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

We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

hugotunius.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 1001 posts

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#191

Post by HDThoreaun »

wkat4242 wrote: post #87
HDThoreaun wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its only the manufacturers interests because they dont want people to brick their phone on accident. Really theyre only a secondary party of interest, the real interested party is grandma/anyone who can fall victim to malware. Apples decision to ban sideloading is a huge part of how they became the most popular phone maker in the us

The real interest is their protection of their sweet 30% revenue stream. There are many ways to protect security, leaving all your keys in the hands of one party is not the only one. And there should also be the right to be able to opt out of the manufacturers' protections of course.

Youre not wrong about the real interest but security is another very real one.

> There are many ways to protect security, leaving all your keys in the hands of one party is not the only one.

When youre dealing with idiots its a bit harder than you might expect. Tons of idiots own phones and if apple allowed them to be the victim of security vulnerabilities they get terrible pr.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#192

Post by throwaway31131 »

makeitdouble wrote: post #180
idle_zealot wrote: post #4

This makes the point that the real battle we should be fighting is not for control of Android/iOS, but the ability to run other operating systems on phones. That would be great, but as the author acknowledges, building those alternatives is basically impossible. Even assuming that building a solid alternative is feasible, though, I don't think their point stands. Generally I'm not keen on legislatively forcing a deve…

> Google and Apple have more power than most nations. To push further, Google and Apple have basically as much power as the US. The UK going after Apple, only to get rebutted by the US is the most simple instance of it. International treaties pushed by the US strongly protecting it's top corporations is the more standard behavior. Any entity fighting the duopoly is effectively getting into a fight with the US.

> To push further, Google and Apple have basically as much power as the US.

If this is true then why is Tim Cook visiting Trump? Shouldn’t it be the other way around.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#193

Post by nik282000 »

positron26 wrote: post #105
fellowmartian wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a false dichotomy. Open hardware with open source software would be more protected simply by being more stress tested and vetted by more people. If you need even more protection you can employ zero-knowledge proofs and other trustless technologies. I have long been dreaming about some kind of hardware/software co-op creating non-enshittifying versions of thermostats, electric kettles, EV chargers, sol…

> more stress tested and vetted by more people Grandma and grandpa aren't reading the source code and certainly not up at a professional level. This is one of the core misconceptions of the "free/libre" formulation of OSS.

> Grandma and grandpa aren't reading the source code and certainly not up at a professional level.

This is one of the core misconceptions of the anti "free/libre" formulation of OSS. Most users don't need to read the entire Debian source to know that it is safe to use. You are free to look up who maintains any part of the project and look at the history of changes that have been made. A lot of projects have nice, easy to read notes along with the actual code.

If you are so paranoid that you can't even trust open release notes then why would you trust a closed project at all?

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#194

Post by bccdee »

kylecazar wrote: post #6

It's a matter of ownership vs. licensing. You own the hardware you buy, but you license the software. I agree with the author that as long as you use that software, you should be subject to the constraints of the license. The key is that if you choose not to run that software, your hardware should not be constrained. You own the hardware, it's a tangible thing that is your property. Boils down to a consumer rights is…

That's an oddly legalistic line to draw. What if they start licensing the hardware too? Surely if we care about users being respected by technology, the line between software and hardware or between ownership and licensing is immaterial. These are all excuses to deny users the opportunity to do things they should be entitled to do, like installing arbitrary applications.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#195

Post by colordrops »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #109
idle_zealot wrote: post #4

This makes the point that the real battle we should be fighting is not for control of Android/iOS, but the ability to run other operating systems on phones. That would be great, but as the author acknowledges, building those alternatives is basically impossible. Even assuming that building a solid alternative is feasible, though, I don't think their point stands. Generally I'm not keen on legislatively forcing a deve…

"This makes the point that the real battle we should be fighting is not for control of Android/iOS, but the ability to run other operating systems on phones." Sometimes owner control, cf. corporate control, can be had by sacrificing hardware functionality, i.e., features, closed source drivers. Choice between particular hardware feature(s) working and control over the hardware in general.

Yes but in the phone space the sacrifice is too much. You often times forgo the ability to even participate in many aspects of society, e.g. banking. It's not your typical "rough around the edges open source alternative", it's just not even a comparison.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#197

Post by OsrsNeedsf2P »

daft_pink wrote: post #52

There’s something weird about it. My phone needs to be hyper secure, and a lot of companies went to monetize that and introduce insecurities with their software. That’s why I love my iPhone, but I’m not super happy about what happens with my Mac. There’s something in the reality that it’s the app developers not the user that are being restricted by Apple. Apple keeps the app developers from doing things I don’t like…

What does this have to do with the article?

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#198

Post by judge2020 »

shakna wrote: post #172
judge2020 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider the possibility of an evil maid type attack before a device is setup for the first time, e.g. running near identical iOS or macOS but with spyware preloaded, or even just adware.

We already have that today. And locked down systems don't prevent it, because you can always exploit some part of the supply chain. A determined actor will always find a path.

Right now you'd need a zero-day bootrom exploit to do something like this - still a possibility for the average high-level intelligence operative, but not the average white collar citizen. The proposal is making such a thing a feature.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#199

Post by ls612 »

zmmmmm wrote: post #165

> In this context this would mean having the ability and documentation to build or install alternative operating systems on this hardware It doesn't work. Everything from banks to Netflix and others are slowly edging out anything where they can't fully verify the chain of control to an entity they can have a legal or contractual relationship with. To be clear, this is fundamental, not incidental. You can't run your o…

I mean you’re right but it seems like the equilibrium we’re heading towards is one where the opposite is true and our internet and society looks more like China’s. Principles unfortunately mean little in the face of societal and technological change, the only thing that matters is the resulting incentives.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#200

Post by ACCount37 »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #188
ACCount37 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI kicks ass at a lot of "routine reverse engineering" tasks already. You can feed it assembly listings, or bytecode that the decompiler couldn't handle, and get back solid results. And corporate AIs don't really have a fuck to give, at least not yet. You can sic Claude on obvious decompiler outputs, or a repo of questionable sources with a "VERY BIG CORPO - PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL" in every single file, and it'…

That's one of the boil-ups. Why would lack of Linux compatibility for hardware be a thing? If AI can write the drivers in 1/10th the effort/time, it should be a game changer for open source. I haven't heard much from the major projects yet, but I'm not ear-to-the-ground. I guess that is what is disappointing. It's all (to quote n-gage) webshit you see being used for this, and corpo-code so far, to your point.

AI can't write full drivers, and certainly not to mainline Linux quality. But it does make "take apart a proprietary driver to figure out how it works" much easier.
Post reply on HN