[cblades]

This is really frustrating, and basically the exact same thread as happened a while back with another list of "ethical alternatives".

You can't call something ethical without going into detail about what you mean. and:

Policy No Ads No Tracking We respect you

is not useful.

The value in ethics is in the conversation around what is ethical, not in a big, friendly "this is ethical" sticker.

This is as useful as "do no evil", and from the vague wording on the landing page, I'd imagine the people behind librem don't think google is very ethical right now.

[lallysingh]

.. And what is? It took a long time to define what Open Source meant, and that took some work.

[marcus_holmes]

isn't "ethical" one of those subjective terms though?

so... no-one can say their product/service is "ethical" without getting into a semantic argument about what "ethical" means

or... anyone can call their product/service "ethical" and it's up to the buyer to work out if their definition of that agrees

[cblades]

That's my point. The value is in the discussion around what's considered ethical, not in the label.

What I would like is for services like this to provide, up-front, a more complete discussion of how they've arrived at their recommendations, and what criteria they consider.

[marcus_holmes]

that's reasonable, I guess... though I can see a point where they want to sell things, rather than engage in endless discussions about everyone's opinion of what "ethical" means ;)