GrapheneOS (@GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social)
grapheneos.social
@lunar_dust_463@mstdn.social We don't ban people from running the software they want to use and we don't spread misinformation about closed source software or otherwise. Not clear what you mean by libre compatible but an OS which doesn't support using the software you want to use doesn't sound like freedom. The whole point of sandboxed Google Play is that Google Play can be optionally installed as regular sandboxed apps with no special access at all. It already does work that way.

In the specified comment GrapheneOS explicitly stated that they have no opposition against non-free binaries and proprietary programs. Doesn’t Free software requires it to not host non free binaries? This is not even firmware

  • fossphi@lemm.eeEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    No, the FSF does define what free (as in freedom) software is. There are different licenses for linking (not running) against non free stuff. But being able to run proprietary programs doesn’t make something not free. Even on GNU certified free distros, one can run proprietary software. It just doesn’t come with it by default.

    There’s also a looser (imo) definition of open source software which doesn’t maintained all four freedoms.

    • max@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      0·
      3 months ago

      i suppose if ur a language perscriptivist it does, but like… idm free OSes coming with nonfree drivers. theyr doing the best they can in a hostile environment