[Arm-netbook] Init Freedom

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 5:48 AM, James L <james6.28318530 at gmail.com> wrote:

>> if they were true to their mission statement they would add the
>> option to include it.
>
> Unfortunately, I have to agree

 i spoke to one of the people in devuan, who turned out to be an
amazingly wise person, and i was able to point out this discrepancy to
them without over-reaction.  i suggested to them that it might be a
good idea to properly honour the mission statement by including
systemd in devuan.

 their response was that in their opinion it simply would never
happen, ever.  devuan was *geniunely* born out of a back-lash reaction
*against* systemd.. *not* out of a desire to genuinely honour their
mission statement.

> Here is a question: Is a false (in any way) mission statement enough to
> totally dismiss something? Even if their actions (providing a reasonable
> alternative) are seemingly good?

 *sigh* i love what they've done, but the best way to illustrate it is
with a story from mother theresa.  she was invited to an anti-war
rally, once.  she declined... and told them that if they ever wanted
to hold a *peace* rally, she would be delighted to attend.

 that really says it all, i think.

> From what I have observed, you seem to have two "codes" that you live
> by, your ethics and your intuition.

 ha.  to clarify: i use my intuition to identify those things which
are ethical [and then follow up with as much rational / logical
reasoning as i can stand].  where i really didn't even have a
definition of what is actually ethical until i encountered bob
podolski, only last year.  ironic or what... :)

> Your ethics seems to mostly involve
> your influence over others, so what does your intuition say about Devuan?

 jury's still out.  i'm hopeful that one day they'll be able to
resolve the conflict and truly honour their mission statement.  for
myself i... i simply cannot bring myself to endorse or support things
where there exists a huge cognitive dissonance.  call it an ISO9001
"fail" if you will.

l.