Trisquel

>>52257670
> If not, why not?

because another cheesy DE mod with a shitty package manager and repos is stupid.

>>52257670
>If not, why not?
Because I prefer Ubuntu

>>52257694
>because another cheesy DE mod
You can use your own DE.

>shitty package manager and repos
False.

>>52257697
Trisquel is Ubuntu without the non-free components.

>>52257735
>Trisquel is Ubuntu without the non-free components.
Which happens to be one of the reasons I prefer Ubuntu.

>>52257799
>uses GNU/Linux without the intention of running a free system

>>52257735
>Trisquel is Ubuntu without the non-free components.
so it's debian

>>52257823
Yes, I do. Do you have a problem with that? Because not even Stallman has that, you know. While he would encourage you to use a free as in freedom system, his main target is trying to make DEVELOPERS make free software, not forcing USERS to use only free components.

>>52257838
Debian allows you to enable non-free repos. Trisquel have no such repos.

>>52257880
I'm not trying to force you to do anything, I just think you are an idiot for not doing so.

>>52257914
I think you are an idiot for making assumptions about what I use my system for.

I would if my broadcom cards had free firmware. Also, my laptop wouldn't work with libreboot or core boot. Not much or a reason to go full free of your bios isn't free.

>>52257935
I am not making any assumptions. You have explicitly stated that you use non-free software. That is the only thing I am criticizing.

>>52258006
>I am not making any assumptions
But you are, you're assuming I could run my system with free software only.

Which is not a feasible solution for me, as I rely on both proprietary and only partially free tools and programs in order to do my job efficiently, as well as proprietary drivers.

>That is the only thing I am criticizing.
And by doing so, you are making assumptions about how I use my system and how I should use it instead.

>>52257901
so then it's pointless

Meh freedom is a meme. I am better using a botnet

>>52258092
It satisfies some made up criteria by the FSF so they can fully recommend it.

>>52257670
Doesn't the wifi in the X200 require nonfree firmware?

>>52257901
This operating system is more free than Debian because it doesn't allow you to install non-free things!

>>52257880
>not even Stallman has that
https://www.stallman.org/stallman-computing.html
First section, uses Trisquel + Libreboot

>>52258220
>because it doesn't provide nonfree software for you
FTFY
Get it from somewhere else if you need it

>>52258129
I did what Minifree (formerly Gluglug) does with their X200s. Replaced it with a card compatible with free drivers.

>>52258233
That refers to "having a problem with me running a non-free system" not "running a Trisquel installation"

You should probably read the chain of posts before replying in order to get the whole context.

>>52258220
>This operating system is more free than Debian because it doesn't allow you to install non-free things!
That's not true though, see >>52258250

You can install whatever you want, but they don't supply non-free software in the distro repos.

>>52258071
What you use your computer for is irrelevant to me. To me, there are no justifiable reasons for using non-free software on a personal computer. If that computer is for work, at the very least you should keep it separate from your personal computer.

>>52258266
Read it
cba to find the source of this but he wants freedom to be in demand from the users, not just taken where it can be gotten

>>52258109
>FSF
so an organization that's about freedom of choice doesn't endorse an operating system that allows you to choose whether or not you use proprietary software or not?

nice

>>52258299
FSF is not about freedom of choice. It is about software freedom. The two are, in our society, not always the same. Non-free software does not respect your freedom, and therefore should not be endorsed by the FSF.

ITT: communism

>>52258299
>allows you to choose
They do. Do you understand the concept of repositories? They are provided by the OS provider by default, and additional ones may be added and used without restriction.

>>52258353
>>>/pol/

>>52258290
>To me, there are no justifiable reasons for using non-free software on a personal computer.
Then you are even more extreme than Stallman himself. People like you are the reason the free software movement is stagnating. You're fanatically blind.


>If that computer is for work, at the very least you should keep it separate from your personal computer.
I don't have a personal computer, both my laptop (a rMBP) and my work station is supplied by my employer, but I am allowed to use them however I want.

why haven't stallman followers been purged from /g/ yet?

>>52258371
>People like you are the reason the free software movement is stagnating. You're fanatically blind.
You can blame me all you want, but I am going to continue using free software. If you aren't concerned with your freedom, I can't do anything about it. Your freedom is yours to take. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to criticize you.

>>52258298
While that's obviously something he wants in order to fast forward free software, FSF's philosophy is still ultimately that developers should not distribute software that does not give the user the four freedoms, not that the user cannot use software that isn't free.

But obviously he recommends that users refuse to.

>>52257670
>another shitty ubuntu fork

This is everything wrong with linux. Throwing your own DE should not be fork worthy.

>>52258425
I don't think you understand the purpose of Trisquel. It is entirely free software out of the box.

>>52257670

I congratulate your success in restoring your freedom.

Everyone else: Read http://www.libreboot.org/faq/#intelme

>>52257880
completely wrong, he emphasizes that it's about the USERS having freedom

>>52258406
>You can blame me all you want, but I am going to continue using free software.
How is this statement in any way relevant? I never said anything about what software *you* use. I'm addressing the fact that you called me an idiot based on your narrow world view and a bunch of wild assumptions about me and my system(s).

>If you aren't concerned with your freedom, I can't do anything about it. Your freedom is yours to take. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to criticize you.
Your criticism is misplaced and hurting the cause. Why are you calling me an idiot for being forced to do something? Why are you blaming me, the "victim" of being "forced" to use non-free software in my job, when you should rather criticise nvidia et al who make non-free software that I need to use in the first place?

>>52258423
I think we're in agreement actually. Stallman knows some people are going to wind up still using nonfree software, but they're better off using nonfree software on otherwise completely free systems, and if the opportunity presents itself to switch that nonfree component to a free one, users should value their freedom enough to make that switch (provided the free solution isn't buggy as all hell)

>>52258484
Wait, what the fuck?

That's exactly what I wrote, you idiot!

What the hell is wrong with your reading comprehension?

>>52258446
So it's for useless autists?

>>52258492
>Your criticism is misplaced and hurting the cause. Why are you calling me an idiot for being forced to do something? Why are you blaming me, the "victim" of being "forced" to use non-free software in my job, when you should rather criticise nvidia et al who make non-free software that I need to use in the first place?
I do criticize companies more than I criticize individuals. But you are not entirely blameless if you do nothing in your personal life to maximize your freedom. And again, it is just my opinion. If you don't like it you can just ignore me.

>>52258519
"Autists" as an insult is a meme. It's for people who want entirely free systems.

>>52258510
that's literally not what you wrote

>>52258539
Yeah, for autistic people who think non-free software is the devil and everything must be free from GNU standards.

>>52258522
>But you are not entirely blameless if you do nothing in your personal life to maximize your freedom.
I use a GNU/Linux system in order to maximise my freedom, yet somehow this isn't enough. Because not only do I, according to you, need to maximise my freedom, you literally said I cannot use anything else but free software.

>>52258522
We don't know his situation, maybe he's saving up to purchase a RYF device but in the meantime has to make do with what he's got

>>52258554
Non-free software is harmful. And I use GNU standards because they are consistent and reasonable for software. I do not apply GNU standards to everything in my life, although I am an anarchist :^)

>>52258599
Oh look, a delusional idiot.

>>52258546
>that's literally not what you wrote
Read it again. I wrote:

Stallman's goal is to make developers write and distribute software that gives the user his/her freedom

AND

Stallman's goal is NOT to force the user to do anything.

Please learn how to read.

>>52258562
Maybe I shouldn't have been so quick to judge. Honestly, you came across initially (at least to me) as someone who only intended to shit up the thread. I am sorry.

Does any other OS get this much shitposting in its threads?

>>52258622
Anarchist theory is actually pretty reasonable and has its roots in science, philosophy, history, and so on. I don't care what you think of me personally, but I would recommend reading up on the history of the anarchist movement. It's actually really interesting.

>>52258636
People start flinging shit as soon as someone mentions free software. I am guilty of it too.

>>52258624
I think you are reading things that aren't there.
I desire a world where all software is free, but since that isn't the case I need to play with the hand I'm given. Therefore I wrote that I prefer Ubuntu because of convenience.


Convenience and freedom (in the form of free software) aren't mutually exclusive, and I don't know why you would assume that I meant that?

>>52258623
>Stallman's goal is NOT to force the user to do anything.
Have you ever even been to stallman.org
literally one of the first things you'll see on the homepage is links to pages stallman wrote about why NOT to use certain proprietary services. you have to be a delusional idiot or a complete newfag to think stallman isnt trying to convince individuals to use free software

>>52258714
he's being a faggot about his uses of the terms "make" and "force"

>>52258714
>convince
>force

>>52258714
Attempting to convince someone to do something is not even close to trying to force someone to do something.

>>52258714
>links to pages stallman wrote about why NOT to use certain proprietary services.
You know that trying to convince you to not do something is not at all the same as forcing you to do (or not do) something.

>you have to be a delusional idiot or a complete newfag to think stallman isnt trying to convince individuals to use free software
I never wrote anything about convincing. There's a difference between convincing someone and forcing someone.

>>52258714
>convince = force
Nice reading comprehension you got there.

>>52258701
You are right. I just always expect the worst when I post here, and that usually just makes me look like an ass.

>>52257670
>1366x768
>X200
How so?

File: top gun.jpg (178KB, 648x800px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 648x800px

>>52257823
>he thinks majority people pay for software that isnt free
get a load of this guy

>>52258740
>>52258744
Your statement was poorly worded, seemingly on purpose. You could have also said "Stallman's goal is to make users care about their freedom in regards to software, but not to force developers to do anything." which would appear to be the inverse of your statement but in fact doesn't imply anything new. In actuality, Stallman's goal is to compel both users to use free software and developers to develop it.

>>52258772
This is probably a sample screenshot and not representative of OP's computer
It also has an Ethernet symbol where normally a wireless one would be (assuming he would be using WiFi on the laptop)

>>52258790
>le free = gratis bait
1 / 10 bait attempt, no one is going to fall for that

>>52258805
You just did though

>>52258805
im not baiting you fucking nigger. how else is your system gonna be fucking free?

>>52258797
You're undercommunicating the fact that while he want's to compel users to be free (as free as possible), he does consider developers/distributors of non-free software to be outright unethical, which is a major distinction here.

File: desktop.png (262KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 1280x800px

>>52258772
That is not a screenshot of my desktop.

>>52258826
Free as in freedom

Not free as in free beer.

>>52257670
I've tried, but it can never detect my monitor's native resolution or even how it's connected to my computer. Debian also has this issue; perhaps it's related?

There's multiple solutions involving messing with xrandr and xorg, but I couldn't find a solution that worked.

>>52258870
freedom from what? the fucking NSA? literally nothing changes about your computer relating to some faggot selling you're info that you'll notice from running some free linux shit compared to like a mac or running windows. is it all just a mind thing that makes you feel better?

>>52257670
Because it's pointless to go to that extent to exclusively use free software when 80% of people on this board are just going to install steam on it day one

>>52258903
Maybe try lurking more

>>52258903
>freedom from what?
From the tyranny of the developer.

>literally nothing changes about your computer relating to some faggot selling you're info that you'll notice from running some free linux shit compared to like a mac or running windows. is it all just a mind thing that makes you feel better?
Data mining and involuntary surveillance is an entirely different topic.

>>52257670
No, doubt it is as customizable as gentoo.

>>52258903
>literally nothing changes about your computer

>DRM preventing you from doing what you want to do
>unable to change anything about the software or even know what it does
>ads built in
>security vulnerabilities intentionally put in

File: hes-right.jpg (10KB, 260x194px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 260x194px

>>52258960
This desu senpai

>>52258951
It isn't. Gentoo wiki has a guide on doing a libre intsall on a librebooted machine, though.

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Installation_on_libreboot

>>52258918
>being this assmad that someone doesnt care about their freedom enough to run a free system

>>52258922
>From the tyranny of the developer.
i dont understand? what changes about the software other than privacy when it comes to a developer being a tyrant or not? i am genuinely confused

>Data mining and involuntary surveillance is an entirely different topic.
i guess the surveillance is important if you care enough.

>>52258960
>DRM preventing you from doing what you want to do
what do you mean? if the software does what its stated to do, whats the problem?
>unable to change anything about the software or even know what it does
why would you want to change it? if it doesnt do its job, why not get software that does?
>ads built in
ok. i agree this is bad
>security vulnerabilities intentionally put in
also yeah i agree if you care enough

>>52258999
>i dont understand?
Hence why the first anon said "lurk more"

>what changes about the software other than privacy when it comes to a developer being a tyrant or not? i am genuinely confused
That's because you don't know what "free software" refers to. It means software that lets the user

0) run the program as he wishes, for any purpose
1) study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish
2) redistribute copies so you can help your neighbour
3) distribute copies of your modified versions to others

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html.en

>i guess the surveillance is important if you care enough.
As I said, it is an entirely different topic (but equally, if not more, important).

>>52258999
>nonfree software does 99% of what you want
>have to keep looking for 100% what you want

>free software does 95% of what you want
>can add in the 5% difference by either patching it yourself, getting a more tech-minded friend to do it for you, or paying someone to do it

Why does Trisquel still use Gnome fallback mode? Why not just use Mate?

>>52259096
Personally I've found it more usable than MATE.

>>52259061
i've been using this board for like 6 months and i still dont understand all this shit
>also to all of the other stuff
why even do all of that?
>>52259095
i mean if i was in this situation i'd just google the problem and find a different program to do the other percent i need.

>>52259096
>Why does Trisquel still use Gnome fallback mode?
Does it, or are you judging from OP's not very recent screenshot?

>Why not just use Mate?
Even though Mate is a fork of Gnome 2, it isn't developed as part of the GNU project. Gnome is. It's just easier to keep control, I guess...

>>52258999
>what do you mean? if the software does what its stated to do, whats the problem?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management

>why would you want to change it? if it doesnt do its job, why not get software that does?
You're implying that you can find software that does literally anything you can think of, by default. That's not the case. I can be happy with a program for the most part, but want to remove, add or change one little feature, or a few of them. There will be no software in existence that has the same properties.

>security vulnerabilities intentionally put in
you should care about security vulnerabilities in your computer. I don't see why you wouldn't, unless you're very elderly or amish.

>>52259112
>i've been using this board for like 6 months and i still dont understand all this shit
6 months?! It's time to step up, senpai.

>why even do all of that?
Because >>52259095


>i mean if i was in this situation i'd just google the problem and find a different program to do the other percent i need.
And in the case where no such program does this? What do you do then? Give up?

How many times have you used a piece of software that stopped being maintained but you still needed badly, for example? Don't you wish that you could just continue when the original developers can't be bothered anymore? Like what the Mint guys did with Mate when GNOME upped to version 3 and stopped maintaining version 2?

>>52259112
>i mean if i was in this situation i'd just google the problem and find a different program to do the other percent i need.
that's...not how it works. How can you google for a different program that does the EXACT same thing as the program you're already using, except has one or two less features, or more features, or a few small things tweaked. You won't find it, unless they modified the existing software, which is what we're proposing people should be able to do.

>>52259112
>6 months
Lurk more
If you think you're done lurking, you're not done lurking

File: disappoint.gif (2MB, 360x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x240px

>6 months
>can't tell free as in freedom software from pirated software
>mfw

How the fuck did you manage not to pick up on this? We have threads on free software on an hourly basis....

>>52259239
>inb4 I mostly stay in the desktop threads

>>52259181
>What do you do then? Give up?
yes
>How can you google for a different program that does the EXACT same thing as the program you're already using, except has one or two less features, or more features, or a few small things tweaked.
im talking about a whole new program that does something that other program did, but has more features. like different DAWs and shit
>>52259193
>Lurk more
nah. i think ill just leave since i just dont fit in here.
>>52259239
>How the fuck did you manage not to pick up on this?
i did, but i skipped all of those threads since its not my interest and they seem shitposty

since i made everyone confused with me, i'm just gonna stop now. im sorry that im retarded and dont understand this freedom shit

>>52259260
>>What do you do then? Give up?
>yes
Why?

>im talking about a whole new program that does something that other program did, but has more features. like different DAWs and shit
How on earth does that solve your original problem with the application that does 99% of what you want but not something trivial remaining 1%???

>i did, but i skipped all of those threads since its not my interest and they seem shitposty
Well, they tend to dissolve into that, so I'll give you that.

>since i made everyone confused with me, i'm just gonna stop now. im sorry that im retarded and dont understand this freedom shit
Everyone has to be new some time, anon. But free software boils down to this:

We are technically capable people

When we see potential for improvements, we want to be able to do those improvements either for ourselves, for others or for a community

We don't want to be hindered and prevented to do so by arbitrary "whims" some developer or software company might have

We wan't to have this freedom

After all, the software is running on MY system. I should be allowed to know what is going on on MY OWN system.


Nobody would stop you from fixing your own car, so why is this okay when it comes to software?
You can buy a chair in a furniture store, and adapt it as you see fit. Why aren't you allowed to do this with software?

>>52259260
>im talking about a whole new program that does something that other program did, but has more features. like different DAWs and shit
you're not going to find such a thing in the vast majority of cases

>dont understand this freedom shit
i fear for you, anon

anybody have that wallpaper in 1080p?

it looks pretty nice

>>52259381
>fixing/tweaking your own vehicle
imagine if this was copyright infringement (protip: it actually is if it's the software you're tweaking http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/ )
>modifying a wooden chair you bought
Fucking criminal.
>adding your own sauce to the burger you just bought and sharing it with a friend
Disgusting pirate!

>>52259260

It doesn't have to be like this anon, you are still welcome here. I personally believe that software freedom is very important these days, not just from security agencies spying on us, but advertisers and developers are a greater concern. They will sellout very quick just to get rich, just look at Adobe. It used to be that you could pay for photoshop and have it be yours forever. Now, everything is in 'the cloud' and you have to pay a lot of money for yearly access.

I'm so tired of devs fucking over users, and while GNU/Linux is definitely not immune to this, software freedom allows users an alternative.

>>52259486
>>52259381
>sharing your tip on how to tighten the screws on the wobbly chair you bought from ikea with others
Criminal scum! Reverse engineering is strictly illegal!

>>52259519
Storing personal data in the cloud, and hence "not owning your own data" / "not owning the (exclusive) rights to data" is a separate issue though.

It's not directly related to free software, only if software respects the four freedoms apply in that topic.

>>52259583

That was just one example, seeing as someone already made the GNOME shell/Mate one. A better example is that photoshop refuses to open up pictures of currency for fear that someone will attempt counterfeiting. This type of nannying is what really annoys me.

>>52259704
>A better example is that photoshop refuses to open up pictures of currency for fear that someone will attempt counterfeiting.
Indeed. I used to work developing a DAM system specialising in photo and video... Licenses and copyrights for these are even more confusing than for software, and not to mention archaic since all of the rules and laws for this were conceived before the internet.

>This type of nannying is what really annoys me.
I remember older versions of Spotify on older Windows version would kill Spotify if you started the Visual Studio debugger in fear of reverse engineering of Spotify and/or capturing audio data.

IsDebuggerPresent, or something similar, used to be a WinAPI call you could do in order to check if a user is running the VS debugger.

>>52259879
And that was a pain in the ass if you worked as a developer and wanted to listen to music.

These days it returns true if the debugger is attached to the process invoking the call, something that makes a lot more sense.

>>52257670
Hey anon, did you buy that X200 from Minifree in the UK? I'm looking to purchase from them and am looking for reviews. Were they a reputable retailer? What condition was the thinkpad in?

File: 1451448252241.jpg (33KB, 550x343px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 550x343px

>>52257670

I wasn't aware free software shills existed.

Do you do it for free?

Also fuck you I'll run what I like when I like. That's true freedom.

>>52260090
>the freedom to be a cuck shall not be infringed

>>52260132
It's the thinking man's fetish, don't you know? :^)

>>52260090
you have the freedom to choose your master, indeed

>>52260061
Not OP, but I did. They were certainly a reputable retailer. The condition of the machine is reasonable. There are a few signs of light use on the machine (as expected from a used machine) but it is otherwise clean and functional. Keep in mind that you will be receiving a machine with the smallest of the batteries it accepts. I purchased a new 9-cell battery independently of Minifree. If your intention is to use the machine for classes or on the go, I'd recommend you do the same. Otherwise you will be disappointed with the battery life, which again is reasonable given the age of the machine.

>>52260197
As soon as my computers start trying to put a leash around my neck you'll be the first to know.

>>52260219
I've read reviews that suggest that the hardware sold by Minifree is a little old. For instance, I can purchase an X220 with an i5 processor, 4 GB memory and 620 GB disk space over two drives on ebay for $600 AU. If I'm buying from him, aren't I paying more for a worse processor, in addition to having to buy another battery?

>>52260241
by then it's too late

>>52260393
They use old processors because all the new processors have nonfree firmware with backdoors

>>52260479
So how important is it to me that the whole system is free? I feel like I'm leaning towards paying less for the more powerful processor and just assuming Orwell's nightmare won't be realised within the next 5-10 years or so.

>>52260896
Those old processors might not be around for that much longer, or they'll be more expensive when more people realize what's going on.

File: 001.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>52257670

I am currently librebooting my x200. It looks like the flash just finished while I was typing this.

>>52258363
this

>>52262279
It worked!

>>52262812
Congratulations anon! Enjoy your freedom.

>>52263327
Thanks. I just installed Debian and Mate. No nonfree packages or repos.


Libreboot seems much faster to get to grub than the lenovo BIOS.

>>52257670
looks like shit

thanks for the heads up, I'm switching to linux and so far installed mint, elementary and xubuntu.

That pic you posted is the worst looking so far.

>>52263939
UI =/= OS

>>52264599
I know, but would I try something that has another shit package manager, has nothing better to offer than any other debian distro and looks like shit from the get go.

>>52258984
So what you are saying is trisquel is useless? Figures.

>>52258657
>Anarchist theory is actually pretty reasonable
Only in fairy tails. In reality, people are too greedy for anarchism to work. That being said, capitalism is cancer too. Socialism is what we need.

File: Swyb8nJ.png (168KB, 673x454px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 673x454px

Autism: the Thread

This thread is a trainwreck. OP is too proud of himself for using free software on a chinkpad like anyone gives a shit. If posting on 4chan is all you do for the free software movement, get over yourself real quick. If not, then good for you I guess. Free is great but it doesn't meet the standards for a lot of people, which you have to understand. Non-free can suck but we can make it better. Both can be allowed to exist, proprietary will never go away. Anarchism is for teenagers and crust punks.

Minifree is a ripoff by hundreds of dollars. They're really just taking advantage of people who became aware of the FSF and Stallman and NSA shit so they shill out their shekels for a thinkpad with a free distro and libreboot installed when it's not that hard to do it themselves.

Use Debian if you want 'literal freedom', as in do whatever. Use Trisquel if you want your options limited with a shitty interface. If you need Trisquel to keep yourself from installing nonfree software, you need to practice self control instead of relying on a crappy distro to make it harder for you to install Photoshop via Wine. I don't care either way, just don't be proud of your lowkey crowd following sensibilities putting together a Stallman-pad mimic when you just want to feel like you're making a difference in some realm of pseudo-SJ the majority of the population is unaware of and doesn't care about anyway. I'm not even a macfag or anything, I totally think a surveillance dystopia is upon us, I'm even at like 99.5% free software according to vrms, I just don't want to read freetards ruining things for free software by acting like a woke sjw jackass.

File: THIS.png (2KB, 618x298px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 618x298px

>>52267693
This

buying a X200, and will be libre booting it too.

but will probably stick with debian. also doing the surgery with a rpi, so not as free as can be to start.

>>52257670
I don't, because I prefer Arch and there's some proprietary software I use (graphics drivers, steam etcetera)

>>52258220
I want this meme to stop. It only forbids non free software in the repos. Nothing is stopping you from downloading and installing non free software manually.

File: 15yvfx.jpg (37KB, 433x558px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 433x558px

>>52258233
>https://www.stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

"he OLPC uses a nonfree firmware blob for the WiFi, so I could not use the internal WiFi device"

>>52258877
Probably a driver issue. Debian ships only with free software. Same with Trisquel. You probably can install non-free gpu drivers in Debian from the repos.

>>52269530
>It only forbids non free software in the repos.
Actually it only forbids non-free software to be included in the repos maintained by the developers. You are free to add your own repos if you want to.

>>52258877
>I've tried, but it can never detect my monitor's native resolution or even how it's connected to my computer. Debian also has this issue; perhaps it's related?
Yes, because they both use a free video card driver by default. Just install drivers from the graphic card vendor.

>>52260479
> new processors have nonfree firmware with backdoors

It is eveyones duty to ditch Intel and their sekret ARC4 cpu which runs always, even in S3 mode. It has full DMA access to your memory. Even VT-d is not enough to shield you from its power. A backdoor wet dream that you paid for. Tamper with it and your computer is rebooted.

http://blog.invisiblethings.org/2015/10/27/x86_harmful.html