121–130 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GrapheneOS?
Only runs on a handful of hardware, and still uses the binblobs from google for the hardware devices.
[flagged]
> want to rip that option away from me.
You would be free to have that option. Just like everyone else would be free to own the same hardware and escape the walled garden. Nobody would force you to unlock your device. Just keep it locked down. Other people freeing their own hardware has nothing to do with your choice.
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…
Open hardware is essentially useless if I need to carry both an open phone and a phone with the parking app, the banking app, messenger app to contact friends, etc.
This feels like an arbitrary level of abstraction for how much control a user should have. When you buy a phone, you're buying a combination of components designed and paired for that manufacturer's software. Can the user potentially replace that software? Sure, but should they be expected to? If they just wanted hardware, they could buy their own and piece something together, if we're exploring those kinds of hypoth…
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
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the user cannot be trusted to maintain the hardware and software, then the only responsible thing is to rely on the manufacturer to do so. In those cases, if the support is dropped you buy the newest device.
Paul knows that. He is arguing for a different future. google is about to remove my ability to remotely control my thermostat. Not even local control. Imagine a world where they would have to choose between continued device support or unlocking… or maybe just building out the local control and cleaning their hands of it. Having corpos as the arbiter of a consumers buying schedule and creating unnecessary easter is pr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
I would argue most code of any license is not actually regularly audited if at all, and certainly nowhere near the levels people seem to think they are.
> We all know that most commercial code is much shittier than open source
citation needed
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
"And that is what is wrong here. Even the smallest nation should be far more powerful than the largest corporation" Since nations can be really small, I don't agree.
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.