Live data from Hacker News

I want a computer that I own

misc-stuff.terraaeon.com

421–430 of 668 posts

Re: I want a computer that I own

#421
post #15

I have a similar feeling, but with modern smartphones. Owning my computer is still relatively possible. I can build a computer from parts which I can choose, and have a choice in which operating system to install on them. Laptops are slightly more closed, but even on those I can choose the OS myself. Modern smartphones however, seem like walled gardens in which I have no control at all. I cannot choose any of the par…

I own a 5-years old Moto G4 Play running a de-googled Android 7.1. It works just fine, and I can install apps from either the F-droid or the Aurora stores.

To me it makes more sense to continue with this phone, as I can find all the replacement parts I need on AliExpress, rather than investing in a new Librem 5 or a PinePhone. While I appreciate being able to use an open mobile OS, there's the problem of apps, and there's still the hardware problem - it's both more expensive (in the case of the Librem 5 at least) and has the same problem of eventual obsolescence.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#422
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can't afford to buy. Yeah, that weakens his whole argument. That said, I would like to know what models these are? Because I think it's pretty much universal. I think the answer is linux.

You should buy MNT Reform. https://mntre.com/

Wow, that's such a cool device, super cool.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#423
Since phones are nothing else than computers nowadays: I want a phone that I own!

The mobile phones are by far more limiting and take away control of the owner.

A simple example would be the possibility to edit the HOSTS file on Android. I am the owner and administrator of this device, yet I am unable to do basic controls of my device.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll play the (intentional) Devil's Advocate here to present an alternative viewpoint. I like iOS, but not Android. Let me explain why. I personally love Linux, Unix philosophy (I'm even sometimes an old beardy zealot about POSIX standards and the old way ), and inherent customization possibilities. On the other hand, I don't want to manage my phone like a desktop or laptop computer, or a server because of a plethora…

> iOS takes all of these away. Complete backups are built-in (I know android has it, but I don't know how bulletproof is this) Not to burn you down, but to burn Android down: no, Android does not allow you to take complete backups. Let alone "built-in". The only backups that are made are forced to Google cloud and only backs-up apps that where downloaded through Google Play and app settings for Google stuff. It is an…

Backups are a total black pattern where you either pay Apple for ever or the respective APIs are horribly broken. It would require zero effort on Apple's side to integrate backup to other servers using the OS or other Apps. That means without silently stopping them or even worse slowing them down to kb/s once in the background.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#425
post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> desktop Linux user like me, open hardware is already a reality Power or RISC-V ISA hardware are in low stock, have very few, specialised vendors and are not affordable. I have great sympathy for people who refuse to pay the outrageous difference to off-the-shelf hardware that can be bought anywhere just to gain a level of privacy that they should have in the first place. AMD and Intel have rootkits in their hardwar…

I seriously doubt either Intel or AMD ship different silicon to the NSA or whoever else. At least from what I've read, the only difference (at least on Intel) is the "NSA bit", that can actually be turned on on any chip these days. System76 actually ships machines with it enabled by default.

The NSA bit? Do you mean this setting to toggle Intel ME?

https://www.csoonline.com/article/3220476/researchers-say-no...

Re: I want a computer that I own

#426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people will tell you that the Pinephone is daily-driver ready. They're right, but only in the sense that using a feature phone is daily-driver ready. It's only feasible if your lifestyle permits it, if you're willing to go without sometimes, if leading by example, and voting with not just your wallet, but whatever you value (be it time, money, or uncertainty) is a deal you're happy to make. I love my Pinephone.…

I'm really heartbroken that I can't use a Pinephone as a daily driver because of the simple fact that it doesn't have a 5ghz wifi antenna. Where I currently live there's just too much interference on 2.4ghz. It's literally the one feature I need. As soon as they come out with a model that has 5ghz wifi I'm happy to jump right on board, especially since they're coming out with a keyboard attachment.

You should be able to just put wifi USB dongle into the USB-C port. These things can be small. Though there are no USB type-c wifi dongles apparently (now that I'm searching the web for them), so you'd need an otg adapter too, and there goes the size benefit.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#427
post #15

I have a similar feeling, but with modern smartphones. Owning my computer is still relatively possible. I can build a computer from parts which I can choose, and have a choice in which operating system to install on them. Laptops are slightly more closed, but even on those I can choose the OS myself. Modern smartphones however, seem like walled gardens in which I have no control at all. I cannot choose any of the par…

The only thing I will say is that I encourage you to get involved with hardware engineering. You will quickly find that small personal electronics have extreme design constraints that are quite unlike a custom-built PC (it's like complaining that you can't just buy RAM, a CPU, enclosure, etc and build your own ECM for your car).

People don't drop their battery-powered custom-built PC into 6ft of water and expect it to keep working (then dunk it again after two years of abuse, 4 floor drops, etc have worked against the case, seals, and so forth). They don't take it from freezing temperatures into the warm indoors and expect it to keep on trucking. They don't expose it to extreme temperatures on car dashboards in the summertime and expect it to still perform (it would absolutely hard-lock due to overheating if you tried it). Compared to a phone it doesn't matter very much how much a custom-built PC weighs +/- 1kg; phones fight for grams. If a custom-built PC uses an extra 15w who cares? But that might be more than the entire power budget of a phone SoC. People expect a phone not to spew EM that breaks the ability of anyone around them to use data or make calls. People also expect their phone to be able to complete a 911 call in an emergency so long as some kind of signal exists.

Modularity IS NOT FREE. STOP ACTING LIKE IT IS.

Modularity costs space, weight, and complexity (which often translates into user time spent troubleshooting).

If a user-replaceable screen means giving up waterproofing do you expect that to be a popular tradeoff? If making the battery replaceable reduces battery life by 40% is that a good tradeoff?

It is clear to me some people complaining haven't spent any time researching this topic and have no idea just how much engineering goes into modern electronics nor what the tradeoffs are. If they actually had to live with the results of their claimed preferences a lot of them would hate it and switch back immediately. At best I see people hand-waving half the battery life or double the weight as if it such things were trivial for devices people hold or carry on their person for hours a day.

I'm 100% serious when I say if you are working on your own company or product please make sure you approach these things with eyes open. If you are deliberately going to serve a different part of the market know that going in. It's fine to go after a niche - a niche can be profitable - but understand your customers and what they really value (not just what they claim to value). Don't let a bunch of contrarians on HN convince you there's a market for 10 million modular cell phones. You'll lose a lot of money when your "customers" skewer your product for all the compromises necessary to give them what they claimed to want.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#428
Looking through some of the points above, I was somehow reminded of Johnny Mnemonic, where he puts together a computer to get online. Based on today's reality he wouldn't need all the most modern, hard core parts, but actually as retro as possible - break into a computer museum and fire up some kind of antique running code he writes himself.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#429

I felt this way about iPhone. My compromise was to only connect using a VPN. The goal wasn’t to keep my traffic private — it was so that I could have complete visibility and control over what the iPhone was talking to. The idea was that my iPhone could be as nefarious as it wanted to be — it could never talk to anyone I didn’t want it to talk to because iptables stopped it, or something. The project didn’t pan out, b…

Apple devices are extremely chatty to the mothership. You can find many many comments on HN. The M1 included.

Re: I want a computer that I own

#430
post #38
post #8

> Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can't afford to buy. This statement here made me pause for a bit. He wants a computer with specific features, but doesn't want pay for the models that offer those features because they are too expensive? Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too, but unfortunately, reality has constraints.

Income shouldn't be a barrier to having technology that you own completely, a concept that until recently was common.

Remember back when you could get "free" dial-up internet by accepting ads? And later Facebook did much the same thing?

I see the whole personal data/tracking industry as that model. You can get a tracking-supported smartphone for $50 or with almost no tracking for $150. This whole thread is people saying they don't want to pay $150 to own a smartphone when they can get that phone for $50 with tracking.

I have a similar problem with slavery. I don't like it. But the smartphone market is utterly dominated by people who are just fine with slavery so there's just one company making a "less slavery" phone and that phone barely sells. Their forums have multiple threads with people complaining quite openly "why does it cost more to make a phone with less slavery" and suggesting that the company could provide more features for a lower price if they just forgot this whole "fairphone" business.

Smartphones are expensive to make and expensive to run. You pay that price either with money, or a mix of money and social/ethical cost.

Post reply on HN