The FSF’s relationship with firmware is harmful to free software users

Mostly open (due to reverse-engineering) FPGAs are a thing, SkyWater is a thing, RISC-V is a thing. Take one of the open source RISC-V designs, design and build a test system using an FPGA[1] (or more than one... depending on what is needed) so you've got something to put on a board, once the design is validated use SkyWater to produce a small run of actual chips to replace the (proprietary) FPGA(s) and produce a 100% open CPU etc. as needed.[2] Sure, performance will be dismal compared to the latest silicon from Apple/Intel/AMD but it will be infinitely better than the Unobtainium processor / system they continue to fantasize about.[3] Yes, they'll probably have to jettison things like cellular and probably WiFi support due to IP issues. (note: that's not to say a wireless solution would be impossible, just that it wouldn't be one of the widely deployed or mainstream ones[4]) I understand that this isn't a simple task but how would it be more work than whining for decades with virtually nothing to show for it (given their requirements) on the hardware front?

Build a bad open source device that you can iterate on rather than complaining about for-profit companies behaving like for-profit companies. Right now open source hardware is decades behind and sitting around waiting doesn't seem to be accomplishing much.

[1] Better yet, design a fully open source FPGA of their own. Sure, it will be a couple/few decades behind the state of the art. But it would provide a starting point to build on.

[2] Of course this would take multiple iterations. One approach would be to see if Google would sponsor this as part of their partnership with SkyWater. Worst case, the FSF might have to do some light fundraising for the iterations.

[3] Again, it would likely be a couple of decades or more behind the state of the art. This too would provide a starting point. Then they could use the finished product as a fund raising aid (i.e. sell it) to fund future iterations.

[4] Open source SDR is a thing, for example.

For example for GPUs it goes a bit like this:

You need to support HDCP? Use a blob. You want to have a separate FOSS firmware without HDCP? An extra expense that bean counters won't like.

I saw this on the nonguix repo for all non free software for guix

> Please do NOT promote this repository on any official Guix communication channels, such as their mailing lists or IRC channel, even in response to support requests! This is to show respect for the Guix project’s strict policy against recommending nonfree software, and to avoid any unnecessary hostility.

To do my job and boot my laptop nonguix is required but not even allowed to talk about it with the OS it intends to support, is not something I can agree with

I think the above is the type of side-effects seen with a hardline policy of the FSF. Obviously I'm not the target of this type of policy, but I still feel more good can be done in the long run with a little compromise to the realities of using a computer today

Your CPU comes with patchable proprietary software. Period.