the packages you use for each of your services, and provides links to their source code. If any of those packages are #AGPL, I believe you are legally obliged to do this. But either way, it would fit well with your mission.
@amolith @purism @Purism
I looked over the announcement page a bit ago and I admit I was confused by it. I don't understand the point of trying to rebrand existing services as your own. I think Disroot did a good job of bundling existing services and being fully transparent about what they are and where they come from.
Idk, maybe it's marketing directed at average Apple/Microsoft/Google/etc. service/hardware users, but it is a turn-off for me.
@nebunez @amolith @purism @Purism I agree with several others. I don't like people rebranding open source as their own for profit, without transparency or giving credit where it's due. Too bad, because I have been following the progress on their phone Also (maybe colored by my negative reaction to the above) my reaction to that "we don't look at your junk" slogan is ugh. Maybe it's just me, but that's pretty cringe-worthy.
Plus: For me libre would be a service with clear software list AND howto guides, how can you host them if you want. Of course it's not cheap to host such a big ecosystem, so ppl will still use the provided service, but users who want to build up their own solution with just a few of them, it could be a huge step-forward to break out.
The idea of a single brand / account for multiple services is good. It reduces confusions about the different projects for non-techy users and makes onboarding easier.
Nevertheless, the root projects / protocols should be named and appreciated. Interested users should see at a glance what they are dealing with under the hood.
@amolith @purism @Purism
This is an unfortunate consequence of free software that we'll need to accept, though. You can't deny this freedom to companies that choose to do so without making your software non-free.
Just take a look at the Lerna ICE license and the clusterfuck of problems it brought trying to make a morally-positive license.
You can't just make a free* license, since companies can just get away with it with shell non-profits. Bill Gate Foundation VPN (powered by Microsoft) anyone?
@purism That's great, thanks for doing it!
But maybe you could mention more clearly that you're using already existing FLOSS apps. People might believe you made Matrix/Riot, Mastodon/Tusky and K-9.
@purism Will your email service support custom domains?