Re: [security-discuss] Freedom 0: the utilitarian vs. the deontologist

[Brandon Invergo]

On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 22:53 +0100, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> It's in fact that separate issue that has been under discussion here.
> To date, there has been no claim or discussion over whether the use of
> the GNU Radio application is restricted.  That's not a point of
> contention.  GNU Radio Foundation, Inc. is denying freedom 0 to GNU
> wget users.  The only GNU Radio users being denied freedom 0 are those
> who are also GNU wget users.

This is a bunk argument.  If, for example, a server is set up to deny
you access to files because you don't have an account and, thus, you
cannot download them with wget, the server is not denying freedom 0 to
you.  If wget weren't free software and it had secret code in it that
prevented you from downloading legitimately available files from a
server, then freedom 0 would be denied.

Is GNU denying you freedom 0 because we don't let you use wget to
download files from our private servers without an account?  Of course
not.  You're still using wget however you want (to download files that,
for any given reason, are not available to you).  You're just not
getting the results that you want.

Or, to be more absurd, the fact that reality won't allow me to use wget
to download 10 kg of gold doesn't mean that reality is denying me
freedom 0 in my usage of wget.  I'm free to try using wget for such a
silly purpose, but I might as well prepare myself for disappointment.

Whether gnuradio.org is actively blocking Tor users can be discussed
(and discussed and discussed, going around in circles apparently), but
the discussion is completely unrelated to freedom 0.

-brandon