You should get ~7 years of update. Here you can check: https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/6220366?hl=en I think it should be more, but it's on par with MacBooks
Actually MacBooks get 6/7 years from when Apple stops selling them. In contrast, the timer starts as soon as the first Chromebook with that cpu is released. It was a nasty surprise when I found that out
This post may sound flippant and is getting a lot of down votes, but this seems like an interesting discussion to be had. Do we (I am from the U.S.) tend to allow companies to screw us more than other countries? If so is it cultural, or something legal? Is it part of our broader convenience culture? I don't now, but it would be interesting to dig into if anyone can provide evidence for or against this.
It's getting downvotes because it was posted in bad faith. Many Americans would say we give corporations the freedom to act how they wish, and we give individuals the freedom to do business with the corporations they choose. The argument to be had is how much the government needs to watch out for the citizenship, because every "protective" law they pass is a restriction on the aforementioned freedoms. The American sc…
This school of thought works as long as individuals are free to do business with corporations. It breaks down when there are monopolies whether they are farm equipment companies or platform operators like Amazon or Apple.
I don't know, Americans seem to be relatively more in favor of allowing corporations to screw them than many other countries.
This post may sound flippant and is getting a lot of down votes, but this seems like an interesting discussion to be had. Do we (I am from the U.S.) tend to allow companies to screw us more than other countries? If so is it cultural, or something legal? Is it part of our broader convenience culture? I don't now, but it would be interesting to dig into if anyone can provide evidence for or against this.
I personally believe it is a mixture of
1) American apathy to corporate behavior
2) Corporations being most willing to dedicate resources to lobbying in the US (compared to European countries) due to its corporate friendly legal and legislature systems and extremely powerful economy
> Have I missed anyone? "Security-minded" folk who insist corporates should have full control of their device via signed code from pre-boot, incidentally preventing "non-authorised" replacement parts from working since repair is an attack vector, allegedly.
Would you trust Joe Random to replace anything in the hardware authentication pipeline? Edit: Replied to the wrong comment...
Why would I want a "hardware authentication pipeline" in a tractor?
Thinking of who wouldn't vote for right to repair I can only come up with: 1. leaders of companies that would be adversely affected by right to repair 2. perhaps employees of same companies but that seems iffy as I doubt the adverse effects would be so great as to threaten employment. 3. People who actually think that although it would be to their benefit to have a right to repair there is an encroachment on a compan…
> Have I missed anyone? "Security-minded" folk who insist corporates should have full control of their device via signed code from pre-boot, incidentally preventing "non-authorised" replacement parts from working since repair is an attack vector, allegedly.
What's the threat model for a tractor/harvester/etc...? Who wants to send a piece of farm equipment on a very slow rampage via a complex and difficult hack job? One that will be stopped if the manufacturer has any sense at all and has physical kill switch.
Maybe sabotage from competing farmers? But that seems far less likely than the owner wanting to maintain his equipment after the manufacturer has abandoned it.
Thinking of who wouldn't vote for right to repair I can only come up with: 1. leaders of companies that would be adversely affected by right to repair 2. perhaps employees of same companies but that seems iffy as I doubt the adverse effects would be so great as to threaten employment. 3. People who actually think that although it would be to their benefit to have a right to repair there is an encroachment on a compan…
4. Lawmakers receiving campaign contributions from those in group 1.
This post may sound flippant and is getting a lot of down votes, but this seems like an interesting discussion to be had. Do we (I am from the U.S.) tend to allow companies to screw us more than other countries? If so is it cultural, or something legal? Is it part of our broader convenience culture? I don't now, but it would be interesting to dig into if anyone can provide evidence for or against this.
It's getting downvotes because it was posted in bad faith. Many Americans would say we give corporations the freedom to act how they wish, and we give individuals the freedom to do business with the corporations they choose. The argument to be had is how much the government needs to watch out for the citizenship, because every "protective" law they pass is a restriction on the aforementioned freedoms. The American sc…
The problem is, between copyrights, patents and limited liability, we give companies a huge amount of power over consumers. That's before we start writing about the power money provides large companies.
This post may sound flippant and is getting a lot of down votes, but this seems like an interesting discussion to be had. Do we (I am from the U.S.) tend to allow companies to screw us more than other countries? If so is it cultural, or something legal? Is it part of our broader convenience culture? I don't now, but it would be interesting to dig into if anyone can provide evidence for or against this.
I personally believe it is a mixture of 1) American apathy to corporate behavior 2) Corporations being most willing to dedicate resources to lobbying in the US (compared to European countries) due to its corporate friendly legal and legislature systems and extremely powerful economy
3) Corporations donating to political campaigns often influencing the candidate's / party's messaging.
Perhaps this is bundling in your #2, but it's powerful enough to individually call out.
Thinking of who wouldn't vote for right to repair I can only come up with: 1. leaders of companies that would be adversely affected by right to repair 2. perhaps employees of same companies but that seems iffy as I doubt the adverse effects would be so great as to threaten employment. 3. People who actually think that although it would be to their benefit to have a right to repair there is an encroachment on a compan…
4. Politicians taking campaign contributions from 1. and 2.
I don't know, Americans seem to be relatively more in favor of allowing corporations to screw them than many other countries.
This post may sound flippant and is getting a lot of down votes, but this seems like an interesting discussion to be had. Do we (I am from the U.S.) tend to allow companies to screw us more than other countries? If so is it cultural, or something legal? Is it part of our broader convenience culture? I don't now, but it would be interesting to dig into if anyone can provide evidence for or against this.
I think, absolutely yes. Americans generally are opposed to regulation of corporations, especially conservative ones, and most especially ones that have a libertarian streak.