Agrego la FND 2.2

The fundamental dialectic of our struggle is this: will we be enslaved by our

technology, or liberated by it? 

It was in cognizance of this notion, and in service to our collective freedom

that the Free Software Movement was born. It is in this spirit that we aim here

to define exactly what it means to say that a network is free.  We hope that

the existence of this definition will help illuminate the path to a more just

world. 

Our intention is to build communications systems that are owned by the people

that use them, that allow participants to own their own data, and that use

end-to-end encryption and cryptographic trust mechanisms to assure privacy. We

call such systems 'free networks' and they are characterized by the following

five freedoms:

* Freedom 0) The freedom to participate in the network. 

  Freedom 0 regards your right to organize cooperative networks.  Conventional

  networks are characterized by a distinction between provider and user. This

  mode of organization encourages network operation in the service of

  self-interest. The provider builds and owns the infrastructure, and the user

  pays for access.  In a free network, however, nodes connect to one another,

  rather than to a single, monolithic provider. By nature of its design, a free

  network is owned by those that make use of it. Participants act as providers

  and users as the same time, and growth is auto-distributed by treating any

  profits as investment. In this way, those that join the network are able to

  become owners. This mode of organization encourages network operation in the

  service of the common good. 

* Freedom 1) The freedom to determine where one's bits are stored. 

  Freedom 1 regards your right to own the material stores of your data.

  Conventional networks encourage (if not force) their participants to store

  their data in machines which are under the administrative auspices of an

  external service provider or host. Most folks are not able to serve data from

  their homes. Participants ought to be free to store their own data (so that it

  is under their care) without sacrificing their ability to publish it.

* Freedom 2) The freedom to determine the parties with whom one's bits are shared. 

  Freedom 2 regards your right to control access to your data. 

  Data mining and the monetization of sharing has become common practice.

  Participants should be free to chose those with whom they would like to share a

  given piece of information. Only someone who owns their own data can fully

  exercise this freedom, but it is an issue regardless of where the relevant bits

  are stored. 

* Freedom 3) The freedom to transmit bits to one's peers without the prospect

  of interference, interception or censorship. 

  Freedom 3 regards the right to speak freely with your peers.

  Information flows in conventional networks are routinely and intentionally

  intercepted, obstructed, and censored. This is done at the behest of corporate

  and state actors around the world. In a free network, private communications

  should remain unexamined from the time they enter the network until the time

  they reach their destination.

* Freedom 4) The freedom to maintain anonymity, or to present a unique, trusted

  identity. 

  Freedom 4 regards your right to construct your own identity

  There is increasing pressure to forbid anonymity, and yet trustworthy

  communications remain rare. While it is essential to liberty that individuals

  be able to remain anonymous in the online public sphere, it is also essential

  that they be able to construct and maintain persistent, verifiable identities.

  Such identities might bear a legal name, a common name, or an avatar that masks

  one's corporeal self – individuals could have many such identities, and switch

  between them at will. Clear delineation between anonymous, pseudonymous, and

  onymous actors would enable all of us to better asses the trustworthiness of

  others on the network.