Slashdot Mirror
Doctorow on the War on General Purpose Computing
Cory Doctorow has posted the content of his talk delivered at Google this month on what he calls the coming civil war over general purpose computing. He neatly crystallizes the problem with certain types of (widely called-for) regulation of devices and the software they run — and they all run software. The ability to stop a general purpose computer from doing nearly anything (running code without permission from the mothership, or requiring an authorities-only engine kill switch, or preventing a car from speeding away), he says boils down to a demand: "Make me a general-purpose computer that runs all programs except for one program that freaks me out."
"But there's a problem. We don't know how to make a computer that can run all the programs we can compile except for whichever one pisses off a regulator, or disrupts a business model, or abets a criminal. The closest approximation we have for such a device is a computer with spyware on it— a computer that, if you do the wrong thing, can intercede and say, 'I can't let you do that, Dave.'"
Just extend RFC 3514 to add an "Evil Bit" to all executables. If that bit is set, the program won't run.
Problem Solved.
I'm a woman who uses a PC and a Christian.
So, I now have to deal with a war on PCs, a Republican War on Women, and then there's the War on Christianity.
What is a girl to do!?
The article in full is a very interesting argument for why we will all regret our eagerness to embrace the "walled garden".
Has everyone forgotten the days when your computer actually belonged to you? The days before computing was more than just shopping?
Do you own your PS3 or your Xbox 360?
How did we reach a point where we will so willingly turn over our individual agency to Apple, Microsoft, Sony? Or AT&T and Comcast? Who here believes that those companies can be trusted to look out for our best interests?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Let's see, where have we heard all of this before, on Slashdot, pointed out by average commenters? Oh yeah:
When TPM was introduced in 2006.
When Apple started doing code signing in 2008 on OS X.
Oh, and I forgot driver and application signing in Windows. When did that start?
Please help metamoderate.
Are we willing to give up more control to "Authorities" and who exactly should these authorities be. Should those with authority be able to execute such a kill switch without notice or should users/citizens have notice? Thinking into the future, if i decided to go to a soft drink vending machine that is "smart" and i choose to purchase a sugar laden drink but my bmi is over a certain number should these authorities dispense a diet soft drink instead. I don't believe we are quite in a big brother society (but approaching it) IMHO users should have the option to disable the "dummy switch" on their devices. For example: if a user has(or feels they have) the technical savvy to be able to take care of their computer or device they should be able to retain responsibility for their devices/computers without being required to give it up to an "authority". Looking to a future where if you are 1 second late on your utility payment...oops you don't have that utility any more..
Chief Thinker www.devotedskeptic.com
Its almost as though freedom requires responsibility or something.
11 of 9 comments loaded
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Quite possibly they won't. But the case will drag through the courts for a decade, and eventually Microsoft would face a fine of a few hundred million dollars. I'm sure they'd be willing to pay that much, if doing so allowed them to destroy linux on the desktop almost entirely. We've been through this before with their bundling decisions: A seemingly endless legal battle, and while Microsoft eventually lost the benefits they gained from their anticompetative actions arguably outweighed even the record-setting fine.
"Diablo 3 had 6Million+ morons buy it."
No, those are 6 million people that got screwed by Blizzard's business model. Same one used by almost all game makers today. A lot of those simply expected an improved Diablo 2, they didn't care about the reviews, because they expected, expected Blizzard to deliver something just as good as the previous one, or better.
Why I'm saying the business model is broken? Well, say you have a demo (not gameplay movie on youtube, because that's just a short movie where you just watch people doing stuff how they want it not how you want it, you watch their experience, not yours), in that demo, you don't see the network problems, the online only issues that crop up, the utterly fucked up auction house business model, and most of all it's hardly enough time to realize just how worthless it is compared to other titles, not just today, but in the previous years as well.
So, they hate piracy? Of course they do, if those 6 million would have played the pirated edition first, they wouldn't have bought the original.
Most games have very little value, or no replay value. Piracy hurts them, because people get a preview without wasting money on them, then uninstall them and try to forget the experience.
Should we care? Absofuckinlutley not. They try to con people into buying their games without puting any effort into their work. Those are the kind of games where you get only a few hours of playtime, at best, or hours of pointless grinding at best. Could you name a few names? You could try, but it would be very hard, those are the kind you intentionally wait until can pick them from the bargain bin, then an hour later, sigh with frustration over the wasted money.
Where am I know? I'm just playing a few flash games, online only, and PS3 to pass the time or socialize, the rest? Well, let's just say I gained a thorough knowledge of emulators for all kinds of platforms in the past decade.
Here is car/microwave analogy.. and forgive my crassness.
A) Stupid or indifferent people want a computer (car) that just works and they don't have to/nor want to fuck with the innards. They want the computer to be microwave simple. 1) Put food in microwave. 2) Press the "30 sec" button repeatedly until they get the cook time to time they want.* That is it. (Or for the car: key, ignition, go. It came from the factory with everything needed and how it came from the factory is how it will stay)
B) Slashdot "power users" car analogy is that of the muscle cars of the 1960s in the united states. They want to redo the suspension, the transmission. the engine, the carb(s), the differential, get it from the factory with aluminum instead of steel for the body, and have no federal E.P.A. emissions regulations.. straight pipes off the headers. They will get their hands greasy and it will not bother them.
Economically, Apple and Microsoft and all the other players know there is greater market of people for A than B.
Now, I do like the idea of a walled garden to protect the idiots from themselves without telling them "No" outright. (Just don't run as admin/root and you're 90% there, but most ISV can't or won't write code that works as non-root) I just don't want the walled garden applied to me. I don't need their excuse of "give me your freedom so I can keep you safe". I know how to fix my own car.
* About the 30 seconds and microwave. for some it seems "time cook" + "5" + "0" +"0" + "start" is too complex.
AFAIK nobody is preventing you from making your own computer that will run any program you want. Nobody is preventing you from designing your own microprocessors and any other component for which you can do computation. Nobody is preventing you from writing the software to do whatever computation you want.
Actually, it's already a criminal offence to run some programs (DRM crackers etc.). I say we'll see the first attempt to seriously enforce laws against running certain kinds of offline software (as opposed to online software like filesharing tools) by 2020.
The OnStar system is one of many deal breakers that would prevent me from buying a GM product; that along with a zillion horror stories. Seeing that many people feel the same way all this does is open up an easy way for competitors to compete. They just won't put that feature in. Their advertising becomes easy, "Look we didn't screw up your purchase."
The only companies that will put these sort of features in are usually defending some other business model. So Apple will put in measures to defend iTunes. Google will put in measures to defend their store, and it looks like Microsoft is thinking about measures to defend either their OS or their store.
But does anyone really think that the server manufacturers are going to make servers that make it hard to install Linux? Also Microsoft is becoming weaker and weaker. They certainly have some weight to throw around but even if they bully a few desktop manufacturers into forcing some protection onto their systems no doubt they will just release a "server only" motherboard that doesn't have any protection and is a complete copy of the desktop except something like the BIOS will boot up and say "Server BIOS". Not to mention that other MB manufacturers will just tell MS to go pound sand.
Also does anyone think that say the Raspberry Pi will give a hoot as to what MS has to say?
The real war on General purpose computing is the trend people using smart phones and tablets. These devices do almost everything the average user needs. It is the more power user types who need what is becoming the specialty hardware of a desktop that they can control. As a programmer I need to be able to install the OpenCV libraries and whatnot but my mother wants the fewest clicks to get to her mail.
Also keep in mind that the seemingly locked down iPhone has done as well as it has due to the fact that it is far less locked down than the phones that proceeded it including the blackberry. Often you would buy a phone from Telus or Sprint only to find that they had crippled some features such as custom ring tones so as to sell you ring tones. When Apple introduced the iPhone they didn't let the Telcos crap up their phones. Can you imagine what the Telcos would have done to the iPhones if they could. All kinds of custom backgrounds, remove the app store and replace it with one of their own, make it so you can't upload your own music, can't surf via WiFi. Again these companies would have crippled the iPhone to protect their other business model.
Again as a programmer if Apple were to lock down the next version of the OS, I would not upgrade and then begin exploring other options. As it stands my next phone will almost certainly be something like an Openmoko.
PS The business model that GM seems to be defending is the fact that the government is their primary lifeline. They know who is buttering their bread and it certainly isn't the consumer.
The author has obviously never tried to get an unsigned device driver running under Windows 7.
Having to switch the OS into "test mode" and jumping through other hoops is a real pain.
I can still go to Newegg.com and order a bunch of commodity parts and assemble a general purpose computer, install a completely FLOSS operating system and all the software I want on it. I can load it up with quad GPUs for password cracking, terabytes of storage for all my pirated media and warez, run TOR and Truecrypt, and all sorts of other "evil" features. If there's a war on general purpose computing it's clear which side is winning.
As it stands now, an individual has never had more access to computing power, bandwidth, and data than they do now. Yes, there are locked down boxes you can buy if you're not interested in all that, but individual components are still being sold. There's a thriving market for computer hardware that isn't going to disappear any time soon, and neither will the free software made to run on such hardware. As little as $35 (or whatever the Raspberry Pi costs) gets you a "general purpose computer", albeit a very simple and underpowered one.
Walled gardens can peacefully co-exist without threatening general purpose computing.
And as we've seen from every iOS device, even walled gardens don't keep people locked in if they are determined to leave. If you make compelling hardware people will always find ways to use it how they wish. I can easily take root control over my iPhone if I wanted to. Same is true for Android devices.
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
Apple never needed fascism to keep their devices largely free of malware. They even have old television advertisements that brag about this very thing.
My opinion might not be "right" but yours is certain wrong. It's contradicted by the facts.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I've got karma to burn, so here goes.
As I get older I want to tinker with my machines less and I want them to just work more. That means that my home setup has gone from a half dozen servers all running a variety of Windows and Linux/BSD operating systems to one simple desktop with ESXi. All the VMs are backed up automatically, they're upgraded automatically (to stable versions -- I don't care about bleeding edge anymore), and they basically don't need to be touched for months and months and months. It means my desktop computer has gone from multibooting various flavours of Linux with Wine to just... Windows 7.
Why?
I just want things to work.
I don't want to spend hours trying to get Wine to run World of Warcraft better, I just buy a new video card and be done with it. I use an iPhone because its working is binary; either it works perfectly, more or less easily, or it doesn't work at all and I'm not tempted by some half-broken package that if I tinker with it enough will be mostly stable (this version). It just works or it doesn't, and there's nothing an iPhone can't do that I care enough to go Android. Who really care if you can't telnet to your phone? Really?
Windows 7 just works. My iPhone just works. That's what I want my machines to do.
After all, if you work for your machines, who owns who?
Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
Except in this case it's "They told me not to let you do that, Dave."
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
In fact, most programmers have an iPhone or an Android and accept the fact that they don't and don't need to completely control that device. It doesn't limit what they can do on OTHER devices that they own.
People without the technical savvy to manage a general purpose computer without support and restrictions don't NEED a general purpose computer without support and restrictions. They'll always be the bulk of the market.
I basically agree. Why impose you own opinion on others? As an long-term Apple user who switched to Linux some years ago I have stopped giving people advise on what to buy or not to buy. If people like the walled-garden approach, fine for them -- and fine for me, too, because don't have to give free support any longer. However, I do reserve the right to ridicule Apple users whenever I wish. Have fun with your glossy "retina" displays, fixed batteries, and soldered memory! ;-)
That's the user perspective. From a developer perspective, things look a bit different, because in comparison to 10 years ago it does feel a bit as if Apple is wanting to screw us. And you need to make money somehow,right? I still develop for the Mac, but it's likely that in the near future either Apple will have to pay me if they want a Mac version rather than vice versa. Or, more likely, the Mac and iOS versions of our programs will be more expensive than Windows and Android. Other developers should do the same, since app-store overhead, lack of portability, risk of being rejected by Apple for no reason, etc. all create additional costs and risks. No problem, since Apple users just love to pay more and have (obviously) have enough money to burn.
They try to con people into buying their games without puting any effort into their work.
You're not a game developer, I take it?
Well, why does it have to be black and white?
What about using the tool for the job? I recently boughtt a macbook pro. I got it because I knew I'd seen be doing a lot of photo stuff and wanted to use Aperture. I got a high end camera and am looking to do video, weddings,e tc. Final Cut Pro X is what I wanted for that...and the hardware and other software, are nice for everyday stuff on it...email, etc.
I have a number of linux boxes at home...I set them up as home servers, and my primary desktop in the back is a gentoo box...I'm also playing around with Backtrack, to teach myself security pen testing.
I have a win7 box (also win7 vm on the mac)...for doing some development for a job...that requires windows.
So, every job has its tool.
Sure there are things I don't like about the mac...so, I use a different box for that....etc.
I mean, these days..computers are largely commodity.....the days of saving forever to only have one family computer is long gone, I have to image most people have at least 2x computers in their homes today, don't they? Or at least a computer...a tablet...a smartphone....etc.
Tool for the job....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
To me, I don't think you have to do anything more on this issue but compare the first 5 years of Windows XP malware (seemingly infinite â" at one point XP malware was the majority of Internet traffic) to the first 5 years of iOS native malware (zero.) END OF DEBATE
End of debate? Really? I would have thought the debate ended when Apple decided that the Bush II countdown app was not allowed on iPhone because it might offend Republicans, but then again, maybe I care more about free speech than I care about run-of-the-mill viruses (don't think for a moment that an intelligence agency could not create the iPhone equivalent of Stuxnet).
Nobody is taking away your Unix
This is not about Unix, this is about my ability to run the programs I want to run and to use my computer to do the things I want to do, and yes, that includes my ability to copy files without permission. If I want to run an Obama countdown app, why should I be prevented from doing so? Heaven forbid Democrats might be offended, right?
It is a sad day when we can honestly say that Windows users have more freedom than Linux users, but that is where we are now (but not for much longer it seems). Everyone loves it when their computers "just work," but when their computers start saying, "No you cannot play that movie, "No you never purchased 1984," and "That file is not allowed to be printed, except for a few author-selected paragraphs" people will suddenly demand their PCs back -- and by then it will be too late.
Palm trees and 8
AFAIK nobody is preventing you from making your own computer that will run any program you want.
Except an army patent lawyers at every major computer and software company.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Nobody is taking away your Unix.
UEFI came close though.
A better car analogy would be the (unsuccessful) attempts made back in the 1970s to regulate auto power to weight ratios. The mother hens in congress were bent upon killing off the muscle car market. Fortunately, they were laughed out of that attempt. In some European countries, cars capable of higher speeds were to be taxed or outright prohibited. So you got cars with speedometers that maxed out at 85 MPH (125 KPH). Even though the car could keep going.
Sure. You can still have your Unix. On a $25K workstation. Just like the old days, before some crazy Finn ported it to a 386.
And no, we can't make a car that never ever crashes, but we can take legitimate steps to reduce crashes significantly, and in fact it is immoral to do any other thing.
We don't legislate morality. This isn't the Soviet Union. Or Saudi Arabia.
Have gnu, will travel.
People should at least know a couple of things. Some companies make computer hardware, and some companies make computer software. Software is something that works on computer hardware. It "can" be the case that the same companies who make the the hardware could also make the software, but this is NOT implied. In the past, we've had the pleasure that we could get our software from anyone because the PC design philosophy was "open".
The standard car analogy may suffice here. Some companies make cars. Some companies make gas. We don't buy "Ford" or "Chevrolet" gas do we? But the analogy gets deeper than this. The gas is seen as the OS in this analogy. We figure that if we put in a single type of gas, example "Ford" gas, we can still travel where we want. But the problem is that the "Ford" gas will only work on certain highways that the car maker will allow us to go down. Going forward in the computer industry, this exactly what is going on. If you use Apple computers and devices for example, you can only view the world through Apple's lens.
Do you know Torchwood? The very first episode was that the policewoman find Torchwood and gets in the headquarter. After she gets out Jack drugs her with an amnesia-pill and she runs home and write everything about Torchwood in her PC before she fells asleep and forgets everything. Before she almost felt asleep, Torchwood control her PC, the PC goes blank and everything she wrote is gone.
Free operating systems are a thread to every government, because such controls are impossible on a system that can be modified by the user. If you think it's scri-fiction: the TPM chips are around since at least 2006.
TPM is for "Trusted Platform Module". Of course the "Trusted" part is that a third party can trust your PC that you didn't change it in any undesired way.
http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
You're missing the point. What happens when nobody sells general purpose computers - just special purpose appliances? Think it can't happen? Where do you go to buy electronics parts? That used to be what Radio Shack sold, now I have to buy parts mail order from Digi-key. How about ball bearings? Hardware stores used to sell the raw materials that I used for projects, now it's all special purpose parts that only work with one manufacturer's product.
And the pen of today is the PC, the evil empire fears the computer more than they fear guns, bombs or riots! "They" can crush any armed resistance like swatting a fly, "they" can subvert, obfuscate, terrorize, propagandize, manipulate the uninformed population with a constant stream of artfully crafted disinformation! Creating "Dire emergencies", "deadly boogimen", one "crisis" after another, thereby keeping the unsophisticated, sufficiently frightened and therefor easily controllable! The PC and the Internet allows the average person the ability to do an "end run" around all the lies, fabrication and propaganda being spewed by the government/corporate controlled media.
Without open source software and a free and public Internet, REAL, open, barefaced, undisguised, tyranny would already be here.
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
Special purpose computing is a maintenance intensive task and a management nightmare on any large scale.
It can be done. It's called "ROM" code. The computer device should ONLY run code from the address space reserved for ROM chips. Forget about the convenience of loading programs into RAM for execution. It leads to compromises.
Updates, patches and the latest awesomeness will just have to wait. And when [security] bugs are found, you just have to turn the thing off until someone can come along with a new ROM.
People don't want PITA systems like these. They are expensive, slow to deploy and all sorts of things like this. Before anyone says "CD/DVD ROM" please don't. Just don't.
Cheap and convenient invariably creates holes in security. It's just the way things are.
Let's not go overboard here. Microsoft is far from being saintly, but at the end of the day, Microsoft is largely indifferent to the existence of desktop Linux.
Microsoft views desktop Linux kind of like the tiny black ants you see walking behind the toilet after a week of thunderstorms. You could go get the ant spray and wipe them out, but then the second floor will smell like ant spray for the rest of the day, and it would mean having to go downstairs, hunt for the ant spray, go back upstairs, and use it.
More importantly, from Microsoft's world view, half the computers running Linux have a paid OEM license for some version of Windows anyway, and the other half are owned by people who, if you backed them up against a wall and forced them at gunpoint to give up using Linux, would buy a Mac. If Linux annoys Microsoft, it's only because Microsoft is forced to stop and find some way to accommodate it.
Server Linux? Yes, that annoys Microsoft. Android? Hell yeah, that annoys Microsoft even more. But Desktop Linux? Meh. Barely even on the radar. Now, if somebody fights back against Metro by porting KDE or Gnome to Windows 9... well, THEN Microsoft might get really annoyed and notice...
And I wonder how many millions more said "Always online? Fuck that noise" and went elsewhere? I know that I can only speak for myself, my friends, and my family and we all just went over to Steam and picked up Torchlight II (Not only is it only $20 but you get Torchlight I for pre-ordering) instead of dealing with the bullshit.
As long as we have choices? I have no problem with companies being douchebags because the douchebaggery will come around and bite them in the ass. Look at how EA is on the selling block and Activision is talking restructuring, why? Got to be too big of a douchebag and ran off their customers, that's why.
So as long as I can buy or build my own machine that does what I want? Then go ahead and be a giant douchebag Mr Corp, I'll take my business elsewhere. The threat that Mr Doctorow is pointing out is when ALL the companies decide to be douchebags. Look at desktops, for the vast majority if Win 8 don't bomb you are gonna have the "choice" of an Apple walled garden..or a MSFT walled garden. Too many companies aren't even competing with each other anymore, as we saw in that article a couple of weeks back how Apple and MSFT have signed cross licensing agreements up the ass so they are now buddy buddy.
It is THAT which we have to watch out for, the day when your choice is black box A or black box B which can be killed at the whim of the OEM and which is completely worthless without the OEMs blessings.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
The problem is much deeper than you think, but you're on the right track. The problem is that you can't economically sell copies. It's retarding the industry. Think about Economics 101: if copies are in infinite supply then what is their price (regardless of cost to create)? Zero
Piracy is just a symptom of an artificial scarcity racket.
Game developers get paid only when they're making a game. The publishers must add cost to the equation (to support their own existance), and they try to get as much money as possible for doing what? Providing Copies? Well, yes, but that's a bogus reason. The only reason we really need Publishers now is that the market is fucked up -- If we could just do work and get paid, like a mechanic does, or a home builder does, then we wouldn't have to charge extra for the work once the games are finished.
The publishers are in the way between the customers and the developers. This is why things like Kickstarter are exciting; However, once free from the Publisher's constraints the Developers are quick to adopt the artificial scarcity system only because they can, and because they can't ask enough funds up front. However, if they couldn't use artificial scarcity to make money, then you could have all games for merely their cost to create (plus a little profit to run things). If we can just get you players to fund the development of the game, we can give you the game for free when its done (since you paid us to make it already), and get more money by making more games / producing mods, etc. -- Game prices are WAY over inflated right now for the successes, but for the less stellar games the margin is so small that one misstep kills the studio. Ah, but the publishers don't care that they're gambling with the futures of the studios! There are other groupn of devs to buy up, milk, and slaughter. You keep paying the inflated prices so the Publishers only need to make a few big hits to stay in business.
Now, to solve the artificial scarcity problem there are a few solutions, some less savoury than others:
o Ensure artificial scarcity can not be circumvented -- This leads to DRM and closed computing with permanent spyware installed.
o Tie the game to a service -- This way the publisher is still providing some work, running a server, but the quality of service drops as usage goes up (Protip: That's bad for sales), and leads to games being unplayable without subscription, and planned obsolescence.
o Stop selling copies, since they're not rare at all. Instead sell our ability to make new content -- to do work -- because that's what is actually scarce. This means having a good reputation, and even releasing a few details of the game up front, like playable demos, to earn investment -- It's a DRASTIC change in the marked, but this is also the ONLY way to end piracy.
As a race, we haven't adapted to the realities of the Information Age yet. We're still clinging to artificial scarcity and trying to sell information as if it can be a physical thing. We haven't yet adjusted to the SIMPLE idea that you only get paid when you're doing work (like everyone else does). THAT is the REAL problem, and the above solutions apply to all information markets, from Software to Music & Movies.
If you can't sell ice to an Eskimo in the Ice Age as a valid business strategy, why would you think you could sell 1's and 0's to folks with computers in The Information Age?! As someone who benefits by holding copyrights over the works I create, I say: We must end all copyright. Once we remove the incentive of artificial scarcity I can actually get paid a fair price for doing the work you want us to do, and end the rein of the Money Leaching Middlemen (Publishers).
Note: there's nothing wrong with charging a subscription for a game service, but forcing a subscription fee where none is required is called rent seeking.
A walled garden does not preclude allowing the ability to turn it off. {...} They could quite easily add an 'opt out' and let people install outside software at their own risk.
As an example of a non obligatory garden: the webOS system from Palm/HP/Gram, on Pre smartphones and the like.
Out of the box your Pre/TouchPad is the classical walled garden example:
It has a application manager, which lets you download or buy applications from a official repository of doctored applications.
But if you want to use your device in creative new way, you need just to type 1 command to switch the phone into developer mode. This command is well documented in the developer documentation. (The only draw back is that the first version was a little bit long to type, because it was a joke on the komani code. later versions introduced shorter alternatives). And then you can do pretty much anything you want with your smartphone/tablet. including installing any software of your liking. Or even installing an application manager which can also use homebrew and opensource repositories. (= Preware). And once you've finished sideloading external software, just switch back into regular mode and continue using your new homebrew apps or the new app manager.
There are no need for hacking, for exploits, for stolen keys, etc.
Using this is at the owners' own risk. But if you corrupted your smartphone/tablet by installing too much weird shit, there's the webOS doctor which is designed by Palm/HP/Gram, to revert back your hardware to factory default. (Though you lose anything you did which was not backed up on the cloud. You lose your homebrew applications. But not the personal assistant data).
And a non-locked android smartphone works in the same way, letting the user do side-loading or replace the firmware altogether.
BUT
Apple and Microsoft decided they didn't wanted to do it that way. They are trying to do as much as possible to prevent going out of the walled garden.
Apple refused to let users do anything else than get applications from the Apple AppStore and at some point even tried to sue against circumvention.
Microsoft is at the center of a controversy due to their abusive requirement regarding the ARM version of Win8 and the Secure UEFI booting.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I have been a longtime Diablo 2 player and fan. When Diablo 3 came out, I was disappointed that they changed the gameplay so much from Diablo 2.
All the always online stuff, auction house etc just made it even less likely that I will buy it.
I recon the Elder Scrolls games (Oblivion specifically) have more of the things I liked about Diablo 2 than Diablo 3 does.
It's _VERY_ likely in the future that if your software/hardware is not "blessed" by your government, it will be illegal to own, and you will be blocked from accessing any network, including the internet. This neatly stops things like Wikileaks, offenses against the media, etc, etc. What, this is unthinkable?... Weeeeeeeeel, The iPad's selling in record numbers, and ALREADY does this, by design. Unless Apple loads the software in the "App Store" it _cannot_ be loaded onto an iPad without "jailbreaking" it. And most sheeple are just fine with that. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPad#Digital_rights_management It's only a short stroll to making that kind of behavior lawfully required for _ALL_ computing equipment. After that, no more worries about proving what IP Address belongs to whom; just prove that you "unlawfully" hacked hard/software to make it do something the government doesn't want, and throw you in a cell.
First of all read http://www.ranum.com/security/computer_security/editorials/dumb/ item #2. You cannot "enumerate evil". Similarly big brother will find that they can't come up with an all-inclusive blacklist of "evil apps". There will *ALWAYS* be something they haven't thought of.email
Instead, it's much more effective to whitelist "harmless apps". So you'll end up with...
* an email applet
* a spreadsheet applet
* a chat applet
* etc, etc, etc
Either that, or the "general purpose applet" will be Facebook... bleagh.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
If the end comes, which I don't believe just that general purpose computers will go back to being a more specialist/expensive tool, then we, the technologists, will only have ourselves to blame.
The reason this is happening is because we have just cared about the other tech users. We've poured scorn on people that click on the wrong link and download a virus. We've tutted at those people that don't know what a file-system is, or why one is better than others. We've laughed when we've heard that someone is still running Windows ME. In short we've cared about ourselves, and our needs, rather than the needs of everyone.
If we had tried to make things simpler and harder to break, but still retained the flexibility, we could probably have done it but it was cooler to rewrite a device driver, or develop a new filesystem/GUI. We didn't, and this is the result.
You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
There is a reason publisherless games tend to be smaller and have fan-driven niche-markets. Notice how the kickstarter game market is already starting to loose steam.. there is only so much room for fan driven content that reaches any significant scale.
People tend to underestimate just how much a publisher does since it does not seem to benefit them. To be honest, the 'kickstarter success' cases have not been all that honest about what it took to get them there... they had massive social networks and a built in fanbase to pay for things, they were stars or got metapeers to spread the word for them.. in other words they were sufficiently well positioned to be able to their their advertizing themselves and small enough to handle their distribution themselves. For most developers though, they can not depend on being high profile enough to get customers to pay up front like that, it takes the resources of a publisher getting the word out, setting up the channels, making sure all those boring details that developers do not think are important happen smoothly. It is a lot of work,.... but beyond that it is not work that respected, it is not work that is sexy, but it can be very make or break.
I am also not sure I would say publishers do not 'care', but they do have their own set of priorities.. specifically the food on the plates of THEIR staff. They are not charities.. they will invest time and effort in a studio they think will make a good partnership, but they are not going to drag along one they do not think will pan out well. It sucks when a studio we as customers love goes under because publishers stop helping them, but the publishers do not sit down and go 'hey, this studio is doing fine, lets destroy them!'.. they look at the studio and go 'well yeah, they have a loyal following, but not enough people want their stuff to justify the investment', they stop, then they spend those resources on other studios.
No, it isn't perfect.. there is a lot of corruption and such in the works.. and I completely agree alternate paths need to be developed since some studios are going to be able to survive and sell their goods through other channels... but if we want to change things we need to acknowledge why things are they way they are and what benefits the current systems have, rather then dismissing them completely. Otherwise we will just make all new mistakes and a lot of studios that would have a chance will shut down because they did not take advantage of resources they could have. Purity is bad when you want to stay employed or when you have people working for you.