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

101–110 of 1001 posts

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

#101

Post by jacquesm »

crazygringo wrote: post #97
Ferret7446 wrote: post #30

I think we really need to discuss whether IP/copyright protections were a mistake. A LOT of our "modern" problems stem from IP protections. Whether that be not being able to own media, right to repair, DRM, censorship, a lot of monopolistic behavior, medicine prices, etc. And no wonder, IP protection is government sanctioned monopoly, and it is generally recognized that monopolies are bad; is it such a surprise that…

Not really sure what this has to do with running your own code, though. If a manufacturer makes a device locked down, it's the technological protections preventing you from running your own code. Not IP/copyright. Sometimes they get jailbroken but sometimes not.

Plenty of barriers around circumventing such obstacles hinge on IP legislation.

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

#102

Post by Almondsetat »

mullingitover wrote: post #50

Command+F 'drivers' 0 results These things are never thought through. Sure, Apple could unlock the whole thing, tell everyone to go nuts. Who's writing the damn drivers? Apple's certainly not obligated to open source theirs, I also can't imagine them signing someone else's. So we end up with a bunch of homebrew drivers, devices crashing, getting pwned, and the dozens of people who install a third party OS on their iP…

Open source drivers are the overlooked heroes that make everything work. If linux hadn't had all these drivers written or ported to it (think of your intel NICs) the OS would be dead in the water

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

#103

Post by crazygringo »

danpalmer wrote: post #66
Liftyee wrote: post #61

As other comments have pointed out, this statement (one I 100% support, BTW) is a little naive. I can see how it might be unreasonable to expect companies to publish documentation, build infrastructure, etc. to support running your own code on the hardware you own (which 99% of people will never need to do). However, I strongly believe that - should one choose to do so - you should not be stopped from jailbreaking, c…

> Companies aren't obligated to support me doing this Where does one draw the line on support? If I jailbreak an iPhone, should I still get Apple customer support for the apps on it, even though they may have been manipulated by some aspect of the jailbreak? (Very real problem, easy to cause crashes in other apps when you mess around with root access) Should I still get a battery replacement within warranty from Appl…

The line is definitely crossed if you jailbreak your phone. It seems pretty clear. Either you're using the device as the manufacturer intended or not. If I take a device rated for 2m of water down scuba diving to 25m, it voids my warranty too.

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

#104

Post by jacquesm »

tern wrote: post #86
divan wrote: post #31

> It should be possible to run Android on an iPhone and manufacturers should be required by law to provide enough technical support and documentation to make the development of new operating systems possible As someone who enjoyed Linux phones like the Nokia N900/950 and would love to see those hacker-spirited devices again, statements like this sound more than naïve to me. I can acknowledge my own interests here (ha…

Not to mention, it's an authoritarian attitude, talking about forcing companies to support arbitrary software stacks

That's not what they wrote at all.

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

#105

Post by positron26 »

fellowmartian wrote: post #98
tzury wrote: post #84

We need both options to coexist: 1. Open, hackable hardware for those who want full control and for driving innovation 2. Locked-down, managed devices for vulnerable users who benefit from protection This concept of "I should run any code on hardware I own" is completely wrong as a universal principle. Yes, we absolutely should be able to run any code we want on open hardware we own - that option must exist. But we s…

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.

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

#107

Post by gdulli »

fastball wrote: post #73

Much harder to make a secure device that is resistant to getting pwn'd if you can run any code you want. I personally prefer my iPhone to be more secure than to be more open. Buy a more open phone if you want one, but stop trying to use legal means to force the software on my phone to be worse for my use-case just because you want to have your cake and eat it too.

Once you decide to trade your liberty for security, it becomes the norm and then no one has liberty.

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

#108

Post by SilverElfin »

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.

Yep. They control our information - how we make it, what we are allowed to find, and what we can say. And they are large enough to not face real competition. So let’s treat them like the state owned corporations they are and regulate heavily. Smaller companies can be left unregulated. But not companies worth 500 billion or more.

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

#109

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

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.

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

#110

Post by fellowmartian »

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.

I’m not suggesting grandpa reads code, contributors do. We all know that most commercial code is much shittier than open source. Sure, commercial code usually covers more edge cases and has better UX, but is cobbled together from legacy and random product asks.
Post reply on HN