Re: Builder crowdsourcing banner on PGO

[Magdalen Berns <m berns thismagpie com>]

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Richard Stallman <rms gnu org> wrote:

  > Are we considering not linking to this fundraiser because it is hosted on a
  > website that uses non-free software?

That depends what you mean by "considering".
Several people are arguing vigorously against that idea,
but nobody proposed it and nobody advocates it.

The issue I've raised is not about what software _Indiegogo uses_ in
its server.  We have no reason to be concerned about that.
Indeed, we can't tell what software Indiegogo uses internally,
because it does not affect us -- so we may as well ignore it.
(Please forgive me for repeating what I've said before.)

Rather, this issue about what software _donors_ have to run when they
donate via Indiegogo.  It includes nonfree _javascript_ code that Indiegogo
installs in the donor's browser.  That affects the freedom of the donors:
if we ask people to donate via Indiegogo, we are asking _them_ to run
nonfree software.

See http://gnu.org/philosophy/_javascript_-trap.html.

I get the _javascript_ thing, ta. ;-)

  > Right. So, to recap: those who are objecting have never used a credit/debit
  > card to buy stuff or get cash out the wall? 

Those scenarios are not similar.  When I get cash from an ATM, the ATM
owner is running software but I am not.  I don't know what software is
inside the ATM, but in any case it doesn't affect me.
Since using an ATM does not require running nonfree software,
there is no harm in suggesting other people use an ATM.

Hmm I am not so sure: The chip in your own card will be programmed with non-free software technically the transaction can't work unless the ATM is reading that. For the ATM to read your chip you are required you to physically connect your card's chip to the ATM's reader thus making an electronic circuit between your nonfree chip software and their non-free ATM software

I do occasionally pay with a credit card (very rarely, for privacy
reasons), but only in ways that avoid my running any proprietary
software.  I don't know what software the merchant and the bank use
for this, but in any case it doesn't affect me, etc.

Respect that.

  > Many of us were already aware his fundraiser would be hosted on indiGoGo
  > before it was published including you (Alexandre). Nobody from GNOME seemed
  > to object to indiGoGo as a fundraiser platform when the idea was being
  > thrashed out and nobody objecting here has suggested any alternative or
  > offered to help support Christian in setting something up either.

I raised this issue as soon as I became aware of the campaign, which
was when I saw it mentioned here.  I would have raised the issue
earlier if I had known earlier. 

That is unfortunate. I guess we (those who knew about it before) could have thought of it but in our defence a lot of FLOSS projects seem to happen on there so I guess it's understandable why nobody considered there would be any problem.

 

Since it is too late to do the campaign differently, I think we should
suggest to people that they bypass the campaign and send money
directly to a person or organization associated with Builder.

This does not seem like proportionate response taking into account that the Builder campaign has time considerations and the developer needs to, like eat and stuff to keep on living (lest we forget that). How about we all agree to let Builder off the hook and have a policy discussion about linking to sites that use non-free software, for in future?   

  > With all that said, perhaps as a sort of "compromise" Christian could also
  > think about publishing a bitcoin address on the indigogo page, so that
  > those who are used to making transactions and are offended by the idea of
  > indigogo are able to donate with this way instead.

That would partially solve the problem, but it would be better for us
to post the bitcoin address directly and skip Indiegogo.
Intermediate: we could mention Indiegogo and ask people to please
use the bitcoin address rather than donating thru Indiegogo.

I would certainly agree it's worth publishing a bitcoin address as well as the indiGoGo but realistically, Builder is not likely to any corporate donations that way and it's likely that a non-trivial portion of potential individual donors might be put off by the practicalities of that too. Bitcoin is still fairly niche. 

Magdalen