We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own • Hacker News Board

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

#281

Post by nuker » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 4:55 AM UTC

quaintdev wrote: post #279

nuker wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My parents are getting old and they aren't tech savvy. The missing piece here is that I want my parents to have a computer they can safely do their banking on, without leaving them vulnerable to scams and viruses and the like. Purists always forget this point :) What is best for 99% of people. And dumb Euro bureaucrats.

Why not give people the freedom to choose what they want

It will be exploited. Key word above - not tech savvy.

The only reason we have convenient banking, gov and streaming apps today is because of guaranteed and enforced mobile security by big boys Apple and Google. (Google being Ad company is another matter, not relevant here).

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

#282

Post by nialse » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 4:57 AM UTC

protocolture wrote: post #273

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…

> let's be real: Google and Apple have more power than most nations. Lets be real, they do not have more power than any nations. They have a lot of power in a few tiny silos that happen to make up like 90% of the mental space of a lot of terminally online folk. Heck they probably have less power than Coca Cola or Pepsi did during the Cola wars, or United Fruit Company at its height. Wake me up when Apple rolls a tank…

There are power rankings where these top companies are considered more influential than many nations.

https://www.realbusinessrescue.co.uk/advice-hub/companies-wo... https://techcrunch.com/2023/06/29/so-who-watches-the-watchme... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/sep/23/amazon-tesl...

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

#283

Post by spaqin » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 4:59 AM UTC

josephg wrote: post #260

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…

My parents are getting old and they aren't tech savvy. The missing piece here is that I want my parents to have a computer they can safely do their banking on, without leaving them vulnerable to scams and viruses and the like. I like that they have iphones. Doing internet banking on their phone is safer than doing it on their desktop computer. Why is that? The reason is that the desktop PC security model is deeply fl…

Your parents are more likely to be a victim of a phone call scam than malware, even on PC. There is also no guarantee that malware will not slip through cracks of official stores or signatures.

You can also choose to do your banking at the physical branch.

We already had "best of both worlds", especially on mobile OSes - granular permissions per-app were quite good, and on Android until few years ago root was widely available if you needed it as well; these permissions could be locked or frozen if there is concern about users, just like work devices are provisioned with limitations. It all depends on your threat model.

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

#284

Post by extraisland » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 5:00 AM UTC

josephg wrote: post #260

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…

My parents are getting old and they aren't tech savvy. The missing piece here is that I want my parents to have a computer they can safely do their banking on, without leaving them vulnerable to scams and viruses and the like. I like that they have iphones. Doing internet banking on their phone is safer than doing it on their desktop computer. Why is that? The reason is that the desktop PC security model is deeply fl…

Everything in life is about trade-offs. Certain trade-offs people aren't going to make.

- If you want to run an alternative operating system, you got to learn how it works. That is a trade off not even many tech savvy people want to make.

- There is a trade-off with a desktop OS. I actually like the fact that it isn't super sand-boxed and locked down. I am willing to trade security & safety for control.

> Personally I think we need to start making computers that provide the best of both worlds. I want much more control over what code can do on my computer. I also want programs to be able to run in a safe, sandboxed way. But I should be the one in charge of that sandbox. Not Google. Definitely not Apple. But there's currently no desktop environment that provides that ability.

The market and demand for that is low.

BTW. This does exist with Qubes OS already. However there are a bunch of trade-offs that most people are unlikely to want to make.

https://www.qubes-os.org/

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

#285

Post by vbezhenar » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 5:01 AM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #100

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. And that is what is wrong here. Even the smallest nation should be far more powerful than the largest corporation. But corporations are now more powerful than most nations, including some really big ones. So the only way to solve this is to for an umbrella for nations that offsets the power that these corporations have. The first thing you notice when you arrive a…

These are basics of capitalism.

Company aims for profit.

Bigger scale allows for better efficiency.

So companies naturally grow big. The bigger they are, the easier for them to compete.

Big companies have access to tremendous resources, so they can push laws by bribing law makers, advertising their agenda to the masses.

There's no way around it, not without dismantling capitalism. Nations will serve to the corporations, no other way around.

There are natural boundaries of the growth scale, which are related to the inherent efficiency of communications between people and overall human capability. Corporations are controlled by people and people have limited brains and mouths. I feel that with AI development, those boundaries will move apart and allow for even greater growth eventually.

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

#286

Post by b_e_n_t_o_n » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 5:03 AM UTC

School-Cotton wrote: post #280

b_e_n_t_o_n wrote: post #144

You already have that ability, afaik there is nothing stopping you or your friends from loading and running whatever software you want except your own technical ability. If you want the government to force other people to do the work to let you have your cake and eat it too, I can't support that.

iPhones have a locked bootloader; it is impossible to run an OS not signed by Apple unless you find an exploit.

So what? Should security features be illegal so people can more easily run their own OS's on phones?

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

#287

Post by yardstick » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 5:07 AM UTC

vbezhenar wrote: post #275

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…

> ability to run other operating systems on phones > building those alternatives is basically impossible For smart people it is not impossible. Just few years ago, few folks wrote complicated drivers for completely closed hardware, and I'm talking about M1 Macbook. Google Pixel, on the other hand, was pretty open until very recently. I might be wrong about specifics, but I'm pretty sure that most of software was open…

I’m fairly sure the modem firmware on the Pixels was never open. There’s some hardware that will never have open firmware to it. Especially when that firmware deals with regulated airwaves like cell signals.

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

#288

Post by seviu » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 5:08 AM UTC

Genuine question and some random thoughts please downvote if you think I am ranting too much: one argument played by Google on this is that they want to protect users from malware, specially for banking apps, etc. However my queations/two cents regarding this:

Banks offer web frontends and many make you use 2FA and even hardware keys, which work on phones. We have been doing e-banking even before smartphone phones existed. We still do. On our full of malware and virus windows desktops.

These mobile apps are in reality web frontends disguised as mobile apps with biometrics on top of it. Nothing else really. I develop an iOS app for a bank. It’s really like that.

Despite that I have to obfuscate the binaries, check for cydia, make sure I am not jaibtoken and all kinds of useless stuff.

When you buy a PlayStation you are buying a piece of hardware that Sony sells you at a break even or a loss so that you can buy their games. You are not buying your hardware. You are buying means to run video games on a piece of hardware Sony is selling to you.

When I buy an iPhone I am paying a lot of money for my pocket computer, my internet communicator. The margins are so big, it doesn’t even make sense to squeeze more out of them.

When I buy an Android phone I fail to see the end game except that Google wants to have absolute control over everything I do in my life.

I cannot really deny them their right to do whatever they want.

Still I can’t see really how they want to protect users by having full control. That’s a big lie.

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

#289

Post by tonyhart7 » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 5:10 AM UTC

isn't that google just make the android reach parity with iOS???

this is happening with apple ecosystem since forever and people fine with it, so what is the issue here???

oh I know, people mad because someone take what they been able used to

not because they cant sideload. you can (just need an developer account for that)

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

#290

Post by ethersteeds » Mon, Sep 01, 2025, 5:10 AM UTC

wisty wrote: post #77

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…

Remember, the law provides patent, copyright, trade mark, and NDA protection. While it would be a burden to require a degree of openness, it's not like companies are all rugged individualists who would never want to see legal restrictions in the field. It's just a question of what is overall best and fairest. Restrictions can both help and hinder innovation, and it's innovation that in the ling run makes things impro…

> It's just a question of what is overall best and fairest.

If only it were so. But it's not just that. It's also a question of which section of society has the power to demand or prevent the creation of such a system.

Whether enacting labor protections or the Magna Carta, these beneficial restrictions require some leverage. Otherwise what is overall beat and fairest won't be coming up.