281–290 of 554 posts
What this article warns as the Apocalypse some suits that make computer use decisions for large organizations will see as features they want implemented.
Interesting naming. "Microsoft Hell God". Pluto (Greek: Πλούτων Plouton, "giver of wealth", Pluton in French and German) the most common name for the classical ruler of the underworld. Plouton was one of several euphemistic names for Hades, described in the Iliad as the god most hateful to mortals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto_(mythology)
Well, they already use Kerberos, his dog.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like it's flawed. Voters and politicians abuse it left and right - pun intended. I don't think we ever came up with anything more humane though, and I don't wish to change it for anything other - to be honest, for the simple reason of not wanting the responsibility that goes along with it. Choosing a party is not like choosing an OS for your PC, though. Choosing the OS would be like choosing the political syst…
So, putting it all together, someone should choose and restrict which OS can be installed on your PC, so that you can feel safe in the thought that everyone has the same restriction? At least that's how I managed to understand your comment to the best of my abilities, so hopefully I'm missing something. Though if there is such a something, the point did not get across successfully.
This makes sense to entities providing a service, and also for many who doesn't mind not having control over their something, which is, I think, very similar to how we don't really have control over a great many of things. This is the point I wanted to get across to the original commenter, who protested "god forbid you have control of your own PC?".
When those these restrictive practices were introduced with iOS and to a much lesser extent various Android distributions (not just phone, but other types of appliances), i was genuinely surprised about how quiet the same type of people are, who I thought protested out of principal.
Its the same pattern, like poltics, where people are just basically trying to sell or advocate for you to buy into or sell another product.
What this article warns as the Apocalypse some suits that make computer use decisions for large organizations will see as features they want implemented.
"For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth have become rich through the abundance of her luxury."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Damn, now I'm nostalgic for the older days of hacker news where RMS was quoted every other post. The community is forgetting it's roots.
As someone who was here from day two, this is not how old HN was. It was many things to many people, and it’s very difficult to break out of the illusion that rose-tintedness tends to give us. (Guilty of it myself.) HN has been consistently contrarian. That’s about all that you can say without quickly becoming mistaken.
until recently. Just like reddit, it has become less niche and more mainstream. For eg: HN majority opinion on covid's origin. It matched the official US govt lines as it switched back and forth between market and lab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How so? Redefines from what to what? Please elaborate. Perhaps you mean that if you, as owner and legitimate user of a device, are able to perform a particular change only during a brief window of time rather than at any time of your choosing, then that limits your control over the device? If so, then my answer is yes, certainly it does. But it also limits the access of anyone who impersonates you (such as the evil e…
You're wrong because the bootloader is more often locked than not, and there are various other nefarious controls in place that prevent you from doing it without voiding your warranty, such as one-time fuses. In theory, yes, you could implement it like you said, but that's not what happens in practice nor the direction we've been tending towards in recent times.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is a hostile power everywhere else in the world. And then also for about 4-8 out of every 8 years to its own citizens.
People should generally be most afraid of their own government - it's the one that is allowed to use violence where they live.
Be careful to not forget the distinction between "being allowed to" and "being able to". There are documented cases of countries (including the USA) using violence against people even when they aren't the government where these people live.