I like the idea of course, but such legislation would also be very disruptive, because it affects the entire supply chain.
Every maker of any gadget, be it random white label android smartphone, set top box or smart home camera would have to negotiate with all their component suppliers to obtain full documentation instead of just driver and firmware blob.
So would these suppliers with their suppliers.
For mor niche components it seems plausible that no proper hardware spec exists and it’s instead through a combination of hardware descriptor languages, the driver code and good old tribal knowledge.
Forcing Google and Apple to allow side loading on their OSs just requires them to flip a switch.
I think there are also compelling reasons why smartphones are special. It’s a duopoly and most people have got to have one to properly participate in modern society.
We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
391–400 of 1001 posts
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's for you as well. You think they're going to stop? No! Which is why I don't want every npm package I install to have unfettered access to my internet connection and to access all my files. If this is being exploited now, I might not even know! How sloppy is that! > You're giving up freedom for safety. At the limit, sure, maybe there are tradeoffs between freedom and security. But there's lots of technical solut…
> At the limit, sure, maybe there are tradeoffs between freedom and security. But there's lots of technical solutions that we could build right now that give a lot more safety without losing any freedom at all. Everything you have suggested in this post takes away freedom. There is no solution that doesn't take away freedom / your control. There is always a trade off. > Like sandboxing applications by default. Applic…
> Everything you have suggested in this post takes away freedom. There is no solution that doesn't take away freedom / your control. There is always a trade off.
Huh? In what way does application sandboxing take away my freedom? What can I do today that I can't do with a sandbox-everything-by-default model?
In my mind, it gives me (the user) more freedom because I can run any program I want without fear.
> I run Discord/Slack in Flatpak. Out of the box the folders and clipboard permissions are restricted. Only the ~/Downloads folder on my PC is accessible to Discord/Slack. You can't drag and drop things into these apps. Which makes sharing content a PITA.
Cool! Yeah this is the sort of thing I want to see more of. The drag & drop problem is technically solvable - it just sounds like they haven't solved it yet. (Capabilities would be a great solution for this.. just sayin!)
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the crux of the matter. Maybe conceptually you will be able to run some kind of open operating system with your own code, but it will be unable to access software or services provided by corporate or governmental entities. This has been obvious for some time, and as soon as passkeys started popping up the endgame became clear. Pleading to the government definitely can't save us now though, because they want t…
> as soon as passkeys started popping up the endgame became clear That's why I'm 100% against passkeys. I'll never use them and I'll make sure nobody I know does. They're just a lock-in mechanism.
For someone who hasn't spent any time thinking about that matter, could you please elaborate your point?
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#394It is interesting, that when Apple, with small steps, slowly disallowed any kind of sideloading merely nobody took notice of it... and now Google is doing the same, and whole internet protest. Who knows, maybe fact that now there is no alternative for tech-savy, and people are angry now it is good thing in longer perspective for both platforms.
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#395The author doesn't seem to understand that you don't need your PlayStation 5 to travel, pay your rent, or authenticate to government services. That's the fundamental difference and why it is valuable that Android is open
I agree that there is currently no expectation for Sony to open up their OS to run just any software (such as pirated games). Nobody said that. There should be an open widely supported mobile OS because that's fast becoming about as fundamental to modern life (in my country at least) as roads and electricity are
Android being so easy to make software for is what hooked me as a teenager, after failing to develop for my previous Symbian phone. Taking that away is possible now because the alternatives are all gone. Where are you going to migrate to without making major concessions in your life? You'll have to forfeit popular messengers that your family, friends, landlord, etc. are on; no more mobile banking; extra fees to use online banking at all; extra fees to legally use public transport; no downloading of episodes or music from streaming services for offline use; no phone calls depending on your country's 2G status; etc.
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#396I like the idea of course, but such legislation would also be very disruptive, because it affects the entire supply chain. Every maker of any gadget, be it random white label android smartphone, set top box or smart home camera would have to negotiate with all their component suppliers to obtain full documentation instead of just driver and firmware blob. So would these suppliers with their suppliers. For mor niche c…
This seems like the perfect case for legislation that starts out targeting higher volume devices/larger companies and lower over time.
I don’t see why the industry couldn’t move to providing this documentation/full source over a few years.
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
exactly, people want all the benefit without the consequences like if there are OS utopia exist that has all the advantage without the downside then everybody would use that but people complaining don't live in reality
A lot of it already exists in one form or another and the trade-off for sand-boxing is usability a lot of the time. It isn't even a freedom vs security. It is usability vs security.
> It is usability vs security.
I think a lot of it is "nobody has bothered building it yet" vs security.
Eg Qubes runs everything in Xen isolates - which is a wildly complex, performance limiting way to do sandboxing on modern computers. There are much better ways to implement sandboxing that don't limit performance or communication between applications. For example SeL4's OS level capability model. SeL4 still allows arbitrary IPC / shared memory between processes. Or Solaris / Illumos's Zones. But that route would unfortunately require rewriting / changing most modern software.
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#398I like the idea of course, but such legislation would also be very disruptive, because it affects the entire supply chain. Every maker of any gadget, be it random white label android smartphone, set top box or smart home camera would have to negotiate with all their component suppliers to obtain full documentation instead of just driver and firmware blob. So would these suppliers with their suppliers. For mor niche c…
Good. It only needs to be done once and the datasheets are already written and often circulate underground.
Component supplier should not be allowed to only provide datasheet upon signing an NDA and only to some customers while providing chips to the resellers. If you put it on the open market, cough up the FULL datasheet, period.
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really not a libertarian, but why shouldn’t Netflix have the right to choose who they distribute content to? They negotiated conditions with the creators, why shouldn’t they be able to specify the DRM? No one is forcing you to subscribe to Netflix. Or even to buy an iPad.
For Netflix sure. I don't care. But when it comes to banking and you are forced to use between two OS or this means no access to your bank digitally, this is a massive problem and restriction to citizens' freedom. Everyone needs a bank to operate, and they need to maximize the options available to use them.
[deleted]
Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could just not watch Netflix. Most of the content is kind of crap anyway, low effort filler. And the streaming services have trouble even licensing third-party content at all unless they have robust copy protection. That may be stupid because it drives more consumers to privacy but copyright holders are free to negotiate any licensing terms they want.
Netflix is right in its prime right now, K-Pop Demon Hunters is a smash hit and probably the biggest cultural thing going on right now, it has like 4 songs from it in the top 10. Wednesday is coming back this weekfor the end of season 2. Stranger Things is wrapping up in November,
Any other examples? None of those scream prime to me - however I haven't heard of kpop demon hunters