Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Your Computer Isn't Yours

sneak.berlin

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 764 posts

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#151

Post by grey_earthling »

rsanheim wrote: post #99
falseAss wrote: post #75

if trustd really cannot be blocked by any vpn, i am wondering how's large corporates will react for this new macbook, e.g. whether to continue allowing employees to use this new macbook as working machine.

The tech corporate response may be one of the best avenues to actually apply any leverage against apple with this current situation. I've already heard of friends at big-tech companies where network admins are applying corporate wide VPN policies to block apple's ocsp.apple.com requests after the outage that happened yesterday and basically nuked productivity for hours. In some cases it meant engineers _could not_ de…

We're already used to being unable to deploy code due to a GitHub or NPM outage. I don't think this will persuade the corporate people with the money to invest in switching. By analogy, look at how many staff hours are wasted supporting IE.

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#152

Post by pizza234 »

d3nj4l wrote: post #118
pizza234 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not anymore. Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered, which is something one can experience with a Linux distro on pretty much any machine. I agree that it's not as much as a polished experience, but that's the point as indicated - trading off polish for ownership. I'm excluding from the discussion professional documents editing - compatibility with Libreoffice is mediocre (at best) in my experience, but hav…

> Consumer usage nowadays is very browser centered But it's also just as likely that you're using a browser made by Google, and using other services made by one of the big companies that don't care about your privacy. Where's the difference?

There's some confusion in the thread, in the fact that there's a mixup between operating systems and programs (or classes of programs), however the parent was referring to operating systems:

> The alternatives are still completely unusable by most people.

Otherwise the statement wouldn't make sense.

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#153

Post by szc »

ur-whale wrote: post #131
szc wrote: post #127

I'm not going to comment on the linked article, other than say I think it contains serious mistakes in describing what OCSP is for and errors in other statements. In the background there is a war going on, but it isn't what you think. It is a war between malware creators and OS creators. From my perspective it goes like this: To "identify" malware you need signatures. Signatures need valid certificates. Signing keys…

>For me, Apple products really are designed to protect my personal information. Which unfortunately isn't mutually exclusive with granting full access to your stuff to state-level actors. But I guess there's always a category of people who actually like the idea of big brother.

Sorry, but please can you point to any real evidence that Apple allows state-level actors access? From what I can see it is exactly the opposite.

I am not an advocate for big brother.

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#154

Post by grey_earthling »

rsanheim wrote: post #100
simonebrunozzi wrote: post #29

This is sad. But the solution is not to use Signal. Resistance if futile that way. I believe the only solution is top-down: voting governments that can change this once and for all.

It can be both things. Use signal if you are sending messages that are security sensitive, or if you want to prefer secure messaging by default. But of course vote and talk to elected officials and agitate for policy changes as well.

Signal uses centralised servers controlled by one organisation. It could interoperate with other servers, but the Signal organisation forbids it. I don't see how using Signal leads to freedom from control by an organisation.

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#156

Post by sooheon »

szc wrote: post #153
ur-whale wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For me, Apple products really are designed to protect my personal information. Which unfortunately isn't mutually exclusive with granting full access to your stuff to state-level actors. But I guess there's always a category of people who actually like the idea of big brother.

Sorry, but please can you point to any real evidence that Apple allows state-level actors access? From what I can see it is exactly the opposite. I am not an advocate for big brother.

Apple has been a part of PRISM since 2012. Apple is a US company, and bound by law to give access when push comes to shove.

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#157

Post by [deleted] »

JimTheMan wrote: post #125
damnencryption wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that's an incredibly 'old fashioned' statement to make If spending in cosmetics industry is any indicator, women definitely cares about how something looks over men. There are hard number even if you don't believe in the various evolution theories and biological differences which makes women more prone to noticing subtle visual and design cues. From 2010: https://appleinsider.com/articles/10/12/01/women_want_apples…

I will state it more plainly than 'old fashioned'. I find your assumptions about what Women want from their tech products offensive and from what I can gather, just based on you wanting to believe it really badly. In addition to that... I actually sold the damn things to actual human beings! I KNOW who is buying them! I've met them by the thousands! It's like approaching a mechanic about why Ford's don't break down b…

[deleted]

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#158

Post by sooheon »

lostmsu wrote: post #91
alphabettsy wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about efficient? A Mac Mini is extremely efficient.

That whole thing is temporary until 2021 when other companies will get a chance to use 5nm fabs.

All things are temporary. If Apple is consistently ahead in efficiency at any given point in time that's what it means to be ahead.

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#159

Post by fxtentacle »

rsanheim wrote: post #103
deadbunny wrote: post #16

Yet despite all the wailing and gnashing of teeth - both in the article and in the comments here in the various threads - people are still making excuses for continuing to use Apple/Google/Microsoft/et al products because the alternatives are a bit rough round the edges. These companies have repeatedly shown that they don't respect people's privacy and people have resoundingly responded that neither do they. I would…

You pointed out a core problem here, and a common blindspot with the HN crowd: > continuing to use Apple/Google/Microsoft That is probably 98%+ of devices that most typical people use for everyday computing, across phone, laptop, and desktop. Whether it is an android device, an iPhone, a Dell laptop or a new M1 macbook you are beholden to a corporation that doesn't care about privacy. I would argue that Apple cares a…

Setting up Ubuntu was easy enough. But the file manager locks up regularly, switching between multiple windows of the same app with alt+tab doesn't work reliably, and I actually had to Google how to create a new folder. The stock picture viewer is lacking information such as ICC profile and when I installed the recommended Gimp, it was a mess of windows and the save dialog was horrible.

I suffer through all of it because I need docker with gpu support, but it's honestly a lot worse than what I expected.

Re: Your Computer Isn't Yours

#160

Post by grey_earthling »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #116

So knowing this, how is it that HN remains so interested in the new "Apple silicon" or the latest "updates" to macOS. Why in God's name do people agree to participate in so-called "telemetry" and submit to whatever changes Apple wants to make in the OS, without question, in the form of "updates". Trying to control what programs users can run via "AppStores" and "developer certificates", and making them pay Apple for…

> Why in God's name do people agree to participate in so-called "telemetry" and submit to whatever changes Apple wants to make in the OS, without question, in the form of "updates".

I have automatic updates enabled because I trust the vendor who makes my distro to act broadly in my interests. If I discover they've done something I don't like, I can switch to a different vendor and get mostly the same software from them instead.

The answer to your question is that these people trust Apple. I don't understand why.

Post reply on HN