From 4bc5505ee19ca0b66bdaf375d0af9f77e1daa790 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Gustav Eek Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 20:03:18 +0100 Subject: Website merge, ideological texts added Two ideologically important texts were found in the org-mode based website's *from_wiki* directory: *princip.txt* and *fscons.txt*, a suggestion to declaration of principals for Fripost and an article text for FSCONS 2010. An *ideology* category (directory) is created with an overview page, *ideology.mdwn* and to content pages *princip.mdwn* and *fscons-2010.mdwn*. The index, *index.mdwn* is updated accordingly. --- ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn | 381 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 381 insertions(+) create mode 100644 ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn (limited to 'ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn') diff --git a/ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn b/ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5c036f0 --- /dev/null +++ b/ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,381 @@ +# Syndicated E-mail Service Against Software as a Service + +Denna sida innehåller dels allmänna anteckningar om Friposts bidrag +till FSCONS 2010 genom Gustav Eek och Stefan Kangas, och dels +innehåller en slutgiltig artikeltext. Rekommendationen är att direkt +läsa artikeltexten. + +This page contains general notes that has to do with the preparation +to Fripost's contribution to FSCONS 2010 through Gustav Eek and Stefan +Kangas. It also contains a final article text. The recommendation is +to directly read the article text. + +[[!toc levels=2]] + +# Anteckningar om föreningens bidrag till konferensen FSCONS 2010 + + * *Authors* – Gustav Eek and Stefan Kangas + + * *Contact email* – skangas@skangas.se + + * *Preferred timeslot* – 30 min + + * *Proposal title* – Olika förslag... + + * "[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/syndicate Syndicated] E-mail + Service Against Software as a Service" + * "Serve our self the server service" + * "Servicing our own software as a service" + * "Defeating SaaS by socializing email services" + * "Collaborative email servers against SaaS" + +## Proposal summary + +It is becoming increasingly common for persons and organizations to +hire external services for e-mail handling, and even for the use of +spreadsheets and word processing. This phenomenon, known as *Software +as a Service* (SaaS), implies restrictions in the users freedom that +is not only tangential. + +In our ambition to counteract this tendency, we would like to present +a project of constructing an independent and autonomous e-mail hosting +service, run by a syndicate, *The Free E-mail Association*, for the +associations members. The syndicate is driven by a simple framework +that guarantees that it is + + * of independent means, + * democratically structured, + * built on trust between its members, and + * ready to be far-reaching with regards to avoiding traffic logging and to protect the members privacy. + +The service that we are hoping to create is a full featured e-mail +solution with high reliability and accessibility. + +This project exemplifies that the creation of a freedom preserving +network service is possible, and it is also an example of what that +can look like. + +The obvious question to raise is whether this service actually is not +just another SaaS? Obviously, all individual members can not at all +times reach absolute freedom and computational control. However, these +limitations must be weighed against that investments in a more +reliable technical infrastructure are possible only through +collaboration. Also, we believe that the association's democratic +structure and numerical and geographical boundaries are enough to +mitigate the limitations; the limited user participation is still +sufficient for the service to bee regarded as free. + +We hope that this project can raise curiosity enough to tantalise +users away from private suppliers of e-mail and other services, to +either join our association or even better start more similar +projects. + +## Other information + +It is preferred from our point of view that the talk is scheduled in +an early stage of the conference. This since the hope is to raise +questions for further discussion during the conference. + +# Antagen till konferensen + +Den 24 juli blev föredraget "Syndicated E-mail Service Against +Software as a Service" antagen till temat "Infrastructure" på FSCONS +2010. Jeremiah Foster är koordinator för temat som har beskrivningen + +> Wikipedia defines infrastructure as "the basic physical and +> organizational structures needed for the operation of a society." +> The theme focuses on the infrastructure needs for tomorrows future +> society, as well as the basic need for privacy and secure +> communication, together with monitoring, both as a threat and as a +> tool to manage our ever increasing networks. + +Det är ett antal saker som vi från Jonas Öberg blivit ombedda att +utföra och återkomma till Jonas och Jeremiah angående. + + 1. Granska den föreslagna sammanfattningen av föredraget och revidera + det med det övergripande temat i åtanke och om något tillkommit i + föredraget. + 2. Om vi har några begränsningar vad gäller schemaläggningen. + 3. Frågan om när vi kommer till Göteborg och om vi ska vara med på de + sociala tillställningarna. + +Frågan är också om konferensen vill ha någon längre artikel för +föredraget. I så fall vore det bra att sätta igång med det nu, +snart. En idé skulle vara att översätta principförklaringen om den kan +skrivas på ett tillräckligt vetenskapligt sätt. + +# Second article for the conference + +This is the second proposal, which is longer and more adjusted to the +infrastructure theme description. The proposal follows declaration of +principals. + +## Introduction + +User freedom is the most important property of tomorrows +infrastructure. This property is necessary to safeguard the relative +freedom of speech provided by the Internet against increasingly +aggressive attacks by preying commercial and opportune state +interests. + +In this abstract of a talk on FSCONS 2010 we first try to define +freedom in computer work. Then the problem of increased centralization +of the Internet is discussed and a number of ongoing threats to this +freedom are identified. We then present the *Free Email Association*, +what built up infrastructure we have, and our principles. Finally we +try to sketch what we think the future paths might look like. + +## Background + +The centralisation of influence and rectification of decision-making +is not unique for the Internet. This is written in a wider context of +general social criticism of economic and cultural globalisation and +the current forms of the globalisation of information flows. Many +decisions are made in multi-lateral arenas where the democratic +control is limited.^1 A decreasing number of transnational operators, +not only controls the means of production and the production of goods, +but also have great influence in markets demands. + +The Internet is, or will soon be, the most important communication +medium in the majority of the industrialized world. The story of its +development from its conception as a highly distributed network +through the establishment of the free and open web, towards the +increasingly privatized web we see today is indeed saddening for those +who takes user freedom seriously. A few strong parties control major +segments of important infrastructure that millions of users depend on +every day. Those who control the technology and its infrastructure +also have power over its users. + +## Computing, computer labour, and power over the infrastructure + +The *Free Software Foundation* suggest definition of *free software* +consisting of four requirements: the "freedom to run, copy, +distribute, study, change and improve the software". (Free Software +Foundation "The Free Software Definition") As a complement to those we +define the more general *freedom with regard to own computer labour* +^2 as requiring that + + 1. the work is performed exclusively with free software, + 2. the work is performed with computer hardware that entirely is at + one's possession and control, + 3. the information worked with is information that one possess, and + 4. the result from the computer work also is at one's possession and + control. + +We here use "information" to denote data and documents that are the +object to computer work. In this context *computer labour* is all use +of computers, and *own computer labour* is computer work performed for +one's own part. ^3 + +## Internet and its servers + +The *Internet* seen as an infrastructure scheme was constructed as a +distributed *peer-to-peer* non-hierarchical network of independent and +self-determined parts. ^4 Despite this immanent property, the Internet +today, seen from a regular user's point of view, is structured in a +hierarchical manner around a decreasing number of server clouds, which +are continuously growing in size and power. Historically the meaning +of *servers* was to gather and publish information provided from its +clients. However, in many applications today, publishing is not +performed as a separate process, and the clients are no longer always +independent. For example social networking sites, like Facebook, often +require their users to perform their work directly on the company's +servers. (Moglen 2010) + +## Software as a service + +A concept introduced in the spirit of centralisation is *Software as a +Service* (SaaS). Shortly SaaS is that users are invited to perform +their computer work on or through a network server on Internet or a +local network. The main purpose of SaaS is to separate *possession* +and *ownership* of software from its *usage*. This software is said to +be *licenced on demand*. (Turner 2003) + +In this text *Software as a Service* is used in a more narrow sense in +accordance with Stallman (Stallman 2010), to mean one's own computer +work on hardware that the user do not control. Popular Internet +services that are examples of SaaS are Google Docs and Facebook, but +the concept is widely used. Computer work performed with this software +is non-free in a double sense; using SaaS also leads to *vendor +lock-in*. However, the complex of lock-in problems reach far outside +SaaS. + +## The infrastructure of email + +The email infrastructure is not an exception from the tendency towards +centralisation and rectification of Internet's services and usage. We +now see even large institutions being lured in by the economic +benefits offered by these large scale solutions. + +Email communication through the Internet involves several computers +and servers, among those a *mail user agent*, a computer program +controlled by the sending person; several *mail transfer agents*, +Internet servers responsible for getting the mail though using the +SMTP protocol; *domain name system servers*, servers keeping track of +the addresses to all those servers; and finally another *mail user +agent*, used by the receiving person to read the emails. It is also +common to make use of extra inbox handling services like *IMAP access* +or *webmail*, which usually involve separate servers. + +What about email and freedom? We here need to distinguish what part of +emailing that is one's own computer labour. Editing email definitely +is, along with all sort of contact management. The transfer process, +however, is not. Whether the email arrives is of course of great +concern to the sender, but there is generally no human activity +(directly) involved and thus no actual work performed. In principle +the same holds also for the process of receiving email. However, most +popular email services are not content with that. Stallman writes, +
Some sites whose main service is publication and +communication extend it with *contact management*: keeping track of +people you have relationships with. Sending mail to those people for +you is not SaaS, but keeping track of your dealings with them, if +substantial, is SaaS. (Stallman 2010)
And using SaaS is +not free computer labour. Furthermore, whether hiring a company for +handling one's email imply usage of SaaS or non-free computer labour +might not be the only matter of importance. + +## Privacy and survelliance + +With large clientele comes a lot of power. Google is currently not the +largest email service provider; both Windows Live Hotmail and Yahoo +Mail has more customers. (Brownlow 2010) We nonetheless believe it is +important to single Google out as a company, because of how +effectively they utilize privacy invading schemes that are integrated +between their services. Together with Google's e-mail service one also +get services that probably was not asked for: advertisement, semantic +analyses of email contents, and spying. (Moglen 2010) The data +resulting from Google's analysis and espionage is later used +indirectly in marketing campaigns with Googles customers or sold +directly to third party. Google is profiting on their email users with +the means of the users private information provided by themselves. + +Google link that data to individuals' surf activities using Google's +search engine, Google accounts and cookies. Additionally, many +websites utilize Google's JavaScript APIs, web site statistics or +reCAPTCHA service, which indirectly exposes individuals to Google's +supervision. + +## Organisation for a change + +Technology has never been neutral. Behind technology changes and +innovations today lies commercial interests and social factors. On the +one hand, the ownership structure of technology companies and their +endeavour for profit ensures that usage of their services for work and +communication will never be free. On the other hand, only a fraction +of the everyday Internet users have knowledge and resources enough to +create free alternatives on his or hers own hand. The question is also +what we can reasonably expect from an average user in terms of +engagement in their privacy and freedom. + +Our idea is to form an association and together take back a small but +important part of our Internet life, namely the email communication +infrastructure. We gather around several servers that receives and +stores the members' email. The purpose of the association is to render +it possible for individuals to bring their computer usage under their +own control. And to show that user freedom is possible, even if only +through active, prolonged and collective struggle. + +In more detail, we start with five or six servers spread out in Sweden +and Europe connected through the Internet: at the very least two mail +exchange and one IMAP server, separate backup and log servers, and +hopefully a webmail server. In the beginning we will not have an SMTP +send mail service, and we will hire the DNS service from third +party. Though we will have tight economic boundaries, our focus on +reliability and stability forces us to try hard to maintain a +sufficiently high level of redundancy. + +The email service provided through the Free Email Association is free +as in free speech, not as in free beer. This because of the democratic +structure and of non-profit and commonly owned organisations like the +Free Email Association. The free email association promises to + + 1. work hard to receive email for the sake of its members in a reliable manner + 2. protect its member's integrity, that is to never + * read or analyse its members emails, either manually or + automatically, (possibly with exception for voluntary spam + filter services and alike) + * gather statistics about or analyse member's traffic through the association's servers, and + * under no circumstances hand out information about members, their + emailing and other activities, or any other information to third + party, and + 3. provide for transparency regarding administration, economy and the + decision-making process. + +Transparency and continuous information about the work of the board is +of cause extra important, and the democratic regime requires constant +attention. A declaration of principles serve as a founding document +for the association, but still a high level of trust is laid on the +elected officers. + +## On the long term + +We recommend and encourage everyone to perform their computer labour +with free software at machines that are in their own possession. But +many solutions on Internet servers, like Google Docs and Facebook, are +quite usable and practical and adopted to a modern way to meet and +work computer-aided. The Free Software Community has a great challenge +in the creation of free and distributed alternatives, where free means +that their usage imply only free computing. + +Despite this, we must not deceive ourselves into thinking that the +final and greatest challenge is about building physical infrastructure +or programming advanced distributed social networking solutions. The +real challenge is to get people engaged in the issue of the Internet's +power structures and in their own freedom and privacy. + +No one in their right mind would put their blind trust in a government +that was dabbling in surveillance on a scale anywhere near what Google +is doing. But when it comes to Google, their marketing strategy has +been so successful that many people need no additional guarantees that +Google will behave – people are willing to take Google's word +for it. + +The reasons behind the described changeover of the Internet are +structural. The structural tendency, as described, is that already +powerful operators get even more power when computer labour is +generally becoming less free. Structural problems need structural +change, but projects like the Free Email Association serve as an +alternative to structural change for those who are eager to establish +free alternatives. In the long-term, however, we realize that a larger +social change on a structural level is necessary. The best we can hope +for is to give a small contribution to bringing about that change. + +## Footnotes + +^1 Good, recent examples are the European Unions IPRED directive or +the ACTA agreement. + +^2 Stallman uses *your own computing* to denote what we call *one's +own computer labour*. [2] We use the latter because of its broader +associations. + +^3 Stallman points out that work performed as employee in some company +or in a cooperation project as Wikipedia is not one's own computer +work, but a part of that company's or project's work. In that case it +is not one's own freedom that is threatened, but the company's or +project's. (stallman 2010): + +^4 Technically the parts of a network are *nodes*, which in the case +of Internet are servers, switches, and personal computers, and +*edges*, which are interconnecting wires. + +## References + + * [1] Turner, M. et.al. (2003). "Turning Software into a Service", + Computer vol. 36, IEEE Computer Society 2003. + * [2] Stallman, R. M (2010). "Who does that server realy serve?", + Boston review, only web version + http://bostonreview.net/BR35.2/stallman.php. Revised version på + http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html. Fetched + 2010-08-30. + * [3] Moglen E. (2010). "Freedom in the Cloud", talk given to the New + York chapter of ISOC February 2nd 2010. Video available at + http://new.law.columbia.edu/isoc/eben_moglen_freedom_in_the_cloud.ogv, + and transcription at + http://www.softwarefreedom.org/events/2010/isoc-ny/FreedomInTheCloud-transcript.html. Checked + 2010-09-10. + * [4] Free Software Foundation. "The Free Software Definition", + http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html. Fetched 2010-08-30. + * [5] Brownlow M. (2010). "Email and webmail statistics", + http://www.email-marketing-reports.com/metrics/email-statistics.htm. Updated + May 2010. First published April 2008. Fetched 2010-09-21. -- cgit v1.2.3