It’s only a proof of concept at the moment and I don’t know if it will see mass adoption but it’s a step in the right direction to ending reliance on US-based Big Tech.
It’s only a proof of concept at the moment and I don’t know if it will see mass adoption but it’s a step in the right direction to ending reliance on US-based Big Tech.
Mint and Ubuntu have Debian as an upstream, don’t they?
Debian is a US legal entity, so if it was required to sanction countries, it feels that software built with it would likely be restricted.
Debian is open source though. So unless they make it closed source we can keep using it.
Making it closed source would probably kill it and a fork would take its place.
Well, all the distros being discussed are open source - it’s kind of a requirement when making a linux distro because the licences require it and you wouldn’t be able to make it closed source. (Unless there’s a huge shift in the law)
And being open source doesn’t necessarily prevent it falling under sanctions legislation. I have seen a linux distro being legally required to “take reasonable steps” to geo-block Russian access to its repos, and I’ve personally read disclaimers when installing linux that “This software is not allowed to be used in Russia”. (That distro is ‘owned’ by an organisation that was controlled by a single person, so it’s probably not comparable to Debian) We’re all technical people so we can all probably think of half a dozen ways around that, but it was still ordered by the US Government (even before the current government)
And you may be right in that it would be excempt. Debian isn’t owned by anyone, but its trademark is(Software in the Public Interest), and it feels possible that those who help distribute foss (by mirroring repos for example) may be restricted if they fall under US jurisdiction. I don’t know for certain - and unless someone here is a qualified lawyer specialising in software licences as well as how software rooted in the US relates to sanctions - we’re all probably guessing.
Three months ago any of this would have felt ridiculous - who would want to stop free software? But now? In this era of the ridiculous? I certainly feel unsure about predicting anything.
I still don’t see how the US can stop anyone from forking Debian etc.
Worst case scenario I can see is “The US implements martial law, no more trade what so ever allowed with anyone outside of the US and they put up a fire-wall to block all internet”
In that scenario we literally just pull Debian from the European mirrors, fork it and create NewDebian.
Problem solved.
Currently we heavily rely on Microsoft, Apple etc. If the US does the same thing, we’re fucked because we can’t just fork MS or Apple software.
We’re an ingenious and motivated bunch (See all the Redhat attempts to stop clones, and lots of other examples), so yes, I think we’d absolutely work around the problem if it was to happen.
And fedora is controlled by IBM. What’s your point.
Point? I was replying about Mint and Ubuntu - what has Fedora got to do with them?
How about systemd ? Aren’t all distros kinda fucked?
Fair point about systemd, or any of the other core components - I don’t know.
But I don’t think we’d be fucked - we’re ingenious and motivated and have a proven record of adapting and innovating to solve problems that stop us playing with our toys.