No. If your blog post is anything to go by, almost none of the software on your machine is Free. Especially your OS!
Every program must fulfill the following requirements:
The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
If you can listen to an MP3 on your machine, chances are it is using a licensed codec, breaking freedom 3. If anything more restrictive than GNU GPL is used for any of the hardware drivers then it is in breach of freedom 1!
Sorry, I am very confused. Debian only includes Free Software in their repositories, right? I'm even using Iceweasel over Firefox. That's one reason I chose it in the first place.
EDIT: checking my sources.list, I do have an additional Crunchbang-specific source. So it's possible that has non-free software in it, I guess.
So, I'm wondering: are you using a Lemote? If so, why not? You seem quite... passionate about absolutism on this issue.
See, this is what people like me who have been using exclusively OSS (and FOSS) for years have had to deal with! ;)
P.S. Don't forget to enable SELinux. :)
Edit: To be fair to your co-debater, by using open-source software with minor exceptions here and there (unFree firmware in the kernel, a smattering of non-Free software, patent-protected multimedia drivers, etc.) is in the mind of Free Software activists kind of like saying that you should have strong privacy rights, except perhaps for a little bit of metadata here and there, maybe some quibbling about analysis/capture just to make it easier on everyone. Why be a zealot about one of those but not about the other?
I personally believe people are free to choose what to be activists about but that's the perspective I see.
I'd suggest that either you: a) actually list free software alternatives in this post or b) remove any reference to free software at all and replace it with whatever you want (open source has a pretty flippant definition, so perhaps that would be the best option)
And no I don't use a Leemote, nor do I use Linux or any free software at all. However I do recognize the FSF and its beliefs and people who misrepresent them annoy me. Someone will come along and read your blog and believe that the set up really is Free Software, write a blog post of their own, probably skewing the definition even more. Where does is stop. Why does no-one do research anymore!
Every program must fulfill the following requirements:
The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2). The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
If you can listen to an MP3 on your machine, chances are it is using a licensed codec, breaking freedom 3. If anything more restrictive than GNU GPL is used for any of the hardware drivers then it is in breach of freedom 1!