https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html
Apple's Operating Systems are Malware
Is there anything these guys like? Stallman and Gnu are extremists
Google's software mistreats or harms the user
31–40 of 291 posts
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#32Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
If you come at it from the perspective that Google is your friend, as in not like a real friend (who I wouldn't let change my passwords), but a friend that's even better than a real friend, then sure, these points are paranoid. The GNU perspective is very distrustful of the idea that anyone else should be administrating their devices, and refuses to trust any corporation more than they would a friend.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not commenting on you directly, but, in general, I find the kind of control that the Google parental control app gives to be excessive. It makes talking unnecessary and gives a direct window to a personal dimension of the kid. You really have a total power over the kids phone and activity. I get the reasons to install this on the phone of a child, but at the same time I'm afraid that it might be too much and tha…
To further specify: go read the user reviews of the kids in Google Play Store for the app. Apart from being hilarious, they are actually quite sad and I understand, in part, their points.
Sorry, for which app?
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#34Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
The average user certainly doesn't worry about any of this, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't. The worst, of course, is the tragedy of the commons dynamics. A lot of harm that comes from surveillance capitalism does not affect someone in particular, but it amounts to great damage to society as a whole. For example, by degrading public discourse, addicting people to screen time while robbing them of living the…
> The average user certainly doesn't worry about any of this, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't.
I think the point he was making, in part, was that if the average user worried about those things, they would WANT most of those features and decisions.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#35Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
[deleted]
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#36As an Android user, what are some ways that I can deal with the problems addressed here? (I already do a number of things, but I’m curious what everyone else does.)
Ignore this list and find a better one that actually represents the issues fairly.
Many of the points made are legitimate concerns. I’m guessing that you work for Google (or Apple)?
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#37Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
> Ignoring the fact that there is basically no OS in existence that can't be infected with malware.
To be fair to GNU, GNU Hurd cannot be infected with malware because no one is quite sure how to install it and keep it running for any meaningful amount of time.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#38Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
It sounds like GNU have a very constrained view on what a computer does and is used for. From reading this, it sounds like they want a computer (and by extension, its OS) to be a thing that sits on a desk and is operated on in very distinct ways.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#39Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
> - They describe Google's demonstrated ability to remove malware from user's devices as a "backdoor"
from wikipedia "A backdoor is a method, often secret, of bypassing normal authentication or encryption in a computer system, a product, or an embedded device "
Seems to fit.
> - They describe parental controls as "censorship"
"Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient"."
Also seems to fit.
I could go on about the other points, but most of it is true almost by definition.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#40I feel like DRM is basically the prisoner's dilemma at this point where it's in everyone's interest to give it up, but no one wants to be the first person to do it.
But honestly it's weird for GNU to fault the person being held at gunpoint for the situation, not the person holding the gun.