Live data from Hacker News

The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

boingboing.net

41–50 of 218 posts

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#41
post #24
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember in the 90s people all thought Stallman was crazy. And by people I mean developers, Linux users, people on usenet, etc. We all appreciated his contributions but at the end of the day just figured he was wearing a tin foil hat.

Over the course of my life the tinfoil to warranted concern has been the general trend. Mostly in areas where unchecked ambition for control, power, and influence have allowed greed to convince people to do evil unto others. The natural cost of information is the marginal cost of copying. It's the creation of new, useful information that needs to be incentivized; that's where UBI or some other hire more public works…

[deleted]

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#42
post #25
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember in the 90s people all thought Stallman was crazy. And by people I mean developers, Linux users, people on usenet, etc. We all appreciated his contributions but at the end of the day just figured he was wearing a tin foil hat.

What's more worrying is people I speak to regularly now don't even know who he is. And if they do it's because of the toe cheese incident. We're obsessed with celebrity trivia and judge the person rather than the message being delivered. I see that a lot in other areas these days as well. This is a broken society in my mind.

> What's more worrying is people I speak to regularly now don't even know who he is. And if they do it's because of the toe cheese incident.

I've known who Stallman is for a long time, but I had never heard about the toe cheese incident. I just looked it up. My reaction:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n_NXSa0_Uc

For anyone interested in the toe cheese incident:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ

I'm not trying to malign Stallman here, but you can't deny this is interesting.

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#43

These days, many computers only run authorized software, and trusted boot is fairly secure. They’re integrated hardware/software systems. This article is out of date, and a bit biased, to boot.

> This article is out of date

Only if you're trying to say that the war is mostly over, and general purpose computing lost.

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#44
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't want to listen to Stallman because he talks about motivations. The number of times I've had people downvote me for pointing out all organizations will act to maximize profit regardless the cost to others is extraordinary. It doesn't matter if it's google, mozilla, microsoft or the fsf.

The FSF is a non-profit organization, so that motivation quite literally doesn't apply to them. All other regular corporations, yes. :)

They will do it too, only it manifests differently. Instead of money in a bank, they will expand and or do more work, etc...

This isn't bad. But it is resonant with what Stallman talks about.

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Biased in favor of empowering individuals, rather than making them serfs under corporate landlords? What's wrong with such a bias?

We lived under that model, and it sucks for a lot of people. Barons also provided for the common defense. An unlocked software architecture and untrusted code leaves people at the mercy of hackers, it doesn't empower the average user. We can do that defense of users better than we're doing right now, by divorcing the trust model from the paid vendor model, but it's worth noting how we got here in the first place and…

An unlocked software architecture and untrusted code leaves people at the mercy of hackers, it doesn't empower the average user.

There are other solutions to this problem that do not involve surrendering control over everything that matters to corporate interests that may coincidentally align with your own sometimes.

For example, do we really think a corporation primarily motivated by making its profits is going to be habitually careful about software security? We know this is not often the case, because the quality of so much software produced by big businesses today is terrible in terms of security. What is more telling is that it continues to be terrible even though we are well aware of methods to mitigate many of those vulnerabilities. But those methods usually require more skill and/or more time to get right, and typically that means greater up-front costs, and since it turns out that Joe User will often put up with junk security and pay good money for the software anyway, the profit incentive does not have the outcome we would like.

Note that this doesn't necessarily mean Joe likes the poor security. He might be willing to use the tech anyway because he values what he gets from it more than he believes the dangers are costing him, or because he believes the dangers are inherent in the tech and unavoidable, or because he just doesn't realise the dangers are there in the first place.

This can be solved in a number of ways, but most of them come down to showing people that it's possible to do better by writing software that actually does better, and given the lack of commercial incentives coming from above, the most likely place we'll see that is in community efforts. Those efforts don't even have to result in some sort of openly developed software that dominates its market to succeed here, just to make it obvious to enough normal people that they don't need to accept substandard junk and they should demand better in return for their money.

Much the same argument can be applied to issues like privacy, repairable and upgradeable hardware, open standards for data portability, freely programmable devices, and no doubt many more. If competition in the commercial markets isn't getting the job done, yet we know doing the job is possible, it's up to those of us with the knowledge and skills to push things forward for now. That could mean directly creating better hardware and software, educating our less skilled and experienced peers to improve standards in the industry and make hiring better people less expensive, or simply educating users and pushing for higher standards from the customer's side.

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#46
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't want to listen to Stallman because he talks about motivations. The number of times I've had people downvote me for pointing out all organizations will act to maximize profit regardless the cost to others is extraordinary. It doesn't matter if it's google, mozilla, microsoft or the fsf.

The FSF is a non-profit organization, so that motivation quite literally doesn't apply to them. All other regular corporations, yes. :)

It does. I remember when I said that Mozilla offering women's outreach was the start of the end for them and being called a misogynist for it.

Their current market rate speaks for itself.

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#48
post #24
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember in the 90s people all thought Stallman was crazy. And by people I mean developers, Linux users, people on usenet, etc. We all appreciated his contributions but at the end of the day just figured he was wearing a tin foil hat.

Over the course of my life the tinfoil to warranted concern has been the general trend. Mostly in areas where unchecked ambition for control, power, and influence have allowed greed to convince people to do evil unto others. The natural cost of information is the marginal cost of copying. It's the creation of new, useful information that needs to be incentivized; that's where UBI or some other hire more public works…

We need to do a lot better than UBI for FOSS to keep advancing. A caste of code monks who forgo a comfortable life to write free software from their Mom's basement, or a cabin in the woods, isn't nearly good enough.

Might not be able to pay out a quarter million a year like the FAAAM crew does, but we need a bunch of jobs paying half that to write and maintain open source. If it isn't competitive with the other options, it won't attract the best people.

I don't have a plan here. I found my niche but, like most of them, it isn't scalable. But we have to keep plotting if we want something sustainable.

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#49
A couple years ago I saw a version of this talk from the chaos computer club on youtube and really loved it. I think its an important issue.

So I emailed Cory and asked if I could interview him for a podcast. He responded almost immediately and said yes. At the time he was doing interviews on major network programs about a new book, and I figured he would never respond.

He was basically like you would expect Cory Doctorow to be in person, smart and well spoken, friendly and fired up about computing freedom type issues. We need more public intellectuals like him.

Re: The Coming Civil War over General Purpose Computing (2012)

#50
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over the course of my life the tinfoil to warranted concern has been the general trend. Mostly in areas where unchecked ambition for control, power, and influence have allowed greed to convince people to do evil unto others. The natural cost of information is the marginal cost of copying. It's the creation of new, useful information that needs to be incentivized; that's where UBI or some other hire more public works…

We need to do a lot better than UBI for FOSS to keep advancing. A caste of code monks who forgo a comfortable life to write free software from their Mom's basement, or a cabin in the woods, isn't nearly good enough. Might not be able to pay out a quarter million a year like the FAAAM crew does, but we need a bunch of jobs paying half that to write and maintain open source. If it isn't competitive with the other optio…

Two things:

1) you'd still budget 125k a man-year? Why? That's only needed for devs in SV, NYC, London and other places with mad rent, besides - all you're gonna get in these places are fresh university grads and hipsters, not seasoned people with actual experience that tells them to not use a two months old JS framework for something that is supposed to live long.

2) Why limit it to USA? Other countries have decent programmers too, with way lower cost of employment. 60k is going to fetch you quality in Germany, 30k in Eastern Europe.

Besides, the best way to finance all of this, other than pressuring government to procure only/preferred open source is some rich startup exiter putting a couple billion dollars into some sort of trust fund and pay the development from the interest.

Post reply on HN