Absolutely, yes; If you ask first for privacy, and there is a good option for privacy, then that's the correct answer.

Privacy without free software is a total joke.

Ergo, given a potentially spyware rich platform that *markets* itself as Private, as Google, Apple and Microsoft for example *all do*, or a free software platform which can be trivially and fairly-well rewritten to not be spyware-rich, you choose the latter.

It follows that for a privacy respecting laptop, you must necessarily begin with a laptop that can, to some degree of certainty, be wiped clean and installed with trustworthy software.

There are many options here; the FSF certify hardware that can be as blob-free as possible. There are also lots of pitfalls, because the Linux architecture in many places implicitly trusts the intentions of device firmwares; it's likely that memory checks aren't implemented well enough on so many layers that you can never be sure without literally CMOSing your own device control hardware.

Given all these options and pitfalls, draw a "sanity line" somewhere and pick some hardware that lets you do modern stuff without torturously long waits. In that short-list, the Librem still ranks quite well, I feel.

On 14/09/15 16:32, Travis Biehn wrote:

What does 'privacy respecting' even mean?

It's certainly a win for the FOSS crowd but FOSS isn't synonymous with
'Privacy and Security'.

If a product markets itself as 'privacy respecting' (is the Librem
/actually/ marketed this way) then it had better back up it's claims.

If someone on cpunks asks if it's a reasonable 'privacy laptop' and the
answer isn't a bet-your-life on it yes, then the response should be
clearly no, even if it's 'a nice /n/th step'.

-Travis

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Cathal Garvey

<cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me <mailto:cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me>> wrote:

    TBF, nobody's going to make that Privacy-Respecting laptop if people
    reject the "most privacy respecting laptop so far" for not being
    good enough. Because, we can keep moving the goalposts, here.

    Librem isn't perfect, and its BIOS isn't fully free. But it's
    free-er than almost any other laptop being sold that's worth owning,
    and it even comes with a hardware switch for some key sensors.

    I could ask for more, but bitching and rejecting the Librem because
    it's not-good-enough, and buying a laptop with NO respect for me on
    the basis that "I can just roll my own", continues to send the
    market the message that:

    1) Free software doesn't sell
    2) Privacy doesn't sell

    On 14/09/15 13:37, Travis Biehn wrote:

        Oshwm: Seems reasonable. It would be cool if consumers started
        valuing
        privacy-oriented products, now the whole plot is lost once a company
        uses a 3rd party load balancer? Nice.

        "Every hardware chip individually selected for being
        freedom-respecting"
        Is that in the datasheet for each chip "no backdoors & 100%
        certified
        vulnerability free"? Does an Intel chipset laptop manufactured in
        Shenzen really count as 'thoughtful and freedom respecting'?

        “Getting rid of the signature checking is an important step.
        While it
        doesn’t give us free code for the firmware, it means that users will
        really have control of the firmware once we get free code for
        it.” - Dr.
        Richard M. Stallman

        And without signature checks how will we prevent un-solicited BIOS
        modification?

        Securing their Trisquel derived distro?

        RMS doesn't have 'robust against nation state attackers' on his
        platform
        for GNU. They're still just trying to get people to comply with the
        license & refer to it as 'gnu / linux'.

        Don't mistake a 'FOSS' laptop for a 'Privacy Laptop' just
        because they
        installed a switch for the webcam. The privacy stuff is just the
        work of
        marketing.

        -Travis

        On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 1:36 AM, Oshwm <oshwm@openmailbox.org
        <mailto:oshwm@openmailbox.org>

        <mailto:oshwm@openmailbox.org <mailto:oshwm@openmailbox.org>>>
        wrote:

             Links go via cloudflare so privacy already abused before even
             purchasing.


             On 14 September 2015 03:11:12 BST, Alfie John
        <alfiej@fastmail.fm <mailto:alfiej@fastmail.fm>
             <mailto:alfiej@fastmail.fm <mailto:alfiej@fastmail.fm>>> wrote:

                 Just saw these this morning:

        https://www.crowdsupply.com/purism
        https://puri.sm/

                 Although a physical switch to kill the webcam and mic
        seems obvious,
                 this is the first laptop I've seen with them built in.

                 Overall thoughts?

                 Alfie




        --
        Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn
        <http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub
        <http://github.com/tbiehn> | TravisBiehn.com
        <http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus
        <https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn>


    --
    Scientific Director, IndieBio EU Programme
      Now running in Cork, Ireland May->July
      Learn more at indie.bio and follow along!
    Twitter:  @onetruecathal
    Phone: +353876363185 <tel:%2B353876363185>
    miniLock: JjmYYngs7akLZUjkvFkuYdsZ3PyPHSZRBKNm6qTYKZfAM
    peerio.com <http://peerio.com>: cathalgarvey




--
Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub
<http://github.com/tbiehn> | TravisBiehn.com
<http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus
<https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn>

--
Scientific Director, IndieBio EU Programme
 Now running in Cork, Ireland May->July
 Learn more at indie.bio and follow along!
Twitter:  @onetruecathal
Phone: +353876363185
miniLock: JjmYYngs7akLZUjkvFkuYdsZ3PyPHSZRBKNm6qTYKZfAM
peerio.com: cathalgarvey