Hello everyone,

I’ve been wondering, why has no one built an entirely free (as in freedom) computer yet? For humans to be unable to share each other’s knowledge to build one of the most important technologies ever created for society, how is it that we have yet to have full knowledge about how our systems operate?

I get that companies are basically the ones to blame, and I know there are alternatives like the Talos II by Raptor Computing, but still, how do we not have publicly available full schematics for just one modern computer? I’m talking down to firmware-level stuff like proprietary ECs, microcode, hard drive/SSD firmware, network controllers, etc. How do we not have a fully open system yet?

  • astraeus@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    This is the same argument you could use against any open-source projects. Software is much easier to open-source because the tools needed and barrier to entry are relatively minuscule. Hardware requires a lot of resources that take time and money to acquire. TSMC is fifty years ahead because they have had billions in research funds and have acquired the brightest minds of the past few generations, this still doesn’t mean that the technology of today is limited to highly advanced fabs the same way fifty years from now. Arguably all it takes is a dedicated team of highly-skilled hobbyists to make leaps toward open-source hardware more suitable for today’s requirements.

    OP said hobbyists will never be able to make open-source hardware close to today’s scale, but it’s entirely possible for future generations to do just that.

      • astraeus@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The fabs broke sub-micron well over 30 years ago, the biggest reason it won’t happen sooner in the public space is because most assume making it open-source is impossible. Technology hasn’t progressed because people said X (variable, not the social formerly known as Twitter) was impossible, it progressed because of the people who questioned that assumption.