<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: “[…] since you would need a really big screen to do chords comfortably.” ← This is not true; the layout makes even triads fairly easy to do on a screen a size of an HTC Desire (though that suffers badly from jitter).
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: No, I didn't mistake you. I'm not really interested in porting Hexiano to a specific combination of hardware. If I do the work, it has to be for others too. If I just want it for me, then I could get those peripheral additions for my existing phone, without needing a Neo900, execpt that my current phone doesn't need such peripherals anyway and can play hexiano just fine.
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: So, yeah the verson 2 thing was separate; that was about me not wanting to spend money supporting an intermediate step when I only really want version 2, and that I'd be happy to downpay the /following/ version (version 2) such that I do not avoid supporting the project entirely but /do/ avoid wasting an intermediate device that doesn't really meet my needs.
<JamesJRH>
Then I discussed testing. Is version 1 really a complete waste if it means that my experience of it can shape version 2?
<JamesJRH>
But in that way of looking at it, how many thing do we /already know/ are wrong with version 1 – those things truely are a waste if you can't afford version 1 /and/ version 2 when it comes out.
<JamesJRH>
So, put it this way I currently only have about 1500£ savings. If version 1 is about 1000£ and let's assume that it will be followed by a version 2 of the same price. With my current funds, I simple can't afford version 2.
<JamesJRH>
If I hold-off, I can afford version 2, but be not supporting the project, and if others do the same, then version 2 may never even materialise!!
<JamesJRH>
But I'm trying to propose another option where I downpay /anyway/ – to keep the project funded – but to downpay for version 2 and do not take a version 1, but instead wait for the R&D to continue and take a version 2.
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: I'd rather pay slightly more for a superior /polished/ product than to pay *twice* as much (2000£ or so) for 2 products, versions 1 and 2.
<Oksana>
JamesJRH: Donate up to 500£ to version 1, give voucher to somebody else who wants version 1 but cannot afford it (a developer?); later get version 2 for 1000£ ?
<Oksana>
Just an option to consider...
<JamesJRH>
Oksana: Cool, thanks for giving me this line of thought!!!!!!
<JamesJRH>
Wow, thanks so much!
<JamesJRH>
Hmmmm, I just need to think who...
<Oksana>
If you find more than one candidate, ask teknologen - he has a voucher which he would like to donate to someone new...
Humpelstilzchen has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<ZetaR>
JamesJRH: I am confused about what you mean by "version 1" and "version 2". The Neo900 is already "version 4", if you were to attach a version to it.
Humpelstilzchen has joined #neo900
<ZetaR>
AFAIK, the design originated with Openmoko and the Neo 1973 (GTA01), and then they released a new version derived from the original as the Neo FreeRunner (GTA02), then they worked on GTA03 but was cancelled because of problems with the company and it was picked up by Golden Delicious and upgraded and released as GTA04. The Neo900 is the next iteration of this design.
<ZetaR>
That is the nice thing about open source, you don't keep reinventing the wheel and development done now contributes to basically everything done after it.
<Oksana>
ZetaR: JamesJRH is speaking about "step 2", the device DocScrutinizer is planning to create after Neo900. It will not be restricted to N900's form factor and binary compatibility, and it will be even more privacy-oriented, as far as I remember
<ZetaR>
Ahh, okay. I don't know much about this then. I didn't know there were already plans in place.
<Oksana>
Currently, the focus is on Neo900. Since many people like Maemo 5 and N900, already.
<ZetaR>
What are the planned privacy features you mentioned?
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: Yeah, I know of the history. I came here actually because I decided, out-of-the-blue, to revisit the status of the Openmoko project and the Neo FreeRunner because I came across something major that I wanted to do with Android that I knew would be trivial on a proper GNU+Linux system. A few minutes later, I saw on Wikipedia that there was indeed some new light – and I was delighted!
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: Really, I mean version x and version x + 1.
<ZetaR>
I see.
<JamesJRH>
The specific numbers 1 and 2 weren't relevant to the point I was trying to make.
<ZetaR>
I also found the Neo900 through Wikipedia.
<ZetaR>
Actually, it might really benefit the project to have its own Wikipedia page.
<ZetaR>
My sister has a nonprofit orginization and she said that it had a large jump in traffic to their website after she made a Wikipedia page for it.
<Oksana>
Write it ;-) Model after existing well-written pages, such as N900
<ZetaR>
I wrote an item on my todo list just now. =)
<Oksana>
:-)
<JamesJRH>
01:19:41 < Oksana> ZetaR: JamesJRH is speaking about "step 2", the device DocScrutinizer is planning to create after Neo900. It will not be restricted to N900's form factor and binary compatibility, and it will be even more privacy-oriented, as far as I remember ← Hey! Brilliant! Yes, this is to what I'm referring. I was effectively saying that I'd like to support this upfront…
<JamesJRH>
Oksana: However, I do like your idea of finding someone who wants version 1 but can't fully afford it now.
<ZetaR>
JamesJRH: Also, any support you give would not just support version X and version X+1 but also versions +2,+3,+4... etc.
burmas has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: Yep, this is exactly why I absolutely do /not/ want to shy away this time, like I did with the Openmoko many years ago.
<ZetaR>
Especially with the phone surveillance problems nowadays.
<JamesJRH>
01:25:28 < ZetaR> Actually, it might really benefit the project to have its own Wikipedia page. ← Agreed. My first port-of-call is Wikipedia. For factual information, I skip using a search engine and go straight to Wikipedia.
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: Albeit, sometimes that is actually still through my configured search engine (DuckDuckGo) via ‘!w <terms>’, but I'm even bypassing that more these days by using browser search shortcuts, just ‘w’ for Wikipedia.
<ZetaR>
JamesJRH: Yeah, a lot of search (i.e. Google) is becoming more and more useless as it gets burdened with commercial stuff.
<Oksana>
Actually, one of the problems with search engines is that they crawl through whole page, and not the "content" part of it. Aka, you search for Navit on TMO, Google is going to bring up results which have Navit only in sidebar with active topics. And so on...
<ZetaR>
Actually, Google primarily ranks sites based on the content of sites that links to them, not the actual content on the site.
<Oksana>
That's the advantage of having own smart search engine on your website: your "simple" search gives the results human wants, not somebody else.
<ZetaR>
Right. I have been thinking about using some AI techniques to build a personal search engine, but I never got around to it.
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: But it's just an unnecessary thing for a lot of stuff… like, it totally gives me despair when people put a URL into Google!! :-/
<ZetaR>
AFK for a bit.
<Oksana>
Just go the narrow way: use standard APIs of websites, instead of text-crawling through them.
<JamesJRH>
“[…] only in sidebar with active topics. And so on...” ← Yeah, that really pees me off, especially that the sites often actually do that on purpose, wasting your time just to increase the chances that get a couple of advertisment click pennies from you.
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: What is the 2nd-to-last word in that latter video?
<JamesJRH>
in that video*, sorry, there was only 1. Latter link.
<Oksana>
DuckDuckGo's results are a compilation of "about 50" sources, including Yahoo! Search BOSS; Wikipedia; Wolfram Alpha; Bing; its own Web crawler, the DuckDuckBot; and others.← Exclude crawlers, such as Bing, BOSS, and Bot; expand the API integration with trusted websites, such as Wikipedia for Web, Wikimedia for Images, Wikinews for News, Wikibooks and Gutenberg for Books, Wikibooks for...
<JamesJRH>
“… but, yet, you cannot adapt our technology to existing phones; it's, err, [end---?] development.”
<Oksana>
...Recipes, OpenStreetMap.org and WikiAtlas for Maps...
<JamesJRH>
What was that reason?
<DocScrutinizer05>
anybody encountered problems with PayPal during last 24h?
<DocScrutinizer05>
on neo900 website
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: I don't know the 2nd-last word
<JamesJRH>
Okay.
<JamesJRH>
Oksana: Does OMAP5 have a big.LITTLE heterogenous arrangement between the Cortex-A15 and the Cortex-M4?
<JamesJRH>
And can all 4 cores operate simulateously at peak load?
<DocScrutinizer05>
stantum helps manufacturers to build their own touchpanels aka digitizers based on statum technology - sth we *obviously* can't do
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: and to be utterly clear: there's only ONE digitizer that fits into Neo900: the Nokia N900 digitizer
<Oksana>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMAP#OMAP_5 a dual-core ARM Cortex-A15 CPU with two additional Cortex-M4 cores to offload the A15s in less computationally intensive tasks to increase power efficiency
<JamesJRH>
Oh, only 1?
<JamesJRH>
yes, I saw that.
<JamesJRH>
It doesn't say whether it's the global type or not though.
<JamesJRH>
Whether they can all be used.
<DocScrutinizer05>
please don't start that multicore debate here again. Multicore is nonsense since one fast core is as fast as 2 0.5-as-fast parallel ones. But multicore per se uses more energy
<JamesJRH>
Oh.
<DocScrutinizer05>
and speed of CPU really never been the problem even on N900
<DocScrutinizer05>
modern crappy architectures need one core for "userland" and one for "modem" (when they use that unbearable shared-CPU&RAM concept you find everywhere now) We always had two cores for that, since our modem has its own ARM CPU
<JamesJRH>
I didn't realise that multicore uses more energy per clock cycles. I thought it was the other way around… but as long as you're considering an option that's fast and efficient enough, that's totally fine.
<DocScrutinizer05>
and like wpwrak (Werner almesberger) said: >> a cumputing power that would have made data processing centers envy a 2 decades ago is now not sufficient anymore to move angry birds across the screen? Really? <<
<DocScrutinizer05>
apropos: did you know angrybirds seems to have been developed on N900?
modem has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<JamesJRH>
Yeah, agreed. It's silly.
<JamesJRH>
I'm still using ThinkPad X60 Tablets – their speed's fine!
<JamesJRH>
I won't use newer hardware until that newer hardware is open hardware.
<ZetaR>
I love the Thinkpad X60/T60! The lastest thinkpad that doesn't have the Intel management engine, AND it supports Coreboot. I am on a T60 right now, actually.
<ZetaR>
JamesJRH: Check out the Novena laptop. It is open hardware.
<JamesJRH>
When open hardware makes a laptop that surpasses the X60 Tablet (including inductive digitiser, pointing stick, etc.) I'll eventually stop using these brilliant machines.
<DocScrutinizer05>
(angrybirds) might be a legend
<JamesJRH>
The only major gripe I have with them is their power consumption / battery life / heat production / fan noise, which would be solved with equivavlent ARM hardware nowadays if an open hardware motherboard were to be made for them.
<JamesJRH>
02:12:16 < ZetaR> JamesJRH: Check out the Novena laptop. It is open hardware.
<JamesJRH>
I supprted that!
<JamesJRH>
supported*
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: Or LibreBoot, even. ;-)
<ZetaR>
Well, I use the T60/X60 models as a desktop replacement, so the battery is basically a UPS for me.
<ZetaR>
LibreBoot is Coreboot, it is like the difference between saying "Debian" and saying "GNU/Linux".
<ZetaR>
Its a "distro" of Coreboot, effectively.
<JamesJRH>
Okay.
<JamesJRH>
But still implies that Coreboot works without blobs. :-)
<JamesJRH>
On it.
<ZetaR>
It does. You can also disable blobs in the Coreboot config, but it is much easier to use Libreboot since it is all set up already.
<JamesJRH>
The battery life isn't bad, it's just that, with an ARM board of the same specification, and with this 9-cell battery, it would last for days!!
<JamesJRH>
Tbh., I prefer the Debian-style distribution that allows one to enable nonfree software if needed, but makes it easy to know that you're not running any when not needed, because I think that it's important to allow people to migrate towards freedom in their own time, and not be forced there.
<JamesJRH>
I prefer strong discouragement of nonfree software, rather than banning it.
<ZetaR>
I think being forced is contrary to the principles of libre software.
<JamesJRH>
But I think strong encouragement is important.
<ZetaR>
It means that you have some mechanism to create a power relationship over your users, and it is that power relationship that is wrong with proprietary software, IMO.
<ZetaR>
True, but the difference is that listening to encouragement is voluntary. Power relationships are not.
<DocScrutinizer05>
when we already confront other users here in this channel with "wall of text", could we please stay on topic?
<ZetaR>
Sorry, was just thinking that.
<DocScrutinizer05>
too much off topic noise will cover any relevant info we try to convey
<DocScrutinizer05>
in that context, again: has anybody used PayPal on Neo900 shop during last 18h?
<DocScrutinizer05>
PayPal seems to not understand what Neo900 is all about
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: Oh, this reminds me. I told someone in #libreboot earlier about the Neo900, and they raised concern about the WiFi not being totally libre – what's this about? They were quite unhappy with it, which I found saddening.
<DocScrutinizer05>
they approached me to send stuff like **INVOICES** to them
<DocScrutinizer05>
our **BUSINESSPLAN**
<ZetaR>
DocScrutinizer05: Have they shut down the account? I was worried about that when I saw that you were using Paypal.
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: our WLAN chip needs a firmware like every hardmac wlan chip
<DocScrutinizer05>
and I don't know of any hardmac embedded chip with FOSS firmware
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: /I/ haven't, but I probably would have done by now if not for the multitouch problem. But instead I'm going to mull over that other suggestion.
<JamesJRH>
About buying it with someone who want this one now but can't afford it… The only thing is, it requires some trust, so I want to know them in-person first…
<DocScrutinizer05>
we tried to find a WLAN chip with open firmware for the onboard CPU which also has proper specs and is compatible with the requirements implied by our system design. We had no luck
<ZetaR>
I think the concern is that if the firmware is upgraded, then secret instructions can be given to the prorietary modules. The Libreboot people removed the Intel microcode from the Coreboot package for this reason. There is sort of a point to it but IMO it is going way overboard.
<JamesJRH>
…And there aren't that many people that I know who are potential candidates for this, so it could be a while before I decide on this option.
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's absolute nonsense since same "secret instructions" can be inside ROM from very beginning
<ZetaR>
Exactly. If you freeze the upgrades, you get rid of the problem anyway.
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: (knowing in person) hey, we can have a beer when you drop by in nuernberg ;-)
<JamesJRH>
I know, it doesn't seem like much, but meeting people in-person really helps with trust.
<DocScrutinizer05>
the WLAN module we picked is basically same as used in N9, and the firmware is not FOSS but at least *accessable* and thus open to disassembly and RE
<ZetaR>
DOcScrutinizer05: So open firmware is within reach?
<DocScrutinizer05>
with other modules which come with firmware in ROM, this isn't the case and only guys like FSF and coreboot/whoever are preferring THAT to a somewhat tangible hackable design
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: That sounds sort of German/Germanic. Are you from Germany or elsewhere in Europe?
<DocScrutinizer05>
I never looked into the packet injection stuff for N900 in detail, but the guy did a hell of a job actually analyzing (and maybe even patching, I dunno) the WLAN firmware
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: NUE/BY/GERMANY
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: Did you go to FOSDEM?
<DocScrutinizer05>
no time
<JamesJRH>
Maybe next year I'll see you for a beer then. :-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'm drowning in workload right now, mainly nasty marketing/business stuff like PayPal, Prestashop, newsletters, whatnot
<DocScrutinizer05>
great! looking forward
<JamesJRH>
Delerium bar is the usual place, have you been before?
<DocScrutinizer05>
never heard of
<DocScrutinizer05>
reminds me of CCCamp
<JamesJRH>
This year was my second year.
<JamesJRH>
Really?!!!
<DocScrutinizer05>
This is a CCC year
<DocScrutinizer05>
I joined last time
<JamesJRH>
Free and Open Source Developers' European Meeting
<DocScrutinizer05>
need to check if I can make it this time too
<JamesJRH>
(Or there abouts.)
<JamesJRH>
It's pretty big.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I know FOSDEM
<JamesJRH>
Oh.
<JamesJRH>
Ooooh.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I never heard of Delerium bar
<JamesJRH>
Yeah.
<JamesJRH>
I see now. :-]
<JamesJRH>
It's like the main place people are recommended to on the Friday night, though people often go their the Saturday or Sunday night too.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I lack the skills to do talks, but we may have nice chats in the bar
mark_weaver has joined #neo900
<mark_weaver>
so, I'm not a hardware expert, but there are atheros wireless chipsets for which the software running on the embedded processor is free software.
<ZetaR>
mark_weaver: probably PCIe based.
<mark_weaver>
the ath9k
<ZetaR>
Yeah, AFIK that is a PCIe chip.
<mark_weaver>
so what's the problem?
<JamesJRH>
Can ath9k only be used with PCIe?
<ZetaR>
The Neo900 uses UART, SPI, and I2C mainly, maybe a few others.
<ZetaR>
Yes, for some things. I don't know how much it is free for internal use.
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: Btw., Atheros and ath5k/ath9k drivers are my favourite WiFi brand and drivers.
<mark_weaver>
I don't understand what the problem is.
<ZetaR>
Ah, interesting. Well, you have hit the limit of my knowledge.
<ZetaR>
mark_weaver: I am not a dev, so I don't know what all went into the selection process.
<DocScrutinizer05>
mark_weaver: we checked those but they don't fit our design. We have a host of other constraints too, like power consumption, interface/bus to main CPU, mere physical size, etc pp
<DocScrutinizer05>
PCIe is not available on OMAP3
<DocScrutinizer05>
so here you are with Atheros
<mark_weaver>
right, so running 100% free software is not in your list of requirements. that's what I thought.
<DocScrutinizer05>
it is in our list of requirements, according to FSF only on main CPU
<DocScrutinizer05>
sorry we cannot provide FOSS software for all peripherals. We cannot provide *any* software
<DocScrutinizer05>
and unlike FSF we DO allow update of firmware on peripherals since we think this is in best interest of our customers
<mark_weaver>
and the ath9k allows that
<DocScrutinizer05>
so?
<DocScrutinizer05>
did you get what I told above?
<Oksana>
ath9k is incompatible with OMAP3, and OMAP3 is part of binary-compatibility-with-N900 requirement
<DocScrutinizer05>
our goals for Neo900 might not be your goals, we try to be as FOSS as possible while still actually *building* a product
<mark_weaver>
I can assure you that it is an FSF requirement that the host OS doesn't need to upload non-free blobs to devices to get them to work.
<DocScrutinizer05>
IF we had found a WLAN module that meets all our requirements we of course would have used that. Now we use the next best one we could find
<DocScrutinizer05>
mark_weaver: please use chanlogs to check, we discussed the topic AD NAUSEUM here
<pabs3>
mark_weaver: so if the non-free firmware is on a flash chip accessible directly by the WLAN module, that is fine with the FSF?
<DocScrutinizer05>
and even back when for Openmoko Neo Freerunner
<JamesJRH>
My approach to this problem is to just push on with getting all of the hardware freer, which should be easier in future versions, right?
<JamesJRH>
Because this version is somewhat constrained by compatibility with Nokia N900 design.
<JamesJRH>
For viability reasons.
mark_weaver has left #neo900 ["ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)"]
<JamesJRH>
Who was it who was telling me about step 2?
<ZetaR>
Well, you can't please everyone all the time. =(
<JamesJRH>
Why, why leave like that. It's not constructive.
<DocScrutinizer05>
if that mark_weaver guy would have bothered to actually read about what's Neo900 he would also have noticed that I'm well aware of what RMS wrote to me personally in email. And he even might have noticed that same RMS recently asked me to assist FSF in evaluation of hardware freedom of projects for FSF
<DocScrutinizer05>
I don't think I need aducation about FSF requirements
<DocScrutinizer05>
edu*
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's just FSF requirements are not Neo900 requirements
<DocScrutinizer05>
theirs are ideological, ours pragmatic
* DocScrutinizer05
hates those "be my friend or be my foe" radical FOSS zealots
<JamesJRH>
Mine are ideological; theirs nothing wrong with ideological as long as you don't shoot down those who are trying in the right direction!
<DocScrutinizer05>
discussions with them always end in "then why did you start that project at all?"
<DocScrutinizer05>
Answer: "because I want the best *I can get*. Not to prove that there's no way to achieve to make the world an ideal place"
<JamesJRH>
Yeah, there are quite a few people like that in the core of FSF that are frighteningly black or white – to the point where they're almost the biggest threat to the progression of the libre software movement. :-/
<pabs3>
openrisc.org FTW :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: exactly
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: It's why I've instead chosen to support the SFC.
<JamesJRH>
Instead of the FSF.
<pabs3>
as in sfconservancy.org?
<JamesJRH>
That is, the Software Freedom Conservancy, yes.
<pabs3>
or do you mean the SFLC
<JamesJRH>
First.
<pabs3>
ah, aka the GPL enforcement division ;)
<DocScrutinizer05>
btw it *seems* to me FSF actually adjusted their RYF program according to criticism from our/my side
<DocScrutinizer05>
recently
<pabs3>
interesting.... any more details?
<DocScrutinizer05>
I re-read the details about RYF requirements recently and it seemed to me like they were a tad more liberal regarding such firmware updates etc
dal2 has quit [Read error: error:1408F119:SSL routines:SSL3_GET_RECORD:decryption failed or bad record mac]
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: Why does the WiFi firmware have to update?
<DocScrutinizer05>
hmm?
<JamesJRH>
I've just realised something that I'm not happy about, here.
<DocScrutinizer05>
the wifi chip has no permanent storage (except for a tiny bootloader that loads the firmware from interface)
<JamesJRH>
Okay.
<JamesJRH>
So it actually needs loading, you don't even have the “well it's okay if it's already on there” thing?
<DocScrutinizer05>
so instead of an obscure hidden flash storage on chip, the firmware code lives in a simple datafile anywhere on the host
<DocScrutinizer05>
the device driver transfers it to the WLAN chip on init
<JamesJRH>
I actually prefer this.
<DocScrutinizer05>
me too :-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's way more hacker friendly
<JamesJRH>
The thing that I've just realised, the bit that I real don't like, is not to do with your side specifically.
<JamesJRH>
I've just remembered that 1 of the thing that I liked about open hardware was that it would provide an opportunity to end this silly argument by eliminating it entirely.
<JamesJRH>
Unfortunately, /this/ open hardware hasn't saved my from this. :-(
<JamesJRH>
Or you for that matter. :-/
<JamesJRH>
me*
<Oksana>
Like, open hardware would allow you to remove WiFi chip entirely, and thus end the argument by having no WiFi-firmware (open-source or closed-source, frozen or upgradable)?
<JamesJRH>
My reasoning (from ages ago) was, well, “Why are we arguing over these last few software bytes that is CPU microcode as to whether it counts as hardware or software, when there are massive amounts of other hardware information that is closed yet you ignore that?” – and this argument about microcode is what progressed me faster into the open hardware side.
<Oksana>
Ah, that the WiFi chip is closed-hardware?
<JamesJRH>
But my reasoning is flawed, because open hardware doesn't really count chips, and it's currently infeasible to do so.
<JamesJRH>
Yeah, I guess that's the deal.
<Oksana>
Well, you could always go the way of software-defined radio...
<JamesJRH>
That line of reasoning is okay, but needs to go another level yet, and we're way off having open chips I think.
<JamesJRH>
At least open chip for major stuff like modern processors and such.
<JamesJRH>
I do eventually want to have a thoroughly libre system down to the chip layouts, don't get me wrong, but this is years off being something that's viable, maybe even a couple of decades.
<JamesJRH>
This recurring microcode/firmware argument is not going to go away soon.
mrcaaattt has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<JamesJRH>
I don't like blobs, but I disagree with the weighing-up of the freedom of firmware versus that of hardware.
<JamesJRH>
So if the hardware sources are open, that makes it easier to change the components right?
<JamesJRH>
So in-theory, have blobs but open hardware should make it easier to replace the components which need the blobs, whereas having no blobs but closed hardware doesn't give you any hardware freedom.
Oksana has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<JamesJRH>
However, if it's so difficult to find blob-free components, such as for WiFi, then it doesn't help that the open hardware allows you to change that.
dal2 has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
<DocScrutinizer05>
our definition of an open hardware platform is: it allows user to run whatever OS on top of it, without the need to get any further support from the hw manufacturer (us)
<JamesJRH>
I'm not sure how to handle this issue; I think that all of us, you, I, and him, would like to see the entire technological creation be fully libre, from the chip layouts to the high-level software applications, but we differ in how we're trying to get there. :-/
<JamesJRH>
Really?
<DocScrutinizer05>
I worked in hw industry for decades, and I know about (im)possible ways to get there
<DocScrutinizer05>
the 2let's force them" approach the FSF and GPL are trying is doomed to fail
<JamesJRH>
There's more to it than that. You need to publish schematics, PCB layouts, and documentation for it to be open hardware.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I consider that mandatory parts of the documentation
<JamesJRH>
Okay! Cool.
<DocScrutinizer05>
sincw how would you port an OS whithout such info?
<JamesJRH>
:-D
<DocScrutinizer05>
NB layouts are largely irrelevant
<DocScrutinizer05>
the only one benefitting from them are copycats
<DocScrutinizer05>
this is not FREE hardware, it's OPEN hardware
<JamesJRH>
Hmm, but your definition doesn't necessarily allow modifications /to/ the hardware, or derivatives.
<DocScrutinizer05>
we're not interested in allowing those
<DocScrutinizer05>
modifications are impossible per se
<DocScrutinizer05>
and derivatives are what we hope to do ourselves, this is a company located in a capitalism country, not communism
<DocScrutinizer05>
we need to pay for our rent
<DocScrutinizer05>
so others need to pay for our work
<JamesJRH>
Oh, crap.
<DocScrutinizer05>
and still I *eventually* will publish the layout. at a time where copycats are not interested in it anymore
<JamesJRH>
This isn't open hardware, is it?
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's not FREE hardware
dal2 has joined #neo900
<DocScrutinizer05>
what the heck you need the layout for? before we even sold the device? To build it cheeper than we could, since you don't have $$$$ expense for layouts and prototypes?
<DocScrutinizer05>
do you think this is the bright future we all want to see ?
<JamesJRH>
How many people have I told today about the Neo900? Maybe 3 or 4 channels worth.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I never said open-SOURCE-hardware
<JamesJRH>
(Because that's what I've been implying to people / believing myself.)
<DocScrutinizer05>
this is NOT FREE open-SOURCE-hardware
<DocScrutinizer05>
I've seen that concept fail a dozen times, when the chinesesw knock-offs were sold even before the original product was available, thus killing off the complete project
<JamesJRH>
Why does thta logo now say source in it? I'm sure it didn't used to… Oh shit, I could have gone so far wrong on other things too...
<DocScrutinizer05>
open-source-hw is a delusion, you can't reboot the world and publish a "HowTo make a phone from a handful chips from a handful sand"
<DocScrutinizer05>
there's always a "frontier" where you need to use stuff you have no docs and no clue about how you would build it yourself
<DocScrutinizer05>
we provide all to docs so user can do to the product *whatever they can think of* - except copying it
<DocScrutinizer05>
since that's not what we're working for
<DocScrutinizer05>
they could copy, when they put in same effort we did
<DocScrutinizer05>
you can repair, even modify the product in whatever way you can think of. You get all the needed info for that
<DocScrutinizer05>
sorry, I'm not interested. Probably they changed since they realized they were fuzzy when they discussed with guys like us
<JamesJRH>
05:26:05 <+DocScrutinizer05> open-source-hw is a delusion, you can't reboot the world and publish a "HowTo make a phone from a handful chips ← I'd have a slightly better chance of getting a ‘knock-off’ manufacturer to put a better digitiser on, at least.
<DocScrutinizer05>
no, not at all
<DocScrutinizer05>
there's no secret data we don't disclose about the digitizer
<DocScrutinizer05>
and digitizer is NOT related to PCB LAYOUT
<DocScrutinizer05>
please stop spreading fud
<DocScrutinizer05>
when you approach me with a reasonably sounding project that involves drilling a hole into the PCB, you can get a layout right away (if we already had a final layout at all). Until you do, I don't see any benefit for users and community to publish layout now
<JamesJRH>
For your definition of ‘open hardware’, as in that the hardware isn't free/libre, I'd expect minimum all of the software to be libre. My weighing up of WiFi firmware versus PCB traces was false all along.
<DocScrutinizer05>
we're building hardware. We don't even provide any software
<JamesJRH>
Well, at least I now know of the ambiguity.
<DocScrutinizer05>
intentionally, since when we don't provide software, we can't provide closed software and we need to provide enough hw docs so you can write your own software
<JamesJRH>
I'm nolonger going to talk of open hardware, but libre hardware.
<DocScrutinizer05>
what software comes with your ASUS mobo?
<JamesJRH>
I always wondered why there was a disparity between libre software / open hardware – no, it libre software / libre hardware!
<JamesJRH>
it's*
<JamesJRH>
Open hardware is ambiguous with what the Neo900 is planned to be.
<JamesJRH>
Libre hardware is not a delusion. I'm in support of Novena. I'm going to try to correct myself to everyone I told about the Neo900 on the various channels of the last 24 hours.
<DocScrutinizer05>
we will provide the project files before we go out of business - if we ever do go out of business. So users are free to build their own devices to replace broken ones, when they can't buy them any longer form Neo900 UG
<DocScrutinizer05>
that *latest*
<JamesJRH>
I'll stay on the newletter though just incase you change your mind.
<JamesJRH>
That is good at least.
<DocScrutinizer05>
(correct myself) just make sure your correction is not more off from truth than the original info
<JamesJRH>
I haven't said anything yet.
<DocScrutinizer05>
we don't need moaners calling us names because what we plan to do doesn't meet THEIR ideas what should get done
<JamesJRH>
I'm not going to support the Neo900 financially, but it's not a bad project.
<JamesJRH>
I just feel rather mislead, even if that misleading was inadvertent and intended.
<JamesJRH>
unintended*
<ZetaR>
JamesJRH: If the wiring diagram is open, and the layout is not provided, isn't that similar to the distinction between offering free source code and free binaries? AFAIK even the GPL doesn't require the provider to include binaries.
<DocScrutinizer05>
sorry about that. We didn't make up any definition of what's "open"
<DocScrutinizer05>
there are other dudes who think they own the "Open" trademark
<ZetaR>
"Compiling" would then be taking the components in the wiring diagram and using it to produce a layout based on the underlying hardware (phone case).
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: The binary is more like the finished board, the layout is apparently a big deal for a number of hacking tasks.
<DocScrutinizer05>
ZetaR: good point
<JamesJRH>
s/finished board/finished device/
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: please elaborate
<DocScrutinizer05>
simply stating that doesn't make it any valid argument
<ZetaR>
JamesJRH: There is enough info in the wiring diagram to figure out exactly what you are looking at on your board.
<DocScrutinizer05>
exactly
<ZetaR>
The finished board is like making an ISO for your distro and having it pressed so disk can be distributed.
<DocScrutinizer05>
usual misconception by people who come from FOSS and think they know about hardware
<DocScrutinizer05>
hardware is not comaprable to software
<DocScrutinizer05>
after layout, they will ask for properties of FR4, about via definition, and finally about the PCB fab we used since theirs only produces rubbsih
<DocScrutinizer05>
then about reflow temperature profiles and so on and on
<DocScrutinizer05>
and finally about the brand of Coke I'm drinking to get all this established
<DocScrutinizer05>
;-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
then they start to moan that the EDA program (eagle) isn't FOSS, and the formula of the Coke isn't public
<ZetaR>
JamesJRH: Just take a while to think about the issue before you start changing your recommendations, thats all.
<DocScrutinizer05>
most of them guys are not even aware *which file format* they'd want the layout in
<JamesJRH>
05:46:42 <+DocScrutinizer05> simply stating that doesn't make it any valid argument ← Sure, but I'm trying to think where this is from. I don't know a lot about hardware either, but somewhere I was told that PCB traces are a big deal, I think with respect to the Raspberry Pi.
<ZetaR>
I think that Eagle being so widely used but not being FLOSS is a problem, but a project has to pick its battles.
<DocScrutinizer05>
traces are a big deal *when you want to copy the PCB*, yes
<JamesJRH>
Nevertheless, I don't like business models based on restricting information, other than for copyleft. Prerelease funding such as crowdfunding is the way forward – ‘knock-offs’ shouldn't be a threat to anyone in an ideal business model.
<DocScrutinizer05>
haha
<DocScrutinizer05>
this is based on which experience in that field of business?
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: I've already changed my recommendations (though I haven't yet said anything).
<DocScrutinizer05>
where does that "restricting info" stop? at PCB eagle project files? At invoices our suppliers send to us? At my weekly working hours log?
<JamesJRH>
But like I said before, I don't think that this is a /bad/ project.
dal2 has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
<JamesJRH>
So, I'm probably actually still in favour of this, now that I'm over my initial shock.
<DocScrutinizer05>
thanks a lot. Now if you had any *serious* suggestions how to make it even better, just holler :-)
<JamesJRH>
(Which is why I refrained from immediately saying anything until I'd thought about it more thoroughly.)
<DocScrutinizer05>
we're not evil-intentioned, we just try to make this work. We can't change the world so it meeds our dreams
<DocScrutinizer05>
meets*
perebor has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
<ZetaR>
I do think it is a good idea to strive for: to become more open and sharing. But the social and economic infrastructure for the most part isn't set up to work that way (hopefully it will be some day though).
<DocScrutinizer05>
you can't build a 500 devices from scratch when you don't get funds. So there are first compromises. You must not gamble with success of project. So more compromises regarding what to disclose when come in
<DocScrutinizer05>
finally you can't seel the device for less than you need to pay to build it, so this determines the sales price
<JamesJRH>
I don't like how you've been mocking me this whole time that I've been thinking through all this.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'm not mocking you. sorry when you think so
<DocScrutinizer05>
when you heard sarcastic statements about Copyleft hardware zealots, those were generic since we had that discussion at least a 100 times now
<DocScrutinizer05>
not addressed at you
<JamesJRH>
Things like:
<JamesJRH>
05:48:03 <+DocScrutinizer05> usual misconception by people who come from FOSS and think they know about hardware
<JamesJRH>
05:50:38 <+DocScrutinizer05> and finally about the brand of Coke I'm drinking to get all this established
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes, see above
<DocScrutinizer05>
all of that was only mildly exaggerated, we seen similar things happen already
<DocScrutinizer05>
_not_ addressed to you
<JamesJRH>
I like copyleft, though I understand that hardware is a whole different boardgame.
<DocScrutinizer05>
/join #qi-hardware
<DocScrutinizer05>
..which i'm a part of as well
<JamesJRH>
05:57:04 <+DocScrutinizer05> thanks a lot. Now if you had any *serious* suggestions how to make it even better, just holler :-) ← Is this sarcastic? Or what did you mean if not?
<JamesJRH>
What does the QI stand for?
<DocScrutinizer05>
I meant we are always open to any criticism and suggestions. We even appreciate it. Just please keep in mind this project has certain factual limitations in the way it's set up to work, so we can't always do what we'd like to do
<DocScrutinizer05>
(Qi) dunno, possibly some chinese philosophical concept
<JamesJRH>
Okay.
<DocScrutinizer05>
within such limitations we try very hard to achive exactly same things you're looking for
<DocScrutinizer05>
and we appreciate when somebody points us to some detail we could actually improve
<freemangordon>
DocScrutinizer05: hi!
<DocScrutinizer05>
hi freemangordon
<freemangordon>
any eta for first prototype boards?
<DocScrutinizer05>
yesterday(?) I received a mail from mouser that we will finally receive BB-xM we ordered a year ago :-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
so no ETA yet, but it's getting closer
<freemangordon>
hmm, sorry, don;t get how's that related. and yes, I saw your post on TMO
<freemangordon>
closer as in? 2 months? 3 months?
<DocScrutinizer05>
we even decided that a tad less 'perfection' in favor for more speed in development is temporarily OK right now
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'd hope for 2
<freemangordon>
so, how's bb-xm related? I don;t really get it
<DocScrutinizer05>
though partial protos without sensors etc could be available even earlier
<JamesJRH>
It definitely felt like I was being mocked a bit while I was trying to recover from the whole shock of how to resolve the open hardware ambiguity. I must have a lot of patience to then say, well actually, all-in-all, I'm still in favour of you, while having refrained from saying anything damaging.
<DocScrutinizer05>
for proto_v2 we use BB-xM for "brainboard" plugged to a "sensors-only" Nep900 proto
<JamesJRH>
I need to work out how to correct myself in a way thta doesn't reverse polarises what I previously said.
<freemangordon>
oh, yeah, I remember now
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: please accept my honest apologies
<JamesJRH>
Accepted and forgiven. :-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
(reverse polarises) what is the actual problem?
<DocScrutinizer05>
time of publishing the eagle project files?
<DocScrutinizer05>
what would you do with preliminary ones anyway?
<DocScrutinizer05>
or the fact that we need to take money for the product?
<DocScrutinizer05>
this is no hobbyist project
<DocScrutinizer05>
we're working fulltime on it
<DocScrutinizer05>
simply the project is not (and never been) meant as a blueprint for DIY
<DocScrutinizer05>
and I can tell you nobody sane in his mind would even start to ponder DIY of a 8-layer PCB for a OMAP3
<DocScrutinizer05>
so I think publishing the project files *after* we sold the product is better than what you get on almost any other project/product
<JamesJRH>
It's still a bit of a challenge though, especially seeing as I was trying to persuade mark_weaver that the Neo900 was freer than something endorsed by the FSF due to it being open hardware (meaning libre hardware). Though some arguments still apply, most don't. I just hope that I can persuade /him/ not to burn you down.
<DocScrutinizer05>
no, since some arguments don't apply, the vast majority still does
<DocScrutinizer05>
s/since/while/
<JamesJRH>
I see it that we're somewhat in the same direction, but not aligned. I won't back you, but I definitely don't want to hurt you.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I honestly don't care much about fanatics "burning us down"
<JamesJRH>
I do. I hate to see in-fighting.
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: then what do you want to accomplish at all, in the end?
<DocScrutinizer05>
again, what's your problem?
<DocScrutinizer05>
we explicitly stated that we're NOT RYF conform
<DocScrutinizer05>
we never promised libre software for DIY either - that would have been a nasty pun on all those who actually think they *could* buiold such thing by themselves
<DocScrutinizer05>
s/software/hardware/
<DocScrutinizer05>
even while we wouldn't need at all, I'm probably publishing the complete eagle project files *incl PCB layout* - just a few weeks after we sold the first bunch of devices
<DocScrutinizer05>
so again, what's your problem?
<DocScrutinizer05>
the we don't surrender to the command of some zealots who think they invented user friendly community driven hw development?
<JamesJRH>
In terms of technology, I ultimately want to accomplish that I get make systems that truly suit me, and some of that also applies to hardware. Beyond that, I want to use my better tools to work on important problems like sustainability, renewable energy, efficient transport and such. I seem to have gotten wrapped-up with my tools not doing what I need, somehow,
<JamesJRH>
and so I've been set on a long quest to fix and improve my tools.
<DocScrutinizer05>
let me put it this way: it's nice that you think this "is not a /bad/ project", and I have to live with you "not back it". But what can I do different now that I know?
<JamesJRH>
Which has led me to libre software, libre hardware, and functional programming, amongst other things.
<JamesJRH>
Wait, I have some backlog (I'm a slow typer/reader/thinker), and I think I half-typed a message somewhere earlier, then suspended it...
<JamesJRH>
And I'm getting tired...
Pali has joined #neo900
<JamesJRH>
05:58:59 < ZetaR> I do think it is a good idea to strive for: to become more open and sharing. But the social and economic infrastructure for the most part isn't set up to work that way (hopefully it will be some day though).
<JamesJRH>
ZetaR: ↑ I'm putting myself all out to support this cause. I've practically committed my career to /only/ rely on prerelease funding, with the only postrelease funding being donations which are at goodwill, and in general probably shouldn't be relied upon. Postrelease, any published works will be copyleft, and I will not expect any further funding, except maybe a few donations.
Pali has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<JamesJRH>
06:19:47 <+DocScrutinizer05> JamesJRH: then what do you want to accomplish at all, in the end? ← It depends how broardly you're asking that.
<DocScrutinizer05>
JamesJRH: anyway this project is not based on pre-release funding since we promised our "donors" will get some real hardware for that
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's why it's NOT libre hw as you call it
<DocScrutinizer05>
once we satisfied our customers, we can turn the whole thing into libre hardware, but only then
<DocScrutinizer05>
since otherwise we risk some copycat sells the product cheaper which is fine for everybody else but a disaster for the Neo900 UG and all its customers who lose all their funds they provided
<DocScrutinizer05>
I hope this makes some sense to you
<DocScrutinizer05>
it did to our customers anyway
<JamesJRH>
This is actually still a prerelease model actually, only the ‘release’ is when you ship it to your customers. At that point, you could release all sources
ceene has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
<JamesJRH>
Yes, it does.
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's exactly what I told above I will do
<DocScrutinizer05>
:-)
<JamesJRH>
Of course, people are a bit weary of the support of copycats straigh-off, so you'll always have a head-start at the point of release. However, this is where I suggest copyleft is crucial to prevent competitors from overtaking you based on your own work. They can't take the development /lead/ away from you unless they manage to make something that people regard a the real successor.
<JamesJRH>
(This does happen, occassionally, e.g. OpenOffice.org → LibreOffice.)
<JamesJRH>
However, being copyleft means that at the very worst, if they take the lead you can also use their improvement straight back.
<DocScrutinizer05>
no, this simply doesn't work like that in hardware
<JamesJRH>
I think that copyleft is a kind of collaboration safety mechanism, really.
<JamesJRH>
Why? Please explain?
<DocScrutinizer05>
and copyleft is not ebforcable in China
<DocScrutinizer05>
enforceable*
<JamesJRH>
I've seen this somewhere else but it was not explained. :-/
<JamesJRH>
What?!!!!!!
<JamesJRH>
Shit!!!!
* pabs3
giggles
<JamesJRH>
Ffs..
<JamesJRH>
Not funny.
<pabs3>
pretty funny that you thought it would be :)
<JamesJRH>
pabs3: Well I wouldn't have thought it be any less enforcable than copyright itself.
<DocScrutinizer05>
(Why?) unlike software, in hw it's not that simple to backport any improvements made in a parallel "fork" of the design
<pabs3>
copyright isn't either
<JamesJRH>
Okay, that's not so bad then.
<JamesJRH>
Kind of.
<JamesJRH>
I just means everythings permissive/BSD-like rather than copyleft.
<DocScrutinizer05>
your typical chinese copycat will simply copy your design and sell it for less (though usually with some flaws they introduced during poor copy-work)
<JamesJRH>
But that doesn't so much matter if noöne can close-source a derivative.
<JamesJRH>
Okay, fine, my model accepts that.
<pabs3>
I thought I read somewhere (bunnie?) that also it is trivial to reverse a board layout into a board design, there are companies doing it within a week or something
<DocScrutinizer05>
and not give a damn F about any copy-right/left/up/down/rear/front/charm/bottom
<JamesJRH>
Lol!
<pabs3>
er, s/board layout/physical PCB/
<pabs3>
JamesJRH: reading bunnie's blog is very interesting btw
<JamesJRH>
I read the Crowd Supply Novena updates, they're long enough. ;-)
<JamesJRH>
But sure, I'll take a look.
<DocScrutinizer05>
bunnie knows a lot about that stuff (btw back in Openmoko Sean had some chats with Bunnie about cooperation on hw design)
<pabs3>
much more interesting than that
<pabs3>
Gongkai (sp?) especially
<DocScrutinizer05>
in the end such coop didn't work, since... hw is not sw
ceene has joined #neo900
<JamesJRH>
I've seen a few videos of Bunnie in his workshop and such.
<DocScrutinizer05>
the requirements were simply not exactly matching
<DocScrutinizer05>
so the idea of using same SoC been void
<DocScrutinizer05>
---> no cooperation on hw design, though stay friends nevertheless
<DocScrutinizer05>
now guess how much of a use any 'slightly improved design' done by a chinese copycat would be, particularly since that copycat does NOT publish their schematicsa and layout, even if we already did under copyleft or whatever
<DocScrutinizer05>
again the clash between idealism and pragmatism. We want this project to *succeed*, not to establish a shining example of a (failed) ideal libre hw project
<DocScrutinizer05>
epitaph: "but the concept was brilliant"
<DocScrutinizer05>
;-)
<pabs3>
every project starts somewhere, even RMS had to use proprietary OSes to create GNU stuff
<DocScrutinizer05>
yup
<JamesJRH>
The only reason I like copyleft over permissive is because copyright allows some to make a proprietary derivation of your permissive code. Copyleft, roughly-speaking, just makes it like in China. Noöne is allowed to restrict a derivative of what you've done. From the point of release, the manufacturing playing-field is leveller, you just have to make sure that you covor all design costs before
<JamesJRH>
release.
<DocScrutinizer05>
which is exactly what we do
<JamesJRH>
Actually, no; it's not close enough. China's copyright situation is bad.
<DocScrutinizer05>
thus my former request to "just make sure your correction is not more off from truth than the original info"
<DocScrutinizer05>
s/bad/inexistent/
<JamesJRH>
Copyleft ensures redistribution of hidden binary-like stuff.
<JamesJRH>
“particularly since that copycat does NOT publish their schematicsa and layout, even if we already did under copyleft or whatever”
<JamesJRH>
Okay.
<JamesJRH>
So I read before, hang-on...
<DocScrutinizer05>
and so far our stuff got published inder CC-by-sa (or CC-by-nc-sa)
<DocScrutinizer05>
we're not really in need of any new licensing model, I guess. Unless you tell me that this license is WAY better than CC-BY-SA
<DocScrutinizer05>
we're not religious about the licensing
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's just to take some strain from our customers who want to reuse the design in whatever way, we can't enforce anything by license anyway, so we will take care about our own needs in a different way (by postponing the release of data until it can't hurt the project anymore)
<JamesJRH>
“Experience has shown that the NCL does not provide the benefits it was intended to. The TAPR Open Hardware License ("OHL") is identical to the NCL but does not place any limitation on commercial use of OHL designs. We encourage you to use the Open Hardware License, as it more closely follows the Open Source software philosophy than does the NCL.”
<JamesJRH>
But why?
<JamesJRH>
So is the answer “But China!”?
<DocScrutinizer05>
sorry you lost me
<Wizzup>
JamesJRH: they mean 'free software philosophy' but write 'open source'
<JamesJRH>
But I thought it was copyleft in general that falls into the China sinkhole. :-/
<DocScrutinizer05>
any licensing is simply moot in china
<Wizzup>
in any case, if china is going to mass produce neo900's after this project succesfully did one or two batches, I am not sure if I will complain
<Wizzup>
also what DocScrutinizer05 said
<DocScrutinizer05>
as is NSA arrest warant to Snowden in Russia
<Wizzup>
fbi*
<Wizzup>
but yeah
<JamesJRH>
Why then do TAPR deprecate only the NCL and not the OHL? What's sigificantly worse about it?
<DocScrutinizer05>
aiui NCL restricts *western* commercial copy only, while it cannot restrict copy in China
<JamesJRH>
Also, is China's copyright sinkhole allow to be exported to counties where the copyright does apply?
<JamesJRH>
allowed*
<DocScrutinizer05>
so why restrict western companies when you still need to figt Chinese companies
<DocScrutinizer05>
not really, but alas nobody really cares
<DocScrutinizer05>
unless you're Apple
<JamesJRH>
Hmmmmmmmmm...
<DocScrutinizer05>
and have a bazillion lawyers
<JamesJRH>
Damn'it.
<JamesJRH>
Well, at least this is good to be aware of.
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes, and it helps when it comes to arguments with open libre hw zealots who think they know better how to properly run such project
<DocScrutinizer05>
(again, not you I'm looking at)
<JamesJRH>
I'm not sure how much it'll deter me from my general commitment to copyleft though, primarily outside of hardware.
<DocScrutinizer05>
it shouldn't
<DocScrutinizer05>
the more people are committed to libre, the less problems projects like ours have with copycats, since nobody wants to buy their cheap but flawed non-free stuff
<JamesJRH>
The prerelease funding thing still works, only if they're better at reverse engineering than you, which I gather they are, and they can produce a much larger scale, which they usually can, they can steal your edge, potentially.
<JamesJRH>
But surely they can do that anyway if they can reverse-engineer.
<DocScrutinizer05>
to reverse-engineer they first need to get a hardware
<JamesJRH>
Hah!
<JamesJRH>
Of course!
<DocScrutinizer05>
at that point in time we as well can publish the project files
<DocScrutinizer05>
which is what we will do
<DocScrutinizer05>
so how much "libre" is Neo900 now?
<ds2>
an 8L PCB is not out of the question....
<JamesJRH>
Meh, no, it doesn't matter. You can basically see it a bit like: when you ship a device they can reverse engineer and copy it. When they ship a change to it, you don't know what they did. They can steal the advantage simply by being a 1000 times better at you at reverse-engineering.
<ds2>
it is the blind/buried vias and ViP that is more of an issue
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes
<DocScrutinizer05>
I know ;-D
<JamesJRH>
Regardless of whether you hold sources or release them, the one who has the better reverse-engineering skills, wins.
<JamesJRH>
(Along with mass-productiona capabilities.)
<JamesJRH>
mass-production*
<DocScrutinizer05>
sure. Let them win. We have no capacities to build more than 1500 maybe. So if after we built and sold those, some copycat jumps in and builds more since there's still demand, all the better
<JamesJRH>
/Do/ they win though? Do they ever take the lead and produce a ‘successor’?
<DocScrutinizer05>
but our prices are incl R&D. Now when a copycat jumps in and offers a device at mere shenzen based hardware&production costs, we're dead
<JamesJRH>
And again any sort of reputation? Or is that not the culture over there?
<DocScrutinizer05>
unless we already sold our 1500 devices we can sell
<DocScrutinizer05>
they think copy is a compliment
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's chinese culture
<JamesJRH>
Okay, I like that. That fits with my planned career model.
<DocScrutinizer05>
hehehe
<JamesJRH>
It's just that if they make a modification that they deliberately obfuscate, then the playing field is very unlevel, and away from the lead developer. They can still the lead – this is what worries me.
<DocScrutinizer05>
they don't do modifications
<DocScrutinizer05>
never seen that, and colleagues from China tell me that Chinese are very poor at real development
<JamesJRH>
I think that taking the lead should be a difficult and competive taks, on a level playing field.
<JamesJRH>
Oh.
<DocScrutinizer05>
particularly on existing designs
<JamesJRH>
I see.
<DocScrutinizer05>
they maybe kick out components they don't understand why they are needed
<DocScrutinizer05>
;-)
<JamesJRH>
I guess this ‘very rapid reverse-engineering’ can only really be useful for copying and very minor modifications, hence why the source is useful.
<JamesJRH>
So this is good to know.
<DocScrutinizer05>
then otoh when they actually do development, they get components in where nobody except them knows why they are needed
<DocScrutinizer05>
of course there are also brilliant asian EE, but they are a tiny minority
<DocScrutinizer05>
and some of my chinese friends would generally deny their existence ;-)
<JamesJRH>
Heh.
<JamesJRH>
08:00:09 <+DocScrutinizer05> of course there are also brilliant asian EE, but they are a tiny minority ← NonChinese Asian?
<DocScrutinizer05>
also Chinese
<JamesJRH>
Okay.
<DocScrutinizer05>
but yeah, outside mainland china you usually can find higher percentage of qualified EE
<DocScrutinizer05>
and in Taiwan and Korea etc you got very smart people
<DocScrutinizer05>
maybe those smart people also exist in China, but it seems to me the culture there doesn't foster (or actually even hinders) them to do a decent jonb
<DocScrutinizer05>
job*
<DocScrutinizer05>
RE is prolly simply a more valuable skill in China than EE-R&D
* DocScrutinizer05
glances at his Rigol scope and wonders whwre it got engineered
<DocScrutinizer05>
ooh, forgot about Japan, home of Sony et al
<DocScrutinizer05>
*very* western
<DocScrutinizer05>
EE wise
<DocScrutinizer05>
maybe even smarter
<DocScrutinizer05>
actually you can usually tell from schematics where/by-whom they got designed
<DocScrutinizer05>
not from any signature, merely from circuit design
<JamesJRH>
Yeah, I was just thinking that you missed Japan being smart R&D wise!
<JamesJRH>
heh.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'm pretty sure I can tell apart a USA circuit from a German circuit from a Japanese circuit
<JamesJRH>
:-)
<JamesJRH>
What about British? What are we like? :-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
USA: "KISS", Germany: "That doesn't look solid yet, and we need this curly here for a special case", Japan: "That's smart and new, so let's try that"
<DocScrutinizer05>
British is pretty close to German
<DocScrutinizer05>
with a touch USA
<JamesJRH>
You could probably tell my style – a bit quirky, but hopefully pretty decent. (Though in terms of circuitry, not very experienced.)
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes, sounds about right
<JamesJRH>
08:14:48 <+DocScrutinizer05> British is pretty close to German ← I'd have to agree with that – I was thinking before you said it actually.
<DocScrutinizer05>
"rock solid and decent, but why the heck they used that 50mmxdia15mm blowfuse instead the usual 20mmx5mm?"
<JamesJRH>
I'm quite actracted to German design, I guess beceause it's akin to my own.
<JamesJRH>
What's that last statement?
<JamesJRH>
I didn't get the joke.
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's about what I might think while studying a British amplifier
<JamesJRH>
So just sort of standards variations but similar design styles?
<DocScrutinizer05>
everythin state of the art but often... unusual like right steering cars
<DocScrutinizer05>
I think I've seen more British designs with plus on Ground than all other similar non-british circuits I've seen together
<JamesJRH>
Hmm, I wouldn't say /everything/ state-of-the-art.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I guess for cars same applies, with plus on chassis
<JamesJRH>
Yeah, quirky unusualness sounds fair.
<JamesJRH>
And, at least for me, I deviate from the norm it I think it's for the good, and I guess that's the the state-of-the-art bit has an oportunity to florish, but otoh. we also have some legacy stuff that hinders us a bit.
<JamesJRH>
In some cases due to historically leading innovation – like we now have a relatively bad train system, compared to other European countries.
<JamesJRH>
But we started-off with all of the legacy stuff because at 1 point we were (inventing?)/leading trains for example.
<JamesJRH>
And apparently our Victorian sewers tell a similar story of legacy.
<JamesJRH>
Though I experience the hinderance of the legacy train service far more.
<DocScrutinizer05>
btw one fact (at least afaik) that most people are not aware of at all: there's no copyright on circuits, only on the "printed" schematics as such. And only very few circuits are protected by patents, e.g. Moog cascade filters
<JamesJRH>
They keep talking about electrifying this line, but as of yet (as of many years) they still haven't.
<JamesJRH>
I see.
<JamesJRH>
It kind of makes sense, like you can't copyright shapes or numbers maybe.
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes
<DocScrutinizer05>
iirc Rotel benn British audio amps
<DocScrutinizer05>
been*
<DocScrutinizer05>
re "national identity in circuit design"
<JamesJRH>
:-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
look at http://www.rotel.com/ and I'd say that *must* be British design
<JamesJRH>
You mean from the outside?
sparetire_ has quit [Quit: sparetire_]
<JamesJRH>
The stacking and general control interface is definitely something that I used to see a lot, but I wouldn't say this is specifically British.
<DocScrutinizer05>
from outside and prolly also inside
<DocScrutinizer05>
Rotel Europe
<DocScrutinizer05>
Dale Road
<DocScrutinizer05>
Worthing, West Sussex
<DocScrutinizer05>
England BN11 2BH
<DocScrutinizer05>
anyway, we're getting quite off-topic again
<DocScrutinizer05>
sorry
<JamesJRH>
Both my parents and my auntie/uncle have a Sony equivalent-form CD/tape players (black).
modem has joined #neo900
unclouded has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<JamesJRH>
I.e. only 2 in the extended family (that I know of); the plurals didn't work well.
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: Anyway, as interesting as this is. Back to licenses… So basically everything in China can automatically (in terms of rough practicality) be regarded as being licensed under the hypothetical Creative Commons licence of ‘ND’.
<JamesJRH>
licences*
<JamesJRH>
:-D
<JamesJRH>
Once the hardware/object/binary is released, that is.
<JamesJRH>
ND
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: Everything closed-source is roughly CC ND in China.
<JamesJRH>
BY-ND if you're lucky. ;-)
<bencoh>
err ... them not enforcing any kind of IP law doesnt mean you (as a foreign company) can get away with it when releasing a project outside of china
<Wizzup>
outside of china will get you into trouble, yes
<Wizzup>
or, can
<JamesJRH>
I said _“in China”_.
<bencoh>
JamesJRH: yeah but ... you dont want to sell in china, do you ?
<JamesJRH>
Basicially, this is interesting, because catering for China means catering for a world without copyright – if I can succeed in this prerelease-only funding constraint that I've set myself (excluding a few voluntary donations postrelease) and if this concept works in China, then I can be safe and never have to worry about postrelease piracy, whilst not hindering derivative innovation.
<JamesJRH>
From what's been said, everything still fits.
<JamesJRH>
From what I can see.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I just doubt any such pre-release funding will fly in China
<JamesJRH>
That's not the bit I'm thinking about in relation to China.
<DocScrutinizer05>
they're not even used to the *concept*, it must sound pretty strange to them
<DocScrutinizer05>
anyway, this is again pretty off-topic for Neo900
<DocScrutinizer05>
we quite thoughtfully decided NOT to produce in China
<JamesJRH>
Where will you?
<JamesJRH>
Anyway, China's not what I'm getting at. I think that ideal things should in general work without artificial adjustment, so my ideal career idea should not rely on copyright (artificial copying legal resistriction).
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: If Neo900 hardware can be fully libre at release then me financially backing it is back on the cards, as well as all that which I was saying before about getting involved on the software side with Maemo, NixOS, Hildon, Dalvik, etc., if I manage this.
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: And please keep an eye out for any opportunity that may enable a screen with a couple more pointers!
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: And also please keep an eye out for any opportunity to change the WiFi chip for 1 that doesn't have the blob problem.
<JamesJRH>
DocScrutinizer05: (Preferably ath9k or similar, because I know what to expect with Atheros.)
<JamesJRH>
:-)
paulk-collins has joined #neo900
unclouded has joined #neo900
norly has joined #neo900
trx has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
mvaenskae has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<wpwrak>
JamesJRH: if you knew the jolly ride atheros gave us at openmoko .... ;-) (though i think have changed there since then)
<JamesJRH>
No, I know none such. :-/
<JamesJRH>
I've always had a good success with Atheros.
norly has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<Humpelstilzchen>
openmoko had an atheros chip which wasn not covered by madwifi
che11 has joined #neo900
mvaenskae has joined #neo900
norly has joined #neo900
che11 has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<wpwrak>
firmware in flash, full of bugs, atheros made us send in modules physically in order to get firmware upgrades, their internal development process involved forking for each customer, etc.
<wpwrak>
as i understand it, they had two lines: the "laptop" type of chips, and the "phone" type of chips. the former were much nicer. alas, we had to use the latter ...
<DocScrutinizer05>
http://linuxwireless.sipsolutions.net/en/users/Drivers/wl12xx/ >>The firmware for WL12xx chipset is available under the Linux firmware license on git tree at: git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git<<
<DocScrutinizer05>
sorry when that's not good enough for any hacker who thinks it should be better than that but is not willing to actually DO sth about it to get there.
<DocScrutinizer05>
And I really think the CPU they use in wl12xx is an ARM M4 or sth like that, anyway somebody been able to disassemble the firmware and even patch some aspects in it, already years ago iirc. When same firmware was completely hidden inside a flash memory on wlan chip nobody would even bother and the FOSS firmware zealots would cheer about the "pretty open design" - fools.
<DocScrutinizer05>
we have lots of such CPU-driven peripherals, where you wouldn't even expect it: in 9-axis accelero-gyro sensor, in ALS sensor, in camera sensor, in LCD driver chip, in eMMC controller, don't get me started ;-) Just because the fools now can SEE there is a firmware, they suddenly think they are naturally entitled to get the sourcecode of such firmware - NB even the sourcecode wouldn't help then a single bit since it might be assembler, in
<DocScrutinizer05>
a flavor they never before seen (if the CPU wasn't an ARM core but something proprietary). And when they had access to the sourcecode and would understand it, they still are not any wiser unless they get FULL docu about all the hw registers in the WLAN chip that adjust timers and filters and de/modulation and stuff
norly has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
panais has joined #neo900
<wpwrak>
naw, you can often guess how peripherals work from looking at a driver. you will obviously not find out about modes or features the driver doesn't use, but you can at least play with the things you see. also, sometimes register definitions have details the driver doesn't actually use.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'm talking about firmware
<wpwrak>
still. firmware also has drivers :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
you lost me
<wpwrak>
firmware source -> you have a good amount of information on registers -> you can do useful stuff with it
<DocScrutinizer05>
THAT depends on the source
<wpwrak>
sure. if the source is full of *(BASE + 0x1386) = 0xf8; /* snafn gha zyoo */ then you have a problem ;-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
I've seen e.g. glamo source and dunno what's been the name of GTA02 display driver chip, they had pretty little info about any registers used
<DocScrutinizer05>
and that wasn't even firmware, this was an actual kernel driver
<wpwrak>
the comment is of course in the language the original author found most of the voices in his head could agree on :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
or think about the audio config registers in calypso, where we couldn't really make sense from some of them, *despite* seemingly nice comments on their meaning
<DocScrutinizer05>
the point I'm trying to make: "driver" sourcecode is worthless when you have to decent low level technical reference of internal function blocks of a chip
<DocScrutinizer05>
s/ to / no /
<wpwrak>
not worthless. manuals don't always tell you the whole truth. and often enough, even if they do, it's hard to extract it. so code that is known to work can help a lot.
<DocScrutinizer05>
:shrug:
<bencoh>
I think you both agree anyway ;)
<bencoh>
(and you both know how tedious it can be)
<DocScrutinizer05>
and we both know that whiners just whine because they don't get it their way, no matter how much or how little sense and result their way may make
<DocScrutinizer05>
I think wl1273 is a rather good WLAN module/chipset
<bencoh>
clearly not the worse :)
<bencoh>
NRND, but ... that's in line with the rest of the design ;)
<DocScrutinizer05>
when somebody wants a module with firmware hidden in on-chip flash since that *feels* more "free" to them, I can't help
<DocScrutinizer05>
~wtf nrnd
<infobot>
Gee... I don't know what nrnd means...
<bencoh>
not recommended for new design by TI
<DocScrutinizer05>
well
<DocScrutinizer05>
still active though
<bencoh>
yeah
<DocScrutinizer05>
but yeah, it's actually becoming a risk component meanwhile
<wpwrak>
if they deprecate it at the speed at which they disappeared the calypso from the market, our grandchildren will still play with it ;-)
<DocScrutinizer05>
more recent modules are worse wrt "openness"
<DocScrutinizer05>
and re atheros, I'm actually not convinced yet it has a FOSS *firmware*. Maybe it has a softmac mode where the driver is FOSS, OK. We can't use softmac though, unless you want to cut through your battery in less than 12h
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'd love to see myself standing corrected on that
<freemangordon>
so far it is not clear to me, "building maemo from scratch" sounds fuzzy to me
<bencoh>
sounds like "gimme source, I wanna build everything from scratch"
<DocScrutinizer05>
complete build of *whole* maemo from free soruces, as far as it gets. I already noticed that SDK installs nokia proprietary binaries which would be the first obstacle to get a FOSS-fremantle
<freemangordon>
1st, I don't think we need to do any "build from scratch" as long as there is CSSU and repos
<bencoh>
(as with buildroot or openembeded for instance)
<freemangordon>
DocScrutinizer05: thought so, but why is that needed?
<DocScrutinizer05>
we can't distribute anything like fiasco files
<DocScrutinizer05>
and you can't install a maemo system just from repositories
<freemangordon>
iirc we agreed "we" will distribute a fiasco with installer only ')
<DocScrutinizer05>
at least I'd not know how to do that
<DocScrutinizer05>
well, where is that?
<freemangordon>
right now you can;t because the nokia repos are down, but n900 has the same (or similar) problem
<DocScrutinizer05>
exactly, that's why we need a "FOSSfiasco" that has everything but the Nokia binaries
<freemangordon>
nowhere, but you don;t need the whole maemo for just an installer. see, I am not against someone trying to build everything in maemo that is foss, I am just trying to understand what is the purpose
<freemangordon>
you don;t have to build anything in order to have that fiasco
<freemangordon>
as there are already pre-build debs
<DocScrutinizer05>
and how do you know which of them are actually building from an available source?
<freemangordon>
and why do you want to know that?
<freemangordon>
as long as .deb is licensed under (L)GPL you're good to go. most of the times
<DocScrutinizer05>
I don't get it how you want to bootstrap installation of FOSSfremantle to an arbitrary target
<freemangordon>
repository.maemo.org that is
<freemangordon>
DocScrutinizer05: this is not gentoo :P
<bencoh>
f:]
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's no answer
<freemangordon>
DocScrutinizer05: you can install (most of) the needed packages from the repo, without the need to build them
<DocScrutinizer05>
so what?
<DocScrutinizer05>
how would I do that, on a bare CPU?
<freemangordon>
a minimal fiasco with apt-get should suffice
<DocScrutinizer05>
BUILd IT!
<freemangordon>
and some kind of connectivity
<freemangordon>
ah, I see what you mean
<bencoh>
:))
<freemangordon>
DocScrutinizer05: my point is - this is not the same as "building maemo from scratch". at least in my book "building" means "compiling from the source"
<bencoh>
those two are orthogonal
<DocScrutinizer05>
and i'm not a packager or distro maintainer
<freemangordon>
but "compiling from source" != make a bootable minimal fisaco
<freemangordon>
thus my question - what does panais try to achieve
<DocScrutinizer05>
he tries to help getting some working system on Neo900
<freemangordon>
great. and I want him to be more specific so /me to help :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
for this you can emulate basically every possible Neo900 installation procedure on N900
<freemangordon>
sure
<freemangordon>
or not :( . n900- u-boot does not support onenand
<DocScrutinizer05>
and your "I don't know what he's trying to do so I can't help " actually doesn't help. Please come up with details about your "You don't need to do that" Please specify what needs to get done instead
rjeffries has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<DocScrutinizer05>
N900 uBoot doesn't support OneNAND?
<DocScrutinizer05>
then how does it boot into standard rootfs which lives on OneNAND?
<bencoh>
actually the important part is fetching the kernel, not the rootfs
<freemangordon>
it is nolo that reads u-boot + kernel from onenand
<bencoh>
but I guess that's the same issue
<DocScrutinizer05>
or - in case I'm actually terribly wrong on that one - how about flashing a new proper uBoot to N900?
<bencoh>
freemangordon: not when you use an "external" instead of the combined one (?)
<bencoh>
+kernel
<DocScrutinizer05>
and btw we can't flash OneNAND on Neo900 directly either
<freemangordon>
kernels are read from eMMC iirc
<freemangordon>
DocScrutinizer05: why?
<DocScrutinizer05>
so your installer invariably has to go to uSD
<freemangordon>
wait, why we can't flash onenand?
<freemangordon>
I did exactly that
<bencoh>
freemangordon: oh, rigt
<bencoh>
right*
<DocScrutinizer05>
why? because all flashers also use NOLO to flash NAND
<freemangordon>
on pimped board
<freemangordon>
what has nolo in common with neo900?
<DocScrutinizer05>
nothing, that's the point
<freemangordon>
we can load u-boot visa USB and then use it to flash the onenand
<DocScrutinizer05>
so your installer invariably has to go to uSD
<freemangordon>
*via
<DocScrutinizer05>
meh!
<freemangordon>
anyway, I run out of time, sorry
<freemangordon>
gtg
<DocScrutinizer05>
when you write the "flasher" for that
<freemangordon>
will discuss that later
* DocScrutinizer05
thinks Neo900 firstboot installer should live on a uSD
<DocScrutinizer05>
after all Neo900 *can* boot from uSD, unlike N900
<DocScrutinizer05>
NB: incl uBoot and xLoader
<DocScrutinizer05>
of course a uBoot based "coldflasher-0x1337" would also be great
<DocScrutinizer05>
and it would still need somebody creating the script for all the deb downloads and converting them into binary images that can get flashed to OneNAND
<DocScrutinizer05>
and somebody needs to already start building and testing that
<DocScrutinizer05>
or alternatively create the "flasher" and provide that minimal-fiasco
<DocScrutinizer05>
which still needs to boot and provide a consle at least, where user can check connectivity and log in to WLAN and then start the flashing of the full fledged system by downloading and installing debs
<DocScrutinizer05>
which needs a script that also needs to get written
<DocScrutinizer05>
and again all this is pretty much completely test-able on N900
<DocScrutinizer05>
excpet maybe for uBoot/NOLO itself, so who cares
panais has quit [Quit: Page closed]
nicksydney has joined #neo900
rjeffries has joined #neo900
Pali has joined #neo900
arcean has joined #neo900
modem has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
modem has joined #neo900
Pali has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Pali has joined #neo900
modem has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
useretail has quit [Quit: Living in realtime. Thinking in binary. Talking in IP.]
norly has joined #neo900
<ilon>
o/
<DocScrutinizer05>
\o
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: hows things?
<DocScrutinizer05>
stress never ending
<DocScrutinizer05>
PayPal acts up
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: I feel you.
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: Whats the problem with them?
<drathir>
paypal sadly stealers in my opinion... ;/
<ilon>
drathir: Paypal is a business as others, they want their cut
<drathir>
but sadly mostly ppl no have any other choice and alternatives ;/
<ilon>
Actually, Paypal are the less bad of of horrible options most of the times.
<drathir>
ilon: i speakin about steal w/o reason ans suspending accounts, i hear that often practice, sadly personally included...
<drathir>
maybe few $ ismt much loose but still, no response to two email, waitin when they wakeup...
<ilon>
drathir: Haven't encountered nor heard about something like that, so I can't really comment it
<drathir>
ilon: and i wishes You never occur that to You...
rjeffries has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
* drathir
personally was verry happy when creating account to check how thats workin, but fast happines ended...
<ilon>
drathir: So do I. So far I've only been bothered by their automatic transaction tagging systems (i.e. transactions gets flagged and have to be verified manually AFTER they've spoken with me in person)
<ilon>
drathir: May I ask where you live?
<drathir>
ilon: i verified by bank account, but they want crazy things im reply them they could forgot to get that data form me, and they should be happy of bank verify of account...
<drathir>
ilon: honestly i will understand if they suspicious transactions at lvl of k or kk $ but not few $...
<ilon>
drathir: Well, atleast in Europe they are required by law to have knowledge of all their customers to prevent money laundry, no matter of the amount.
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's no reason to ask me for my businessplan, for where I get my customers from, for invoices of purchases I made (paid via their account!!!)
<DocScrutinizer05>
my tax papers
<DocScrutinizer05>
and whatnot else they want from me now
<drathir>
ilon: they have proof from banc account data...
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes, same here
<DocScrutinizer05>
the account been used without any problems for a year now
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: I agree on that being way more intrusive than they should be
<drathir>
DocScrutinizer05: also that is crazy in my opinion, bc the payments are mostly made in local area bank accounts after go into paypal the noney are own by paypal no country related...\
<ilon>
drathir: They are regulated in the countries they operate in afaik
<DocScrutinizer05>
no idea, maybe they think I do money laundry for chinese mafia, or whatever
<drathir>
ilon: they should better look at ssl certs ;p and last one big security leak which one they ignored first...
<ilon>
drathir: Big corp (tm) just go for the easy points.
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: You never know ;-)
<drathir>
sometimes i think the btc is not a bad idea...
<ilon>
Its not, neither were tulips.
<DocScrutinizer05>
tulips? hrrhrrhrrr
<ilon>
:D
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: I take it you know history? :D
<DocScrutinizer05>
yep, I do
<DocScrutinizer05>
awesome to grow your complete house during one year in your garden
<DocScrutinizer05>
doing basically nothing for it
<ilon>
:D
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: as long as you get some good bulbs you'r all set!
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: Well, Paypal is for sure close to being in monopoly, but there is usually local companies that offers similar services.
<DocScrutinizer05>
I don't know of any
<ilon>
DocScrutinizer05: atleast here in Sweden there are quite a few payment gateways that could be used to accept (at least) credit card. Bank transfer would be a viable option as alternative