Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

["Lefty (石鏡 )" <lefty shugendo org>]

On 3/4/10 3:00 PM, "Richard Stallman" <rms gnu org> wrote:
>
> Let's not be in a rush to invite users to use servers -- even our own
> -- instead of their own computers.  That is the wrong direction to go.

That's a pretty black-and-white statement. Shared servers make a great deal
of sense for shared information; effective sharing with just your own
computer--particularly if you're not a developer, a sysadmin, a web
designer, or the like--is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the
vast majority of people who use computers.

I doubt that as many as 10% of the people who maintain a blog or share
pictures on Flickr or Picasa could do it if they had to run their own server
to support those activities, and it seems unreasonable to suggest that they
should.

(I find it a bit ironic to contemplate that when I started programming
professionally in the mid-70s, I was using EMACS on a DECsystem-10, a
time-sharing computer; in effect, a "virtual computer server".)

> Many commercial server operators abuse the users in various ways.
> They find it profitable to do so.  A nonprofit operation could decide
> to make less money and not commit such abuses.  I am sure the GNOME
> Foundation would have a higher standard of respect for the user than
> Facebook has.  That would solve part of the problem of using servers.

Many commercial supermarkets abuse their customers in various ways. They
find it profitable to do so. Should we all start growing our own food while
awaiting the spontaneous arrival of a non-profit grocery store of some sort?

I'm also not sure what you're actually referring to when you refer to
Facebook's supposedly low "standard of respect for the user". If your idea
of a "low standard of respect for the user" means "probably sharing the
user's information with the CIA", I'd have to remain unimpressed with
that...

> But some of the problems of using a server are unavoidable.  For
> instance, under US law, it is easier for police to seize your data
> from a service you use than to seize them from you.  The operator of
> the service has no choice in the matter.

Facebook's privacy policy (http://www.facebook.com/policy.php), which all
users of the service should certainly read, says, "We may disclose
information pursuant to subpoenas, court orders, or other requests
(including criminal and civil matters) if we have a good faith belief that
the response is required by law."

Have you read this document? It's quite detailed and explicit.

In any case, I'm under the impression that a search warrant or similar order
is generally required in the US to get information regardless of whether
it's from a hosted service or from your personal computer; certainly the
police can't simply call up Facebook and ask for information on random
people and expect to get it.

I'm likewise not aware that, being presented with a search warrant to seize
one's personal computer in order to search it for evidence, one has any
particular "choice in the matter" other than handing it over.

Maybe I'm missing something.

> Synchronizing and sharing the notes are not SaaS, though editing might
> be SaaS.  So at least some of this service is basically ok, provided
> Gnote can also use it (because Tomboy's dependence on C# is a problem).

Again, I must certainly be missing something here, but if C# represents such
a problem in and of itself, how is it that gnu.org develops, maintains and
supports the DOTGNU project, which "aims to be for ... C# programs what
GNU/Linux is rapidly becoming for desktop and server applications"?

Either C# is a problem or it's not, and if it is, why is there a GNU project
to support it? If it's not, what exactly are we talking about?
(http://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu/)

> Even better, can Gnote be adapted to communicate these data via email,
> I wonder?  Then it would not need a server at all.  People could
> optionally encrypt the email using GPG for full privacy.

I'm not sure that Hub is working actively on Gnote any longer; he got quite
tired of being used as some sort of poster child by the anti-Mono crowd. See
http://www.figuiere.net/hub/blog/?2009/07/27/680-why-i-did-write-gnote

> This approach would require some programming, but that would only have
> to be done once; it would spare GNOME the continuing effort of running
> a server, and enable users to avoid depending on one.

By all means, program away. I believe it to be a misguided effort, but I
wouldn't discourage you from pursuing it, if that's your choice.

The vast majority of people who use computers--and I'm not referring to
people who download source and build their own versions of things--are quite
happy to, for example, have Wordpress or Livejournal maintain their blogs
for them, and there's absolutely no reason for them to attempt to host it
themselves.

In the case of social media such as Facebook and the like, at least until
such time as there's a widely-used and workable distributed scheme for
dealing with one's social graph, shared services are the reality.

When faced with reality, one can either try to engage constructively with
it, or ignore it and hope it goes away. The latter approach has proven to
have a rather poor track record.