FSFE/fsfe-website
25
31
Fork 91
Code Issues 65 Pull Requests 12 Wiki Activity

overhaul: editing sections, changing pictures, adding modules

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
lucas.lasota
2022-08-14 17:39:09 +02:00
parent 5c4c90571b
commit 4b94ef4a98
1 changed files with 192 additions and 99 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

291
activities/deviceneutrality/devices.en.xhtml
View File

@@ -60,16 +60,84 @@
</ol>
</div>
<h2>General Purpose Computers and Free Software</h2>
<h2 id="dn-re-empowerement">Devices and End-User Re-Empowerement</h2>
<p>
We all know the joy of acquiring a new device and the excitement of exploring
the new features and functionalities. Let's imagine the scenario where you
bought a new Android smartphone.
</p>
<p>
You are thrilled to learn and discover all what your device can deliver.
You want to install apps, use the camera, acess the internet,
run games, and enjoy all what your equipment can perform.
However, soon you start to realise something wrong. In order to start your
phone, you are prompted to create an online account for using our device,
even if you are not up to.
</p>
<p>
Further you begin to perceive how limited your to donwload and install new apps and
programs. The only possible way is via the manufacturer's app store or marketplace.
You may be even forbidden to sideload or install third party software,
including <a href="https://www.f-droid.org/">alternative repositories</a>.
Most weirdly, are not allowed to unistall pre-installed programs that are unpurposely
occupying the device's memory and unduly draining its battery.
</p>
<p>
You may think this is an issue with the operating system and start searching
for alternatives. However, your device boots only a specific proprietary operating
system. In other words, you cannot install a different OS. Finally you sadly realise,
although your smartphone is a general purpose computer, you are stuck with an
artificially limited device which perfoms much less than you expected.
</p>
<figure class="no-border">
<img
src="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/big/d0988bf4e317a6cd7953689adf50b573.jpg"
alt="Alt: Person staring at smartphone at the table." />
<figcaption>
Limitations to Free Software, vendor lock-in and lack of control over personal
data are current hurdles faced by end-users in digital markets.
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>
Issues like these, and many others related to browsers, search engines and
to hardware are common occurance in digital markets. End-users are experimenting
a severe limitation on their rights and ability to freely use their devices.
Basic freedoms as installing and unistalling software are being unfairly limited
by these companies, commonly refered as "gatekeepers", because of their
monopolistic control over devices.
</p>
<p>
Device Neutrality is a policy concept to enable end-users to bypass gatekeepers
in order to run Free Software and use services independently of the the control
exercised by hardware manufacturers, vendors and platforms. In this page
you will learn that Device Neutrality can be achieved by safeguarding
software freedom in devices, protecting end-users from lock-in
and promoting standardized ways of data interoperability.
</p>
<h2 id="general-purpose-computer-free-software">General Purpose Computers and Free Software</h2>
<p>
Digital devices are a present reality in all aspects of life. We use them
for work, communication, entertainment and internet access. Such devices
are powerful machines, allowing us to have access to a huge amount of
features, and perform an infinite number of tasks. Our smartphones,
tablets, laptops and other connected devices are <i>general purpose
computers</i>. It means we can potentially run any software we want to
make full use of the hardware. Software freedom depends on how we can run
tablets, laptops and other connected devices are <strong>general purpose
computers</strong>. It means we can potentially run any software we want to
make full use of the hardware. This potential is fostered by Free Software.
</p>
<p>
Software freedom depends on how we can run
software in devices. Safeguarding <a
href="/freesoftware/freesoftware.html">the four freedoms of Free Software</a>
over operating systems, drivers, app stores, browsers and any software is
@@ -77,44 +145,51 @@
competitive and democratic digital environment.
</p>
<figure class="max-width-100 no-border">
<figure class="no-border">
<img
src="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/medium/f249f62be8feafee1ce40b9128c91a11.jpg"
alt="Several people working together in a table with different kinds of devices." />
src="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/medium/d534afb7636cafbee2ec91bda7283ec0.png"
alt="Drawings of a computer and smartphone." />
<figcaption>
We use and interact with devices every day. Software freedom depends on
how we can control them. Photo credit: Helena Lopes, Unsplash License.
Everyone should be able to run the software they want on their general purpose computers.
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Gatekeeper Control and Monopoly over Devices</h2>
<h2 id="gatekeeper-control-monopoly-devices">Gatekeeper Monopoly over Devices</h2>
<p>
<p>
Although the devices we use are general purpose computers, device
manufacturers, vendors and internet platforms have been restricting
software freedom due by exercising their monopolistic control over our
equipment. Operating systems, browsers and app-stores constitute a
<i>termination monopoly</i> which grants such companies powers in the
sense that they could be considered <i>gatekeepers</i> of gateways for
end-users to access and control software running on their devices.
software freedom due by exercising their monopolistic control over end-user
equipment. This power is exercised over key features and components of
devices such as operating systems, browsers and app-stores. Since these elements
are essential for the functioning of devices, they constitute a
<strong>termination monopoly</strong>, which grants such companies powers in the
sense that they could be considered "gatekeepers of gateways" for
end-users to access and control software, hardware and services of their devices.
</p>
<p>
Therefore, manufacturers, vendors and platforms controlling devices may
perform a <i>gatekeeper function</i> in similar ways that a provider of
an internet access connection controls a <i>gateway</i> to the internet. For
instance, today's reality of digital markets demonstrate that end-users
have very few alternatives concerning operating systems and app-stores for
mobile devices. Browser market is also highly concentrated. Even worse is
the access and control over the operating system of connected devices
such as smartwatches and internet of things (IoT) equipment. In general
terms, tech companies achieve their gatekeeper power by:
</p>
Manufacturers, vendors and platforms controlling devices may
perform a <strong>gatekeeper function</strong> in similar ways that a provider of
an internet access connection controls a gateway to the internet. Depending how
important the device features and components are for end-users, the more
entranched the position of the gatekeeper can become in the digital markets.
</p>
<p>
Monopolised markets are prejudicial for fair competition
and consumer welfare. Gatekeepers control over operating systems,
app-stores, browsers and key online services end-users are left
with few choices, hindering individual freedoms and self-determination.
In general terms, gatekeeper control is achieved by:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
<strong>Restricting Software Freedom</strong>: Gatekeepers limit users
to install different operating systems, browsers, apps stores, drivers,
<strong>Restricting Software Freedom</strong>:Gatekeepers limit users to
install different operating systems, browsers, apps stores, drivers,
etc. on their devices. They also impose on users pre-installed apps and
control their uninstallation.
</li>
@@ -133,17 +208,24 @@
software, devices and services.
</li>
</ul>
<figure class="max-width-100 no-border">
<figure class="no-border">
<a
href="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/big/6bf2afc0835df12555350fd4f765acfa.png">
href="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/medium/77a19abc35b147a07d16525ddf38b37a.png">
<img
src="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/big/6bf2afc0835df12555350fd4f765acfa.png"
alt="Gatekeeper power over devices: restricting software freedom, locking devices down and increasing switching costs." />
src="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/medium/77a19abc35b147a07d16525ddf38b37a.png"
alt="Alt: Drawing of smartphone, a person and locked devices." />
</a>
<figcaption>
Gatekeeper power over devices: restricting software freedom, locking devices down and increasing switching costs.
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Device Neutrality and Free Software</h2>
<module id="banner-subscribe" />
<h2 id="device-neutrality-free-software">Device Neutrality and Free Software</h2>
<p>
The monopolistic power of gatekeepers threats software freedom, individual
@@ -157,76 +239,87 @@
</p>
<p>
Since its genesis, the FSFE has been working to put control over
technology in the hands of end-users. Along the years, we have gained
experience with several dedicated activities focused on how users can keep
their control over devices. For us, re-establishing user control over
devices and fair competition on digital markets require the fostering and
protection of the following principles:
Re-establishing end-user control over devices and fair competition in digital
markets require safeguarding software freedom in devices, protecting end-users
from lock-in and promoting end-user control over data.
</p>
<figure class="max-width-100 no-border">
<a
href="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/big/5c451f840cf325cf4dfddf2fa243ec26.jpg">
<img
src="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/big/5c451f840cf325cf4dfddf2fa243ec26.jpg"
alt="Device Neutrality Principles: software freedom, no vendor lock-in and end-user control over data." />
</a>
</figure>
<div class="icon-grid one-per-row">
<ul>
<li>
<img src="/graphics/icons/autonomy.png" alt="" />
<div>
<h3 id="dn-software-freedom">Software Freedom</h3>
<p>
Blocking end-users' freedom to install, run and uninstall software on
their devices is a central source of gatekeepers control. Although gatekeepers may
argue that installing third party software could be potentially harmful to users due to
security, data integrity and privacy concerns, in fact commercial
interests are the main drive to lock users in. Instead, regaining
control over devices require safeguarding software freedom. Users should
have the ability to install and uninstall any software, including
operating systems and app stores. Besides, gatekeepers should provide to
third party software the same access privileges as the pre-installed
ones.
</p>
</div>
</li>
<ul>
<li>
<strong>Software Freedom</strong>: blocking end-users' freedom to
install, run and uninstall software on their devices is a central source
of gatekeepers control. Although gatekeepers may argue that installing
third party software could be potentially harmful to users due to
security, data integrity and privacy concerns, in fact commercial
interests are the main drive to lock users in. Instead, regaining
control over devices require safeguarding software freedom. Users should
have the ability to install and uninstall any software, including
operating systems and app stores. Besides, gatekeepers should provide to
third party software the same access privileges as the pre-installed
ones.
</li>
<li>
<img src="/graphics/icons/no-lock-in.png" alt="" />
<div>
<h3 id="dn-no-lock-in">No Lock-In</h3>
<p>
Keeping users in very restrictive
environments is another key source of gatekeeper control. Users can only
access and use different services if their devices can interact and
communicate with other devices and services. Big tech exercises direct
control over their customers by locking them into a very limited number
of proprietary alternatives that operate within a "compatible" but not
interoperable ecosystem. This results in less freedom for users and
increasing of switching costs. Therefore, high degrees of
interoperability, wide implementation of <a
href="/freesoftware/standards/index.html">Open Standards</a> and easy
access to APIs' specifications and functionalities invoked by third
party apps are fundamental. Equally important, devices should not be
bundled with app stores and online accounts. Gatekeepers should permit
third-party app stores and code repositories in their devices.
Gatekeepers should provide non-discriminatory access to Free Software in
their stores and not favour or give undue preference to their own
products.
</p>
</div>
</li>
<li>
<img src="/graphics/icons/transparency.png" alt="" />
<div>
<h3 id="dn-control-over-data">End-User Control Over Data</h3>
<p>
Breaking monopolies over
devices necessarily requires empowering users to control their own data
on equipment. Smartphones, smartwatches and computers are very personal
equipment which accumulate a large amount of personal and non-personal
data that users care about. Such data constitutes a switching cost that,
taken together, can be decisive for users to exercise their freedom to
changing devices. This is especially problematic for switching between
operating systems. Besides, the importance of the correlation between
data and software tends to grow, encompassing further developments with
artificial intelligence and future technologies, which will create an
additional layer of complexity for end-users controlling their data.
That's why end-users should be able to easily transfer personal data
from apps, operating systems and devices. Most importantly, gatekeepers
should be bound to <a href="/freesoftware/standards/index.html">Open
Standards</a> and common interfaces for data transfer.
</p>
</div>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<li>
<strong>No lock-in</strong>: Keeping users in very restrictive
environments is another key source of gatekeeper control. Users can only
access and use different services if their devices can interact and
communicate with other devices and services. Big tech exercises direct
control over their customers by locking them into a very limited number
of proprietary alternatives that operate within a "compatible" but not
interoperable ecosystem. This results in less freedom for users and
increasing of switching costs. Therefore, high degrees of
interoperability, wide implementation of <a
href="/freesoftware/standards/index.html">Open Standards</a> and easy
access to APIs' specifications and functionalities invoked by third
party apps are fundamental. Equally important, devices should not be
bundled with app stores and online accounts. Gatekeepers should permit
third-party app stores and code repositories in their devices.
Gatekeepers should provide non-discriminatory access to Free Software in
their stores and not favour or give undue preference to their own
products.
</li>
<li>
<strong>End-user control over data</strong>: Breaking monopolies over
devices necessarily requires empowering users to control their own data
on equipment. Smartphones, smartwatches and computers are very personal
equipment which accumulate a large amount of personal and non-personal
data that users care about. Such data constitutes a switching cost that,
taken together, can be decisive for users to exercise their freedom to
changing devices. This is especially problematic for switching between
operating systems. Besides, the importance of the correlation between
data and software tends to grow, encompassing further developments with
artificial intelligence and future technologies, which will create an
additional layer of complexity for end-users controlling their data.
That's why end-users should be able to easily transfer personal data
from apps, operating systems and devices. Most importantly, gatekeepers
should be bound to <a href="/freesoftware/standards/index.html">Open
Standards</a> and common interfaces for data transfer.
</li>
</ul>
<hr />