A #ThankGNU! to Arthur Gleckler and David Klann for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

Success for #softwarefreedom in @fsfe's intervention against #Apple in front of the European Court of Justice!! Big thank you to @llas who is coordinating the activity, our lawyer Martin Husovec, plus Jithendra, Dario, our interns Ben and Anna Rita, and the rest of the @fsfe team working on this!

https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260708-01.en.html

A #ThankGNU! to Yon-Seo Kim and Zacchae Us for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

The Digital Lease: Why You No Longer Own Your Hardware

4,199 words, 22 minutes read time.

I recently sat down to perform a simple, logical task: backing up my Android phone directly to my personal computer. It is a procedure I have executed countless times without incident over my 25+ years in IT. I wanted a local copy—a static file under my absolute control—to ensure that if the network failed or the manufacturer decided to restrict my access, my data would remain mine. I quickly hit a wall. There is no native option to perform this transfer, not even through traditional ADB commands; when I queried an AI search tool about it, the confirmation was stark: there is no longer a way to perform a true, system-wide backup to a local machine outside of manually copying files I select individually. The software is designed to force you into their proprietary cloud. You are not backing up your data to your own infrastructure; you are surrendering it to a server over which you have zero authority.

This is not a technical limitation; it is a calculated design choice. The industry has moved beyond the simple profit margin of a one-time hardware sale. That device in your pocket is merely an entry fee into their managed ecosystem. The real, long-term revenue is not in the metal and the silicon; it is in the data stream. By forcing your device to communicate exclusively with their cloud infrastructure, they ensure a constant flow of telemetry, behavioral patterns, and personal data. This data is the raw fuel for the advertising models that subsidize their bottom line.

They lock down the hardware to ensure you cannot bypass these requirements. They use secure boot, encrypted partitions, and restrictive firmware to prevent you from installing an operating system that respects your privacy. Every time you are forced to use their apps, you are being served targeted advertisements and having your usage habits profiled. You are not the customer of these services; you are the product. They have turned your own hardware into a tether, ensuring you are constantly connected to a network that monitors your every move.

This is why they fight the Right to Repair with such fervor. It is not about protecting the security of the device. It is about protecting the sanctity of the data extraction pipeline. If you could repair, modify, or strip the software layers from your device, you could potentially cut off the telemetry and reclaim your privacy. That is an existential threat to their business model. They need you to remain inside their walled garden, dependent on their servers, and vulnerable to their terms of service.

To understand how this system of control functions and how it is being dismantled, we must analyze three critical factors:

• The Business of Perpetual Dependence: The systemic move toward cloud-exclusive management, which shifts hardware from an asset you own to a service you lease through data extraction.
• The Legal Precedents of Erosion and Resistance: The mounting body of legal actions and regulatory scrutiny that prove the industry’s “security” arguments are often pretexts for illegal repair monopolies.
• The Cost of Digital Compliance and the Sovereignty Shift: Why the status quo is a form of managed decline and how organizations—from individual operators to national governments—are beginning to reclaim autonomy through a migration toward open-source infrastructure.

The Business of Perpetual Dependence

The shift to cloud-exclusive management is a strategic move to eliminate the independent user. By centralizing everything, the industry gains total control over the software lifecycle. They can push updates that you cannot refuse, track features that you use, and throttle performance to nudge you toward the next hardware upgrade. The hardware is just the physical manifestation of a service subscription that you can never truly cancel. When they use terms like “security” or “optimization,” they are actually talking about their continued access to your data.

This creates a power dynamic where you are constantly at a disadvantage. You are paying for the device, paying for the cloud storage, and paying with your personal data. You are funding the very mechanism that limits your choices and restricts your autonomy. This is a closed-loop system designed for extraction. They have effectively turned the convenience of the cloud into a trap, making it nearly impossible to live a modern digital life without consenting to terms that undermine your property rights.

Legal scrutiny has begun to expose the reality behind these models. Courts have addressed cases where companies unilaterally altered terms of service or functionality, stripping users of features they paid for. In various class-action settlements, corporations have been forced to pay millions after being found liable for deceptive practices regarding forced performance throttling and the elimination of local storage functionality. These legal battles prove that when functionality is tethered to a remote server, the user has no leverage. The courts are confirming what we already know: the service model is often a mask for stripping away the consumer’s right to stable, predictable access to their own digital assets.

The lack of a true, native local backup—which I experienced firsthand when trying to back up my own device—serves as the ultimate proof of this intent. It demonstrates that the industry has prioritized data harvesting over user autonomy, forcing you into a pipeline where your information is captured by design. If these manufacturers truly cared about the integrity of your data, they would provide robust, user-accessible, offline backup tools that do not require an active internet connection or account authentication. The reality is that your data is far more valuable to them when it sits on their servers, where they can analyze, monetize, and leverage it for their own growth at the expense of your privacy.

This systematic stripping of your control is not an isolated annoyance; it is a fundamental shift in the relationship between the consumer and the technology they rely on. When the product is the data, the manufacturer has every incentive to make the “offline” world as difficult and restricted as possible. However, this aggressive expansion of corporate reach has not gone entirely unchecked. Courts and regulatory bodies are beginning to recognize that these practices often cross the line from standard business operations into deceptive and anticompetitive behavior. The following legal precedents demonstrate that while the industry is intent on securing total control, they are not immune to the consequences of their overreach.

Legal Precedents and the Erosion of Control

The battle over hardware autonomy has played out in multiple courtrooms, where the industry’s “authorized repair” models have faced significant pushback. Plaintiffs have successfully argued that forcing consumers into proprietary ecosystems is not a matter of security, but a tactic to create illegal repair monopolies. When manufacturers combine hardware sales with software-locked maintenance, they effectively bypass the consumer’s right to choose how they service their own property. These legal losses underscore that the industry’s arguments regarding “device integrity” are often thin veils for market control.

While the following cases are pivotal, they represent only a fraction of the mounting legal challenges being brought against restrictive corporate practices across the technology and industrial sectors.

• In re: Apple Inc. Device Performance Litigation (2023): This landmark case addressed the “throttling” of processor power in older devices via software updates. Plaintiffs alleged that the manufacturer purposefully slowed down older models to force consumers into buying new ones, under the guise of “battery management.” The court eventually approved a $310 million settlement, validating the claim that manufacturers cannot unilaterally degrade the performance of hardware you already own.
• Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. (1992): In a foundational antitrust ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a manufacturer could not use its market power in one area (parts for their machines) to force consumers into an unwanted market (service/repair). This case established that restricting access to parts and diagnostics for the sole purpose of maintaining a service monopoly is an actionable anticompetitive practice.
• Sony “Other OS” Litigation (2016): This class-action lawsuit targeted the removal of the “Install Other OS” feature on the PlayStation 3 via a mandatory firmware update. After years of litigation, Sony agreed to a multi-million dollar settlement. This case proved that manufacturers cannot simply disable advertised hardware functionality after the sale without facing financial consequences.
• Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) vs. Bambu Lab (2026): In a major modern escalation, the SFC has launched a multi-pronged campaign against Bambu Lab for clear violations of the Affero General Public License (AGPLv3). Bambu Lab attempted to use its Terms of Service to bully independent developers into silence and keep its networking plugins as proprietary “black boxes.” The SFC’s intervention—which includes reverse-engineering the restricted code and providing legal protection for community developers—serves as a critical stand against the industry’s attempt to use “proprietary” labels to bypass open-source obligations and impose illegal restrictions on user rights.

These legal outcomes are the first cracks in a system designed to extract value through dependence. They provide the necessary framework for individual action, signaling that the industry cannot unilaterally define the limits of your ownership. When you push for transparency and access, you are not just asking for a favor; you are reclaiming a right that has been legally recognized as being stripped away by overreaching corporate policies. You must use these precedents as proof that the status quo is not only unethical but legally indefensible.

The significance of these court cases lies in the dismantling of the “security” argument. For years, the industry has claimed that allowing third-party repairs or local software control would invite catastrophic vulnerabilities. Yet, when forced to provide diagnostic tools, the promised collapse of device security never materialized. This proves that the locking mechanism was never about your protection; it was about protecting the revenue stream generated by exclusive repair contracts and data-harvesting ecosystems. The court’s intervention also clarifies the distinction between a software license and physical hardware. By ruling that consumers must have the ability to repair, the legal system is effectively stating that the software on your device cannot be used as a leash to dictate your hardware’s fate.

The Cost of Digital Compliance

Living under this model is a form of managed decline. You are losing the ability to interact with technology on your own terms. You are being forced to accept whatever limitations, privacy-invasive features, or forced advertisements they decide to push. You are becoming a passive participant in a system that views your autonomy as an inconvenience to be managed. This is not the future of innovation; it is a calculated future of total control.

If you value your independence, you must start looking for alternatives. This means finding hardware that supports open-source alternatives, using software that allows for local control, and being willing to sacrifice some of the “seamless” features that are actually just conduits for data harvesting. It is not easy, and it requires a fundamental change in mindset. You have to stop viewing your device as a consumer product and start viewing it as a piece of infrastructure that you are responsible for maintaining and securing.

The industry will continue to push for more control, more cloud integration, and more data extraction. They have the resources and the momentum, but you still have the choice of what to buy, how to use it, and how much of your autonomy you are willing to surrender. The first step is acknowledging the trap. The second step is refusing to play the game on their terms. Do not let the convenience of the cloud blind you to the heavy price of your digital sovereignty.

Establishing Your Perimeter

Reclaiming your digital life begins with shifting from a reactive consumer to an active operator. Start by auditing your current stack. If a device requires an active, persistent connection to a proprietary cloud just to function, you have already lost the battle for control. You need to prioritize hardware that offers local API access, offline-first functionality, and open firmware. Every piece of equipment you own should be evaluated for its ability to operate independently of a corporate server. If it cannot, it is not an asset—it is a liability waiting for a shutdown signal.

This transition requires you to develop new technical competencies. Learn to manage your own backups, preferably using encrypted, offline storage that you own and secure. Explore open-source operating systems that do not include built-in telemetry or forced account requirements. Yes, this will require effort. It will require you to learn how your systems function and how to secure them against unauthorized access. This is the price of admission for independence in a world that wants you to be a passive, data-generating node.

Finally, recognize that your participation is what fuels their model. Every time you opt for the “easy” cloud-locked solution, you validate the industry’s strategy. When you choose an open-source alternative—even when it is less convenient—you starve the extraction pipeline and strengthen the market for privacy-respecting technology. You are not just upgrading your tech; you are casting a vote for a future where you retain ownership of your tools and your life. The building is burning; start building your exit strategy now.

The Sovereignty Shift: Why the Linux Migration is Accelerating

The era of blind reliance on a single proprietary vendor is nearing its breaking point. We are currently witnessing a “quiet revolution” where governments and major enterprises are initiating a migration toward Linux, driven by a desperate need for digital sovereignty and stability.

This is not a hobbyist trend; it is a calculated response to the reality that relying on foreign-controlled software stacks introduces systemic risk that no responsible entity can afford to ignore.

The catalyst for this shift is becoming impossible to hide. When a dominant OS provider releases a “security update” that simultaneously breaks boot sequences, triggers BitLocker recovery loops, or bricks enterprise-grade hardware, the business case for proprietary software evaporates. For a government or a large-scale organization, a forced upgrade cycle that destroys productivity is not just an inconvenience—it is a catastrophic failure of operational readiness. Leaders are waking up to the fact that they have surrendered their “off switch” to a third party that views their stability as secondary to its own release schedule.

Sovereignty as a Strategic Mandate

The concept of “digital sovereignty” has moved from abstract policy debates to concrete implementation.

Nations across Europe—most notably France—are actively dismantling their reliance on foreign tech providers.

France’s Interministerial Digital Directorate (DINUM) has officially announced it is moving its own workstations from Windows to Linux and has mandated that all government ministries formalize plans to eliminate extra-European digital dependencies by autumn 2026. This is a fundamental shift intended to reclaim control over the public IT ecosystem, ensuring that pricing, security, and updates are no longer dictated by the strategic priorities of a foreign corporation.

This movement is gaining momentum because it solves the “captive customer” problem. Proprietary vendors thrive on keeping users in an infinite upgrade loop, locking data behind proprietary formats, and forcing telemetry-heavy software that bleeds system resources. By contrast, Linux allows institutions to build, maintain, and audit their own software stacks.

When the underlying code is open, a nation—or a company—is no longer vulnerable to a vendor’s arbitrary decision to sunset a product or restrict access. They own their infrastructure, and by extension, they secure their own future.

The Economic and Technical Reality

The transition is being fueled by hard economics.

The cost of proprietary licensing, combined with the rising price of PC hardware, has created a “hardware-software crisis” that Linux is uniquely positioned to solve. Linux distributions are lighter, more efficient, and capable of breathing new life into aging hardware, allowing organizations to avoid the treadmill of mandatory hardware refreshes. As the professional software gap closes—with high-end creative and productivity tools now running natively on Linux—the last remaining excuses for staying locked in a proprietary ecosystem have largely vanished.

This is a structural transformation, not a passing fad. Companies and governments that have already transitioned report quantifiable gains: lower licensing costs, tighter security, and the ability to deploy systems without the constant threat of external interference.

The revolution is quiet, but it is profound. It is a rebalancing of power that favors those who prioritize independence over convenience. If you are still tethered to an ecosystem that dictates your terms of operation, you are operating from a position of weakness. The exit strategy is available; the only question is whether you have the discipline to execute it before the next mandatory update forces your hand.

Conclusion: The Path to Digital Autonomy

We have been sold a lie: the idea that convenience requires us to surrender ownership. The industry’s transition to cloud-exclusive management and locked-down hardware is not an evolution; it is a calculated extraction of your digital agency. They have transformed the tools you paid for into tethered devices that function as conduits for telemetry and advertising. When you are denied the ability to perform a simple local backup, you aren’t just facing a software limitation—you are witnessing the systemic removal of your right to control your own data.

This is a model designed for total dependence. By monopolizing your software lifecycle, throttling your hardware, and forcing you into walled gardens, these corporations have turned your digital life into a subscription service you can never cancel. But this model has a vulnerability: it requires your ongoing, passive compliance. The moment you decide to operate independently is the moment their extraction model begins to fail.

The evidence of this backlash is already mounting. From major class-action settlements that punish manufacturers for deceptive performance throttling, to the proactive migration of entire nations toward open-source infrastructure, the era of unquestioned vendor dominance is ending. The movement toward Linux is not merely a technical preference; it is a strategic assertion of sovereignty by entities—governments, ministries, and enterprises—that have realized they cannot afford to outsource their “off switch” to a foreign corporation.

To reclaim your digital life, you must commit to the following principles:

• Audit Your Dependencies: A tool that requires a persistent cloud connection to function is not an asset; it is a liability. Identify every point where a third party holds the keys to your data or your hardware’s operation.
• Prioritize Local Control: Invest in hardware and software that supports offline functionality. If you cannot back it up yourself and verify its state, you do not truly own it.
• Reject the “Default” Path: Convenience is the primary lure used to strip away your autonomy. Opting for open-source, transparent, and modular systems—even when they require a higher barrier to entry—is the only way to break the cycle of extraction.
• Demand Transparency and Interoperability: Support the standards and legislation that force companies to open their ecosystems. Use your purchasing power to reward manufacturers that respect your right to repair, audit, and maintain your equipment.

The building is burning, and the fire is fueled by your data. Stop feeding the machine. Start building your own infrastructure, one component at a time. Digital sovereignty is not a status you are granted; it is a perimeter you defend. The choice is yours: remain a passive, monitored node in someone else’s network, or take the helm of your own digital future.

The Hardware You Bought: Stop Leasing Your Own Property

I recently sat down to perform a simple, logical task: backing up my Android phone directly to my personal computer. It is a procedure I have executed countless times without incident over my 25+ years in IT. I wanted a local copy—a static file under my absolute control—to ensure that if the network failed or the manufacturer decided to restrict my access, my data would remain mine. I quickly hit a wall. There is no native option to perform this transfer, not even through traditional ADB commands; when I queried an AI search tool about it, the confirmation was stark: there is no longer a way to perform a true, system-wide backup to a local machine outside of manually copying files I select individually. The software is designed to force you into their proprietary cloud. You are not backing up your data to your own infrastructure; you are surrendering it to a server over which you have zero authority.

This is not a technical limitation; it is a calculated design choice. The industry has moved beyond the simple profit margin of a one-time hardware sale. That device in your pocket is merely an entry fee into their managed ecosystem. The real, long-term revenue is not in the metal and the silicon; it is in the data stream. By forcing your device to communicate exclusively with their cloud infrastructure, they ensure a constant flow of telemetry, behavioral patterns, and personal data. This data is the raw fuel for the advertising models that subsidize their bottom line.

A Warning: The End of Private Operation

Understand the trajectory we are on. Legislation is already in motion—and much of it is already law—that codifies the “managed” nature of your property. By 2027, federal mandates will require new vehicles to be equipped with “advanced impaired-driving detection technology.” These systems use in-cabin cameras and sensors to monitor your eyes, head position, and driving behavior. If the car decides you are “impaired,” it can limit your speed, force you to stop, or even report you to the police. This is not about safety; it is about the state and the manufacturer installing a permanent, mandatory witness inside your vehicle.

Simultaneously, the push for federal privacy legislation is largely a Trojan horse, designed to preempt stricter state-level protections and lock in corporate surveillance as the “standard.” We are rapidly approaching a reality where your private documents, communications, and movements are expected to be transparent, indexed, and accessible to third parties by default. If your equipment can be managed by someone else, it will be.

To understand how this system of control functions and how it is being dismantled, we must analyze three critical factors:

• The Business of Perpetual Dependence: The systemic move toward cloud-exclusive management, which shifts hardware from an asset you own to a service you lease through data extraction.
• The Legal Precedents of Erosion and Resistance: The mounting body of legal actions and regulatory scrutiny that prove the industry’s “security” arguments are often pretexts for illegal repair monopolies.
• The Cost of Digital Compliance and the Sovereignty Shift: Why the status quo is a form of managed decline and how organizations—from individual operators to national governments—are beginning to reclaim autonomy through a migration toward open-source infrastructure.

Your Tactical Plan for Ownership

1. Join the Frontline Organizations: Stop fighting alone. Put your resources behind the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). These organizations provide the legal muscle and advocacy necessary to challenge restrictive corporate practices on a structural level.
2. Weaponize Your Representation: Call your state and federal representatives. Do not send an email; make the call. Demand legislation that enforces true interoperability, mandates the right to repair, and prohibits manufacturers from disabling local functionality via mandatory software updates. They work for you; remind them of it.
3. Support Right-to-Repair Advocates: Follow and support figures like Louis Rossmann. His advocacy is not just about fixing screens; it is about dismantling the monopolies that prevent you from owning the hardware you paid for. If he exposes a new corporate restriction, share it. Visibility is a weapon.
4. Execute the “Hardware Purge”: Identify the devices in your life that are “service-tethered” bricks. If a device refuses to function without a persistent cloud connection, it is a liability. Replace it with hardware that supports open firmware or independent operating systems. Every proprietary device you remove from your network is one less data point for them to exploit.
5. Force the Migration to Linux: If you have the technical capacity, make the switch. If you are in a decision-making position at your workplace, champion the migration to Linux-based workstations. Point to the European government initiatives—such as the French DINUM project—as the professional, fiscally responsible standard for digital sovereignty.
6. De-Google and De-Microsoft Your Workflow: Stop using proprietary “ecosystems” for your core data. Move your documents to local storage. Use encrypted, offline backups as your primary vault. Use tools that allow you to export your data in open, non-proprietary formats that you can move, manipulate, and own without seeking permission from a server.
7. Participate in Community-Led Governance: Engage with open-source projects that are actively building the tools we need to replace the proprietary stack. Whether it is contributing to documentation, testing new builds, or simply participating in the forums where these solutions are developed, your active involvement keeps these alternatives robust and viable.

The exit strategy is open. Build it before they close the doors. Reclaim your property, secure your data, and stop serving a system that treats your hardware like a rental. Start your migration now.

SUPPORT

SUBSCRIBE

CONTACT ME

D. Bryan King

Sources

• Right to Repair – Wikipedia
• National Right to Repair – Access to and Control of Vehicle Data | Auto Care
• France ditches Microsoft for Linux to achieve digital sovereignty
• France to Replace Windows with Linux Desktops for Digital Sovereignty
• U.S. Mandates AI-Driven Driver Monitoring Systems in All New Vehicles by 2027 – OECD.AI
• Your Car May Soon Be Monitoring Everything You Do Behind The Wheel
• What Is Vendor Lock-In? | Vendor Lock-In and Cloud Computing
• Enterprise data extraction: How AI turns documents into workflow-ready data
• Free Software Foundation (FSF)
• Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
• Rossmann Repair Group
• The Linux Foundation
• PrivacyTools: Encryption and Privacy Resources
• De-Google-ify Internet
• Debian: The Universal Operating System
• Arch Linux: Simple, Lightweight, User-Centric
• Privacy Guides
• What is Free Software? – GNU Project
• The Repair Association
• iFixit: The Free Repair Manual
• LibreOffice: Free Office Productivity Suite
• ONLYOFFICE: Open Source Office Docs
• Syncthing: Continuous File Synchronization
• Nextcloud: A Safe Home for Your Data
• The Matrix Protocol: Open Network for Secure Communication
• GrapheneOS: The Private and Secure Mobile OS
• CalyxOS: Privacy by Design
• Tails: Incognito Live System
• Whonix: Anonymous Operating System
• Pi-hole: A Black Hole for Internet Advertisements
• WireGuard: Modern VPN Protocol
• Caddy: The Ultimate HTTP/2 Web Server
• Nginx Proxy Manager
• Open Firmware Project
• Coreboot: Replacing Proprietary BIOS
• Librem One: Privacy-Respecting Services
• Purism: Security and Privacy Hardware
• System76: Open Source Hardware and Linux
• Framework: The Repairable Laptop
• Pine64: Open Source Mobile and Computing
• Digital Sovereignty Initiative
• European Digital Rights (EDRi)
• Access Now: Defending Digital Civil Rights
• Privacy International
• EFF Right to Repair Issues
• The Right to Read – GNU Project
• Free Software Foundation Europe
• CISA Software Transparency Resources
• NIST Privacy Framework
• The Linux Kernel Archives

Disclaimer:

The views and opinions expressed in this post are solely those of the author. The information provided is based on personal research, experience, and understanding of the subject matter at the time of writing. Readers should consult relevant experts or authorities for specific guidance related to their unique situations.

Related Posts

Rate this:

#AndroidBackupIssues #antiSurveillance #autonomousSystems #cloudTethering #corporateMonitoring #cyberSovereignty #dataExtraction #dataSecurity #dataSovereigntyMovement #deGoogle #digitalAgency #digitalAutonomy #digitalControl #digitalInfrastructure #digitalRights #digitalSovereignty #EFF #encryptedBackups #FSF #governmentSurveillance #hardwareOwnership #hardwareRepair #impairedDrivingDetection #LinuxMigration #localStorage #LouisRossmann #offlineFirst #openFirmware #openSourceSoftware #openStandards #ownYourHardware #personalDataPrivacy #privacyAdvocates #privacyFocusedTech #proprietarySoftware #RightToRepair #selfHostedInfrastructure #softwareDependency #softwareFreedom #sovereignComputing #surveillanceCapitalism #systemTransparency #techAccountability #techIndependence #techManifesto #techMonopoly #userRights #vehiclePrivacy #vendorLockIn

A #ThankGNU! to Richard Zweiler, Steven Morrealle, and the Anonymous Fund of Triangle Community Foundation for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Maks Romih and the Opus Qua Foundation for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Deborah Jackson and Logan Edwards for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Colin Carr and David Potter for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

The campaigns team has been focused on the latest threats to #SoftwareFreedom and promoting digital rights around the globe: https://u.fsf.org/4bm #FSF #GNU

@kirschner, president of @fsfe, is coming to DWeb Camp to read “Ada & Zangemann - A Tale of Software, Skateboards, and Raspberry Ice Cream”

https://talx.dod.ngo/dwebcamp-2026/talk/83EYB7/

🍦 We will be serving organic ice cream for free after the reading 😋

➡️ Full schedule here: https://dwebcamp.org/schedule

#DWeb #DWebCamp #FreeSoftware #SoftwareFreedom #FSFE #Berlin #camp #reading

Alt...

Profile picture of MK in a graphic with the title of the talk

A #ThankGNU! to Alain Greppin and Catalin Francu for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

Lodging options include both shared, dorm-style and private suites.

The block is available until End of Day Monday July 5th, Cancelable up to 72 hours before your reservation starts.

https://2026.fossy.ca/travel/
https://2026.fossy.ca/schedule/

#Vancouver #Canada #FOSS #OpenSource #FreeSoftware #SoftwareFreedom #FOSSY

A #ThankGNU! to Norm Gunn, Raffael Stocker, and Ryo Nakamura for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Adam Oberbeck and Edward Flick for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Howard Pan, Reynaldo Cordero, and Ron Hume for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Arthur Gleckler and David Klann for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to the Sheila, Dave and Sherry Gold Foundation and Tom Benjamin Radtke for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Norm Gunn, Raffael Stocker, and Ryo Nakamura for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Adam Oberbeck and Edward Flick for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Howard Pan, Reynaldo Cordero, and Ron Hume for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Arthur Gleckler and David Klann for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to the Sheila, Dave and Sherry Gold Foundation and Tom Benjamin Radtke for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Norm Gunn, Raffael Stocker, and Ryo Nakamura for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Adam Oberbeck and Edward Flick for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Arthur Gleckler and David Klann for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to the Sheila, Dave and Sherry Gold Foundation and Tom Benjamin Radtke for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

A #ThankGNU! to Norm Gunn, Raffael Stocker, and Ryo Nakamura for helping the FSF to promote #FreeSoftware. To see a longer list of those who have helped us financially in our advocacy for #SoftwareFreedom and awareness, visit: https://u.fsf.org/4ao

Alt...

Image that says 'Thank GNU' with a GNU head by Vijay Kumar Bagavath Singh

https://youtu.be/Nhz6vao13bs

[copypasta]

California AB 2047: The End of Open Source 3D Printing

California just introduced a bill that doesn't just regulate "ghost guns", it mandates a digital kill switch for every 3D printer sold. California AB 2047 requires "blocking technology" that connects your printer to a government-approved database before every single print. If the system goes down, or your file is flagged, your hardware becomes a paperweight.

This isn't just about firearms. This is the death of Open Source. If this bill passes, it effectively bans Marlin, Klipper, and Orca Slicer, forcing every manufacturer to lock down their firmware. It turns general-purpose computing into a walled garden where you only rent permission to use the hardware you own.

[/copypasta]

#OpenSource #RightToRepair #Privacy #Clippy #California #Monopolies #3dPrinters #3dPrinting #Technology #Government #Firearms #Guns #SoftwareFreedom #Surveillance #Panopticon #Lobbyists

All the donor-funded foundations ought to be fighting against and speaking out against this Orwellian garbage.

@eff@mastodon.social
@fsf@hostux.social
@linuxfoundation@social.lfx.dev
@privacyint@mastodon.xyz
@openssf@social.lfx.dev
@rms@mastodon.xyz
@CCIAnet@techpolicy.social
@WriterOfMinds@sigmoid.social
@SeaGL@mastodon.social
@hopeconf@mastodon.online
@w3c@w3c.social
@ACM@mastodon.acm.org
@irtf@discuss.systems
@osi@opensource.org

"While the [age verification] bill moved through the legislature, the OSI, FSF, Software Freedom Conservancy, and Linux Foundation all sat it out — no testimony, no public analysis, no formal opposition on the record."

California's computer age verification law is poison. The new California age verification law is a version of INGSOC's telescreen watching you. And the usual self-proclaimed software freedom fighters are AWOL as this attack on your freedom is executed.

Don't listen to apologists who claim this isn't a big deal. It is a huge deal. This law is not about protecting children. The California law is a ruse for laying the foundation and precedent for mandatory remote control of all operating systems. They are using children as a shield for their true intentions. It's called a 'subterfuge' or a 'pretext' to hide the real rationale. And in politics subterfuge is very common. These politicians don't care about your children. They care about control and information is control. Compliance with California's new law is highly corrosive to free software and deadly to personal privacy.

With the mandatory age verification API in place, legislators can later add more laws mandating retrieval of even more privacy-invasive information just to install and use any operating system. This is Big Brother's telescreen in your living room. And the Linux community is nearly silent on the matter, instead focused on artificial intelligence investment.

Where were the software freedom organizations when California was mandating installation of #spyware in all free and open source operating systems? Did they oppose it? Or did they support it by silence? The California age verification law is the greatest threat to software freedom in recent history., striking right at the root of software installation for all users. Yet (((crickets))).

Is silence really tacit support?

"While the [age verification] bill moved through the legislature, the OSI, FSF, Software Freedom Conservancy, and Linux Foundation all sat it out — no testimony, no public analysis, no formal opposition on the record."

Where were they when this mandatory spyware infrastructure was being shoved down our throats? Where were the self-proclaimed software freedom fighters? Where were the calls to action? I didn't see any.

Is silence golden ... or is gold buying silence?

Let these organizations know that you oppose California's age verification spyware law and that you expect them to rally in defense of true software freedom--freedom from government oversight of your software systems. Parents--and not the spyware state--should protect their children. The government is neither your parent nor your god nor your savior and the people should send a clear message stating that.

California, stay out of my operating system! And stay the hell away from children!

@eff@mastodon.social
@linuxfoundation@social.lfx.dev
@fsf@hostux.social
@osi@opensource.org
@conservancy@sfconservancy.org

#AgeVerification #Linux #EFF #OSI #LinuxFoundation #FSF #Privacy #Cybersecurity #Surveillance #Spyware #OpenSource #OperatingSystems #FreeSoftware #SoftwareFreedom #Panopticon #BigBrother #Government

CC: @laffer1@bsd.network @leo@twit.social @MichaelRoss@social.linux.pizza @rms@mastodon.xyz @thenewoil@mastodon.thenewoil.org @TechDesk@flipboard.social @remixtures@tldr.nettime.org

Alt...

A crowd of sillouettes of people stands in front of a giant telescreen depicting a single giant eye watching them.

Software should empower users. Software should not abuse, spy on, or hobble users. This is SOFTWARE FREEDOM.

Some evil companies design software to wield power over users. This is SOFTWARE BONDAGE. It is analogous to literal bondage because the user is cornered, shackled or caged.

Some evil companies forcibly integrate user systems into the AI cloud panopticon so the system won't install or boot without the user being identified and tracked by the panopticon. This is SOFTWARE SLAVERY. It is analogous to literal slavery in that the user needs constant permission to use the system and can only use the system in a way that chiefly benefits the software slaver.

Some evil companies forcibly harvest user data and force users to store private data in compromising cloud settings where their privacy is violated and subject to even greater risk of violation. This is SOFTWARE RAPE. It is analagous to literal rape and denudes users of the privacy and security of their data.

When an evil company is doing evil with its software or hardware offerings these terms may be used to tell the truth about such evil actions.

#SoftwareFreedom #SoftwareBondage #SoftwareRape #SoftwareSlavery

SkiftOS : https://skiftos.org/

It's not a *NIX!

"skiftOS isn’t POSIX. It’s a fresh API and userland inspired by Plan 9, Haiku, and Fuchsia. Familiar ideas, different contracts."

Problem: the GPL is poison. It has polluted Linux and the Linux userland software so that only large corporations can afford to monetize it. BSD License or MIT License would be much better allowing small players to produce unique work without then being forced to share their source code with the AI hegemony racket.

#SkiftOS #Tech #Linux #OS #Plan9 #Haiku #Fuchsia #Computing #SoftwareFreedom #AIHegemony #GPL #License #BSD #MIT