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

811–820 of 1001 posts

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

#811

Post by sokoloff »

eldaisfish wrote: post #798
sokoloff wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nor did GGP's approach require them to be in google or apple's walled garden. That's exactly the point: there's an easy and common method that many people choose to use, but there is still a perfectly working method for people who choose to not use apple or google.

the part you are missing is that this is the situation for now. Emphasis on for now. Google are already moving to restrict what software your phone can run i.e. they control your device. Please, don't be so obtuse just for the sake of argument. Any rational, well-informed person can wee where this is going.

I think the upthread argument is the weak one in that regard. "See how terrible it is that banks offer a new method to get more convenient service for people who have an Apple or Google device? Because I choose not to, I had to use a perfectly viable method that people relied upon for decades and that still worked just fine."

That's an example of how the banks are continuing to accommodate customer preference, not the other way around. As to "where this is going", ATMs and debit cards are nearly pervasive and, yet almost 60 years after their introduction, I can still choose to bank with a teller if I insist on not having a debit card.

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

#812

Post by hungmung »

mothballed wrote: post #734
tomaskafka wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a great analogy. There are countries where a police can throw you into a lifetime jail with zero option for justice unless you are a famous person from a well known western country. Those countries are North Korea, Iran, Russia, Google and Apple.

Well the US can do it with CBP/ICE, but not for life. I was placed in a jail without being arrested or being accused of a crime and they were very clear at all times I was not even arrested, nor did a federal criminal history search show any record of arrest. No access to lawyer either. US Citizen. Contacted lawyers, all informed me they'd given up trying to sue for these things because it's hopeless.

Assuming what you're saying is true, this is the kind of thing 2A was written for. I don't mean for you personally, but for society it's really the last line of defense against a rogue government. But, even if your story is totally made up it's completely believable. Scary times.

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

#813

Post by toasterlovin »

rollcat wrote: post #786
AdamN wrote: post #562

Here's the deal for you young'ns. Richard Stallman (rms) had it right on this topic and alot of people had to fight to have the limited stack we have. It's not enough though. All we can do is make all the decisions possible to keep an open stack as viable as possible - even though what we have now is woefully incomplete. We need to push for this within our teams, within our companies, within our governments, in civil…

It's not the devices, or the operating systems. RMS didn't see TiVo coming, but TiVo was never the problem: by the time GPL3 was ready, the industry (e.g. AOSP) has mostly moved to MIT/BSD. In the end, none of this mattered. The real problem is that @gmail.com or @icloud.com are now required to participate in society. I'm happy to use an iPhone, it's in my subjective opinion the best device on the market. My concern…

> The real problem is that @gmail.com or @icloud.com are now required to participate in society

They absolutely are not, though. I've been fully bought into the Apple ecosystem for nearly 2 decades and have used a Fastmail email address with it for the last decade (when I ditched my MobileMe email address). Similarly, I have never had an @gmail.com email address, though I've used various Google products.

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

#814

Post by abtinf »

mothballed wrote: post #734
tomaskafka wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a great analogy. There are countries where a police can throw you into a lifetime jail with zero option for justice unless you are a famous person from a well known western country. Those countries are North Korea, Iran, Russia, Google and Apple.

Well the US can do it with CBP/ICE, but not for life. I was placed in a jail without being arrested or being accused of a crime and they were very clear at all times I was not even arrested, nor did a federal criminal history search show any record of arrest. No access to lawyer either. US Citizen. Contacted lawyers, all informed me they'd given up trying to sue for these things because it's hopeless.

You should contact IJ. They recently took up a case like this.

https://ij.org/press-release/us-citizen-and-army-veteran-sub...

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

#815

Post by inetknght »

account42 wrote: post #778
callc wrote: post #715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost. Having access to the internet requires a device, or public computer if available. A just society would at least maintain ability to interact with all government services through in-person and through post office. Universal access.

At least in some countries you can use a public computer at a library or other government-provided institution. I agree that it ideally shouldn't be required though.

> At least in some countries you can use a public computer at a library or other government-provided institution

...for now, at least.

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

#816

Post by const_cast »

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…

Option 1 is a superset of option 2 - meaning, any hackable device can also be a locked down device because hackability means the power to do whatever.

We don't need option 2, period, and it shouldn't exist.

Just put the hackability behind a switch or something. If people turn it on, that's on them.

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

#817

Post by bee_rider »

pdonis wrote: post #774
kristov wrote: post #641

I think the conversation needs to change from "can't run software of our choice" to "can't participate in society without an apple or google account". I have been living with a de-googled android phone for a number of years, and it is getting harder and harder, while at the same time operating without certain "apps" is becoming more difficult. For example, by bank (abn amro) still allows online banking on desktop via…

To me the point where the law needs to intervene is the bank or the school. You need a bank to function--that means the bank should be prohibited by law from tying you to an app from a particular company, whether it's Google or Apple or anyone else. You should be able to access their functions using any client that supports the appropriate open standards (such as web browsers). Similarly, if the school is going to ha…

If it is a public school, the state should “intervene,” but really it isn’t an intervention, it’s the state’s school they should fix their stupid policy.

For the bank, I don’t really see why it would be preferable to intervene with the bank vs the tech company. Either way the state will have to impose on a private company.

> You need a bank to function--that means the bank should be prohibited by law from tying you to an app from a particular company, whether it's Google or Apple or anyone else. You should be able to access their functions using any client that supports the appropriate open standards (such as web browsers).

Really this is an interoperability problem, so the government would have to impose on both sides. An OS should be mandated to come with a browser than supports some locked down functionality—a subset of HTML, nothing fancy, no scripting or anything like that. The bank should be required to provide a portal that speaks that language.

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

#818

Post by const_cast »

Jolter wrote: post #341
beeflet wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we need the second option to exist? The world is dangerous place. If you can't figure out a computer perhaps you're just unfit to participate in the modern economy. The existence of locked-down hardware eliminates the feasibility of open hardware through network effects. That is what is happening now.

You realize you’re discounting 98% of the world’s population, right?

98% of the world population is rooting their phone and installing unsigned binaries? Really?

Are you sure you maybe don't have this the complete opposite way around?

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

#819

Post by fsflover »

rhines wrote: post #743
mothballed wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't own a phone, but the most shocking revelation came when my child's school required us to use an app to specify how our children will be picked up or ride the bus. So far I've been able to avoid using apps for pretty much anything, but when the school says "use an app or you won't get your kids" and then also say they will call CPS and have your kids seized if you don't get them in time, that puts you in a rea…

We've reached the point where people without devices or common online services are so rare that society no longer accommodates them. It's similar to how we need legislation to ensure that disabled people have accessible infrastructure, except I doubt there will ever be legislation mandating offline/off-app accessibility.

This is not even about having a device but about forcing you into the duopoly with no choice, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45092669

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

#820

Post by bluesign »

fsflover wrote: post #681
bluesign wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is kind of levels: "can't participate in society without a mobile phone" "can't participate in society without internet" "can't participate in society without google" not sure where is the logical correct threshold making it wrong. because we all accept maybe people not participating without internet.

> not sure where is the logical correct threshold making it wrong This can't be more clear: Forcing to use the duopoly is against the competition and is totally wrong.

I meant a bit like: Let's say you have 2 mobile phone operators in your country ( duopoly ) we are ok that for example using SMS for banking interaction ( second factor etc )

I think this is a process; and somehow slowly people accepting those levels, and in a society it becomes normal ( to have whatsapp for friend group, to have facebook for family photos etc etc ) and you are being left out eventually if you are outside of those norms.

So it is not so different for bank to require something like google provided software.

Post reply on HN