The 'internet of things' is sending us back to the Middle Ages

The 'internet of things' is sending us back to the Middle Ages
theconversation.com

> The computer manufacturer Lenovo, for instance, used to sell its computers with a program called “Superfish” preinstalled.

Most "serious" users reformat the machine and re-install the OS to get rid of the OEM included crapware. Not something the average user does, sure, but you're still allowed to re-install the OS on a commodity x86 system like a laptop. It's a matter of inconvenience, not impossibility.

> This system means that a car company can’t stop me from painting my car a shocking shade of pink or from getting the oil changed at whatever repair shop I choose. I can even try to modify or fix my car myself.

You cannot do this with a Tesla. Go look on the internet about people waiting months for Tesla to repair their cars, or people who have bought totaled Teslas and fixed them, only to be denied re-certification by Tesla.

I think we will see other electric car manufacturers moving in the direction of a more closed ecosystem than what we have now with ICE cars. Reason being that electric cars have a unique drive system (even more than ICE cars) and usually a proprietary HVDC battery (>60V) and battery management system. The manufacturer risks increased liability and bad PR if they let people modify these cars and then they end up in flames.

> Samsung cuts deals with lots of software providers which want to take my data for their own use.

Same deal as with Lenovo, but slightly complicated by the fact that ARM is not as standardized at a platform level as x86 (yet, I think this is slowly changing).

Pick a phone that comes without OEM crapware like Google Pixel, or a phone with good 3rd party ROM support like LineageOS.

> What is important is that we recognize and reject what these companies are trying to do, buy accordingly, vigorously exercise our rights to use, repair and modify our smart property, and support efforts to strengthen those rights.

Agree 100%, but this requires consumers to research products before they buy the cheapest one. We can encourage good behaviour by manufacturers, but it will mean educating our friends and family and collectively voting with our wallets.

For many in the industry this is not a concern, a mere technology issue, an inevitability, an opportunity for profit.

Fortunately there is growing skepticism and awareness of the intrusiveness. And self congratulatory messages on technology forums belittling user ignorance - oh they are dumb so we will take control - as if everyone should be a technology expert will be seen for the betrayal of users it is.

Self preservation comes naturally to humans and given most technology folks are happy, even proud to work with deeply intrusive spyware companies, they are not going to be perceived as harmless as before. There is going to be a backlash against the so called 'nerds' involved in this one way transfer of power.

It's a matter of the moral bankruptcy of supporting a company that does this, and voting with your wallet that this kind of behavior ought to continue.

Remember when Microsoft tried to change that with Secure Boot? If it hadn't been for the public outcry in the tech columns, they probably would've proceeded with it.