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

Right to root access

medhir.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 428 posts

Re: Right to root access

#301

Post by cakealert »

kachapopopow wrote: post #184

The reason why this will never happen is simply due to things like DRM. We right now have ENCRYPTED signal going from our computer to our displays, not just computers, but phones too SIMPLY to prevent people from dumping raw data. All of that extra processing done just so you're allowed to for ex: watch netflix with a resolution higher than 720p. Then comically there's Chinese capture cards that you plug your GPU int…

I suspect DRM will eventually be self defeating. For example, I prefer to torrent content just so that I can get stuff to play using my media player of choice (and the instant seeks) without any hassle. Most normal people probably aren't even aware this is an option.

But with cryptocurrencies normalizing it's only a matter of time before a paid piracy service emerges that is both cheaper, simpler and better than Netflix or any other streamer. Some arguably already have.

DRM was being broken for years without even a monetary incentive, with one it won't stand a chance.

Re: Right to root access

#302

Post by immibis »

regnull wrote: post #252
lapcat wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> privacy-centric solutions are out there and relatively easy to find Really? Please name them. Over the past 10 or 15 years, I've never seen anything other than the iPhone/Android or Mac/Windows duopoly for sale in any retail store. I've never seen any advertising for other than those duopolies. The HN crowd may be aware of obscure options, but for the vast majority of consumers, they don't exist. And since we as de…

And as for "why are not selling this in every retail store?", the answer is the same - because if they were, no one would buy them. I found the situation curious, while everyone complains about it, only very few people are trying to do anything about it. Perhaps the breaking point was not reached yet, and something big has to happen to change people's perspective.

I'm glad that Fairphones are available in stores right next to Xiaomis, but they cost three times the price for half the specifications. It may plausibly be cheaper to buy a Xiaomi phone and then personally sue Xiaomi to get it unlocked than to buy a Fairphone.

Re: Right to root access

#303

Post by AnthonyMouse »

lapcat wrote: post #263
regnull wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And as for "why are not selling this in every retail store?", the answer is the same - because if they were, no one would buy them. I found the situation curious, while everyone complains about it, only very few people are trying to do anything about it. Perhaps the breaking point was not reached yet, and something big has to happen to change people's perspective.

> And as for "why are not selling this in every retail store?", the answer is the same - because if they were, no one would buy them. That's purely hypothetical. How could any prove or disprove the assertion? The general point, though, is that consumer awareness is essential for sales. People won't buy things that they don't know about. As an indie developer myself, I'm painfully aware of this. It doesn't matter how…

It's not just about familiarity. People are willing to try new things. The actual problems are network effects and vendor lock-in.

The hardest part about switching from Facebook isn't installing some other app or anything like that, it's getting everyone else you know to switch from Facebook.

The hardest part about switching from Windows isn't installing Linux, it's getting e.g. game developers to target Linux before it has significant consumer market share.

That isn't to say that doing these thing is impossible, but it certainly isn't trivial, so anyone wondering why it hasn't happened already can't seriously think the only explanation is that nobody cares. It's like saying nobody cares about high healthcare costs -- of course they care, the question is what do we have to do to fix it?

Re: Right to root access

#305

Post by dmitrygr »

If I buy my grandma a device that is locked down in a way that NOBODY (including her, under the patient guidance of a scammer on the phone) can root, that is my choice. If you want a device that can be unlocked, the world is full of android tablets. Go wild. Some of us want an un-rootable device!

Re: Right to root access

#306

Post by inetknght »

throw0101a wrote: post #180
raxxor wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If protection of the casual user was an argument, there would be an easy option to unlock your system, be that phones or desktop computers. But on many systems these options do not exist because the vendor likes people dependent on them. This is why devices like chromebooks or all mobile phones are more or less e-waste in the making. In my opinion it is a waste to use any development capacity for these systems apart…

> If protection of the casual user was an argument, there would be an easy option to unlock your system, be that phones or desktop computers. Making it easy to unlock could make it easy(er) for scammers to get it unlocked: > I received the same type of call a little later in the day. They were very adamant they were calling from the Bell data centre, on a terrible line and I made them call back three more times while…

> Making it easy to unlock could make it easy(er) for scammers to get it unlocked

Ahh, if only governments would start cracking down on scammers.

Alas, scammers are a feature of modern capitalism. You'd not be wrong if you thought modern businesses are built on scamming people.

Re: Right to root access

#307

Post by sumtechguy »

dns_snek wrote: post #300
sumtechguy wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But on many systems these options do not exist because the vendor likes people dependent on them. Dependent is not exactly the right thing here. Lower support costs probably is. If a vendor gives out root access. If that root access can brick a machine. Then you will get a small percentage of very high touch broken things as returns. Customers like this are in the 'dangerous enough' but not 'good enough to do it co…

Damage caused by the customer isn't covered by any warranty anyway, and realistically, how many people would tinker with root access as long as the device worked as intended? I'd be really surprised if the number was more than 1 in 100. And if 1 in 20 brick the device in the process, that's 1 in 2000. According to [1] the average warranty claims rate for consumer electronics is 1 in 100. I doubt the difference in sup…

> Damage caused by the customer isn't covered by any warranty anyway

Exactly. We charged the guy for what he did. We gave him 'sa' access to the database and he tried to burn us.

I think you may be assuming people act rationally? They do not. Most will but you will always get 'that guy' especially at scale. People will lie about what they have done. Or not even realize what they did goofed things up. In my example the guy was asking us to pay them back for defective software (millions of dollars). Right up until we proved he had broke it on purpose. I later found out he did it on purpose (confirmed by former coworkers of his 'he likes to mess with vendors'). He was not even alone. At least 3 other people tried that trick on us at different companies.

Most service requests are 'easy'. Small tweak/reship and off you go. But someone who has really broken something can be as easy as 'ship them a new one' to weeks of trying to figure out why a device has suddenly started acting out of spec. That means at least 1-2 people working on something for a period of time. That costs money.

> I'd be really surprised if the number was more than 1 in 100.

It is the time you have to put into looking into why did you end up with a defect that is not a defect. The margin on some of these IoT devices is in the couple of bucks range or smaller. You have to dedicate 2 guys for 3 months to figure out what went sideways can eat the entire profit margin of the whole run.

I was just saying I can see why a company would withhold the info. I did not say I agree with it. Especially for things that are out of warrantee. I think companies are using it to basically have no support and basically leave what would be a decent customer hanging and hoping they can covert to another sale. There is no 'one reason' there is a list.

Re: Right to root access

#308

Post by e44858 »

throw0101a wrote: post #180
raxxor wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If protection of the casual user was an argument, there would be an easy option to unlock your system, be that phones or desktop computers. But on many systems these options do not exist because the vendor likes people dependent on them. This is why devices like chromebooks or all mobile phones are more or less e-waste in the making. In my opinion it is a waste to use any development capacity for these systems apart…

> If protection of the casual user was an argument, there would be an easy option to unlock your system, be that phones or desktop computers. Making it easy to unlock could make it easy(er) for scammers to get it unlocked: > I received the same type of call a little later in the day. They were very adamant they were calling from the Bell data centre, on a terrible line and I made them call back three more times while…

Unlocking should require a physical modification, like soldering a jumper or flipping an internal switch requiring disassembly. That would filter out basically all scam victims. If a scammer can teach a complete novice how to do micro soldering, they've earned their pay.

Re: Right to root access

#309

Post by diggan »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #273
lapcat wrote: post #32

There are a ton of products on the market that are vastly more dangerous than computers: guns, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, chainsaws, table saws, cigarettes, alcohol, junk food. Yes, consumers do sometimes harm themselves by using these products. That's the price of freedom . I think it's bizarre that we treat computers as the most dangerous products in the world that for some reason demand paternalism, when none of…

> Yes, consumers do sometimes harm themselves by using these products. That's the price of freedom. "Freedom" is also a terrible argument for this. What does it even mean? Freedom from what? Freedom to do what? It's such a meaningless word you're going to lose half your audience just by bringing it up.

"Freedom - the condition of being free; the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints"

When the context is "digital devices", it becomes pretty clear what it means. You should be free to use it however you want, without externally imposed restraints.

Locking down the device so much so users cannot run applications they've written themselves without the approval of the company who made it, isn't "freedom" as the required approval from the company breaks the "without externally imposed restraints" part.

Re: Right to root access

#310

Post by hamandcheese »

jmb99 wrote: post #141
hamandcheese wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am happy my iPhone doesn't allow Meta to say "to use WhatsApp, you must install the MetaStore®, give it root and install it from there". I think the inverse is a much more credible threat, though. "Sorry, you cant sign in to your bank because you are using Linux. Please try again on windows 11 with secure boot turned on" doesn't seem far fetched at all.

Not that I would agree with such a policy (I currently do online bank using Linux), but why is it not within the bank’s rights to make that restriction? If they determine (with whatever degree of accuracy) that online banking from Linux/rooted androids/jailbroken iphones is too risky, why should they be required to allow it?

I don't think I asserted that it isn't within their rights. But this is the direction things are headed, and it is a threat to free and libre computing.
Post reply on HN