171–180 of 432 posts
> The reason I think this is needed is because a large percent of Internet users cannot afford hosting personal websites. "For as little as $0.25, you can set up websites at NearlyFreeSpeech.NET, the masters of only pay for what you use hosting since 2002." [1] Are you telling me people who can afford a smartphone cannot afford some simple static hosting? [1] https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm assuming the best intentions from you but I'd like to point out two things: 1. When discussing human rights (which apply to technological freedoms) reducing a need to "an edge case" is the basis of marginalization, defined as "treatment of a person, group, or concept as insignificant or peripheral". Therefore, it is never appropriate to rely on such language to prove a point, especially when we are discussing sof…
Is the right of a handful of people to run a web server on their phone more important than the right of millions of "unsophisticated" users to not be scammed / abused by malware? Since it's inception smart phones have been a consumer platform, used for consuming content. The platform for tinkerers already exists. It's called a PC with Linux installed. Every platform does not need to cater to your needs.
I think hosting services for Internet doesn't make sense, but does for local network. I have thought how could have disaster response server on local network. Instead of Raspberry Pi with battery, could have phone which is has own battery, and more likely to have one available.
> The reason I think this is needed is because a large percent of Internet users cannot afford hosting personal websites. "For as little as $0.25, you can set up websites at NearlyFreeSpeech.NET, the masters of only pay for what you use hosting since 2002." [1] Are you telling me people who can afford a smartphone cannot afford some simple static hosting? [1] https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm assuming the best intentions from you but I'd like to point out two things: 1. When discussing human rights (which apply to technological freedoms) reducing a need to "an edge case" is the basis of marginalization, defined as "treatment of a person, group, or concept as insignificant or peripheral". Therefore, it is never appropriate to rely on such language to prove a point, especially when we are discussing sof…
I'm intrigued. Should all smart refrigerators be able to run web servers? TVs? Would you want them to?
A phone costs hundreds of dollars. A Raspberry Pi costs $50 and does the job 100x better.
WHY must people again and again insist on this? This is not the way for 99.999% of people
Why not insist on extending the abilities and security of the one device 99.999% of people already have, before insisting on the acquisition of another, special-purpose device, requiring its own intricate setup and maintenance and power and space and connectivity? I just don't get it.
As for non-rooted Android not allowing use of port 80, this is just one symptom of the larger problem of not allowing the computer owner to have root privileges. And letting an advertising company have them instead. IMHO.
Unrelated perhaps but it is possible to forward port 80 in Android. For example, I forward tcp/80 to a computer running NetBSD. This can be done using an app, e.g., NetGuard. TLS zealots might want to try this sometime and observe some of the unencrypted egress traffic.
Thought experiment: Imagine you make a salary or other financial gains by applying what you know in the subject matter area of X. Someone comes along and proposes that they want to teach more people about how X works. What is the likelihood you will respond with something like "no one really wants to know how X works". You want to maintain the status quo because you understand that an information asymmetry between people who understand how X works and those who do not must exist in order that you may continue to be paid for or otherwise profit from your knowledge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm assuming the best intentions from you but I'd like to point out two things: 1. When discussing human rights (which apply to technological freedoms) reducing a need to "an edge case" is the basis of marginalization, defined as "treatment of a person, group, or concept as insignificant or peripheral". Therefore, it is never appropriate to rely on such language to prove a point, especially when we are discussing sof…
But the option is there, rooting. As long as that is reasonably available I don't really see problem. Of course the seven hells of apple ecosystem is another matter You can argue all you want about what the normal joe shmoe should be able to do but most joes shmoes will use that to hurt themselves more than help. Limitiations are essentially OSHA of computing, by making it hard to do the wrong stuff it makes most peo…
Well, it's not reasonably available. The number of android phone manufacturers that still allow bootloaders to be unlocked without significant friction is pretty small, and hardware attestation is slowly killing the whole rooting/custom rom scene since phones with unlocked bootloaders can't run many apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is the right of a handful of people to run a web server on their phone more important than the right of millions of "unsophisticated" users to not be scammed / abused by malware? Since it's inception smart phones have been a consumer platform, used for consuming content. The platform for tinkerers already exists. It's called a PC with Linux installed. Every platform does not need to cater to your needs.
PC is overkill for this case. A raspberry pi would get the job done while saving energy and equipment costs.