forums, mailing lists and other tools

[Jonas Oberg]

Hi Carsten,

I largely agree with what you write, but let me challenge you on one
point.

> *Proprietary* JavaScript, however, as served by Google or Facebook or other
> proprietary software vendors, are another matter altogether. They do indeed
> violate users' freedom.

By and large, I believe *where* a certain piece of code runs is immaterial
to the question, and what matters is the interface the user of a service is
subject to. As we know, throughout the history of computing, we've
constantly moved the processing power between the client, and the server,
and back again, time and time again.

That Google or Facebook happens to have JavaScript that, today, runs on
the client side, should not affect whether it's considered to be violating
my freedom or not.

Let's imagine for a second that Google and Facebook rewrote their frontend
to use only CSS/HTML, and avoid JavaScript. Would that magically make their
service more respecting of my freedom? I do not believe so. It would still
be a proprietary service.

And similarly, if they licensed and made available all the corresponding
source code for their JavaScript, that would not make the service more
respecting of my freedom either. It would still be a proprietary service.


Best,

-- 
Jonas Öberg
Executive Director

FSFE e.V. - keeping the power of technology in your hands. Your
support enables our work, please join us today http://fsfe.org/join