Oh my listen Zachary Vochies.. Real truths of this liar company.
Google go away. Discrace of technology..
Google's software mistreats or harms the user
41–50 of 291 posts
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ignore this list and find a better one that actually represents the issues fairly.
Many of the points made are legitimate concerns. I’m guessing that you work for Google (or Apple)?
Aaaaand confirmed! You do work for Apple. (It took me 30 seconds to visit your website and confirm this.)
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have an android phone then you probably can automate that: https://llamalab.com/automate/ USB tethering is specifically listed under features, presumably there's some API that developers have access to. Apparently by use of the class WifiManager in android.net.wifi you can programmatically change the state of USB tethering without any kind of special privileges.
Or try AOSP, while imperfect its closer to GNU.
Nope. AOSP runs on a mobile device which is malware
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#44Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
Absolutely this. There are real issues worth real discussion, both on this post and their related Apple post. But these are the posts of a conspiracy theorist instead; they don't enable any sort of rational discussion.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#45Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#46We need the Librem phone today. It is long overdue.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#47https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html Apple's Operating Systems are Malware Is there anything these guys like? Stallman and Gnu are extremists
> Is there anything these guys like?
Free (as in freedom) Software.
> Stallman and Gnu are extremists
The word you're looking for is "radicals"; "extremists" carries connotations with violence and illegal behavior, which is the exact opposite of what Stallman/FSF stand for.
Are these views radical? Yes. But are they wrong?
The way I see it, RMS has been writing about what's wrong with the software world for decades and predicting the consequences. The industry has been ignoring this for just as long, and then people keep complaining about consequences materializing as predicted. Makes you wonder whether it's RMS that's really radical, or whether our Overton window has shifted so much that doing the right thing fell off it?
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#48What is interesting about this and the Apple post[1] is that no one is actually taking responsibility or signing their name. It's just a generic blog post with a list of issues. Where is the GNU's "open" log of who is publishing this info? Without a source, I can't really verify if the author has some ulterior motive. [1] https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html
> Without a source, I can't really verify if the author has some ulterior motive Is it actually something you need to appreciate the points the post is making ? I actually very much like raw things like this, that you can appreciate without letting yourself be influenced by who said it. I often wish for a timeline where we could see the community's reactions to some things Jobs or Musk said if they didn't know it was…
I think the points in the post are valid, but there are also things about GNU that are terrible as well. It's just that nobody is wiring GNU faults. If someone did a write up, I would expect that person to own their work as well.
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#49Almost all of this is heavily exaggerated, presenting relatively innocuous features as if they were harmful, or calling out simple bugs as if they were intentional and actively malicious. None of it is flat-out wrong per-se (at least as far as I can tell), and I can certainly see where GNU is coming from, but I think for the average user most of the features they're criticizing actually do a lot more good than harm.…
exaggerated maybe, but they are still facts? what other huge tech started implementing parental controls?
Re: Google's software mistreats or harms the user
#50> Google/Alphabet intentionally broke Revolv home automatic control products that depended on a server to function, by shutting down the server. The lesson is, reject all such products. Insist on self-contained computers that run free software! The last two sentences seem a little pretentious. The people who bought these products don't know (or want to take the time to learn) how to use git or edit config files or in…
One technical person could make this work for everyone else. I have a few pieces of hardware right now that are "broken" because the companies that made them went of business. These products have millions of owners. With the source code and encryption keys I could personally make this hardware work for those users indefinitely. And there are hundreds (if not thousands) of users just like me.
> One technical person could make this work for everyone else.
Yup. An oft-missed but crucial point.
The benefit of software freedoms isn't that everyone has to do everything themselves. The benefit is that everyone can do it themselves if they like, but they can also delegate the job to anyone else that wants to take it, like someone's friendly neighbourhood techie, or a small local business. In this way, free software actually promotes free markets, by enabling unrestricted competition on adding value on top of what free software offers (vs. locking it down and making money by rent seeking).