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

I want a computer that I own

misc-stuff.terraaeon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 668 posts

Re: I want a computer that I own

#141

Post by paulcole »

dom2 wrote: post #38
koverda wrote: post #8

> Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can't afford to buy. This statement here made me pause for a bit. He wants a computer with specific features, but doesn't want pay for the models that offer those features because they are too expensive? Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too, but unfortunately, reality has constraints.

Income shouldn't be a barrier to having technology that you own completely, a concept that until recently was common.

During what period was income not a barrier to “having technology that you own completely”?

Given that the only people frothing at the mouth in desire of “having technology that [they] own completely” seem to be rich computer programmers, why wouldn’t companies jack the price up?

Re: I want a computer that I own

#142

Post by post_below »

judge2020 wrote: post #110
post_below wrote: post #21

> Will this ever end? It remains an interesting question. Is there any way to reclaim the autonomy and ethos of freedom from the earlier part of the digital era? I'm not sure how that would look. I don't mean in terms of a set of hardware and software solutions. I mean technology that's actually for the end users, available to everyone with curiosity as the only barrier to entry. It sounds like a utopian delusion eve…

Windows has been the mainstream OS for nearly 25 years (probably more, had a hard time getting good historical stats). The desktop has never been free, just simpler and less 'rent seeking after the fact'. https://www.cnet.com/news/windows-95-remains-most-popular-op...

I suppose I should have added basic equipment as a barrier to entry, it seemed self evident as I was writing.

Edit: I think you could call Windows mainstream (or becoming dominant) around version 3, maybe a bit before. So that's over 30 years.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#143

Post by asymptosis »

aiisahik wrote: post #105

This is literally something that NEVER crosses the mind of the average consumer. We should have a HackerNews version of "first world problems" and call it "HackerNews Problems". You now have a computer that is 10,000 times faster than one you had 30 yrs ago at half the price. Oh and it fits in your pocket. A lot of time and money went into creating that. Those people need to get paid. And yes you pay for it with some…

Numerous argumentative fallacies here.

* Nothing about "average consumer" was mentioned. * Speed and size aren't relevant to topics of ownership and trust. * People may pay with privacy, but it should be a consenting relationship. * 4000 > 0 * Whatever "most people" are into, there is yet a market for good VPN services, and people do use Tor.

I hope you enjoyed your exercise in hyperbole.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#144

Post by kiwidrew »

Koshkin wrote: post #119
walrus01 wrote: post #31

> Perhaps I am looking for something like the x286 DOS computer I had in the early 1990's You can do an almost fully GPL compliant Linux desktop by building it yourself today. I can already see people thinking "but what about the closed source binary blobs? my video card? my network interfaces?" But even your 12 MHz 286 or 386SX/20 had closed source AMI or Phoenix BIOS firmware on it. The motherboard manufacturer in…

The difference is, the BIOS and other firmware in early PCs did not spy on you.

Precisely!

In the olden days of real mode MS-DOS, if you want to gather keystrokes from the user securely (e.g. a password) the program could simply take over the IRQ1 (keyboard interrupt) vector and that was sufficient. The extra paranoid could also revector the other interrupts (or disable interrupts entirely) and ensure they had exclusive control of the entire machine.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#145

Post by legends2k »

marshmallow_12 wrote: post #124
m-p-3 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your average desktop/laptop CPU runs a blackbox like Intel AMT or AMD PSP which is basically an always active mini-CPU that runs in the background and is OS-agnostic. If you consider your OS max privilege level as ring 0, this is ring -1. If/when someone manage to conpromise those, they can basically take over your computer, and Intel/AMD doesn't provide any sort of killswitch or physical way of disabling it.

Tell me more about this. What does this system do, and why can't we do anything about it?

The first section of [1] explains that with references

[1]: https://legends2k.github.io/note/clean_me

Re: I want a computer that I own

#146

Post by cat_plus_plus »

kokx wrote: post #36
eeZah7Ux wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buy a PinePhone. It might very well be more open and trustworthy than some laptops or desktops.

I love the PinePhone. It is an amazing project, and I'm definitely considering buying one. However, it does not solve my main problem. For most scenarios I still need a "normal" smartphone with either iOS or Android. Apps like WhatsApp and banking apps are unfortunately needed for a large part of my daily life. At risk of either socially isolating myself or bringing major inconveniences without having them. All unava…

Well, you want an open computer right? How can you trust closed source apps like WhatsApp and Wells Fargo?

Re: I want a computer that I own

#147

Post by tvb12 »

missedthecue wrote: post #52
kokx wrote: post #15

I have a similar feeling, but with modern smartphones. Owning my computer is still relatively possible. I can build a computer from parts which I can choose, and have a choice in which operating system to install on them. Laptops are slightly more closed, but even on those I can choose the OS myself. Modern smartphones however, seem like walled gardens in which I have no control at all. I cannot choose any of the par…

You could buy a flip phone

Every flip phone I've come across has run a version of Android.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#149

Post by Retric »

Koshkin wrote: post #106
Retric wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surveillance is profitable for the computer manufacturers. The “barebones” version therefore costs more. SmartTV’s, cellphones, etc don’t make a lot per person but it’s enough you need to go up market to find any real privacy.

I don’t know, a $1200 for a phone sounds expensive enough.

Up market as in brands. Samsung can’t exactly advertise less surveillance as a feature, this a “$5” feature ends up costing vastly more.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#150

Post by 40four »

It’s a somewhat angry & rambling rant, but without picking it apart too hard, one sentence really resonated with me.

I would summarize the thesis in this sentence ->

”I want a computer that does what I want it to do, not one that has a hidden agenda programmed into it at the factory.”

Post reply on HN