Slashdot Mirror
Richard Stallman: 'Apple Has Tightest Digital Handcuffs In History'
jrepin points out a discussion with Richard Stallman in which he talks about how the Free Software movement is faring in light of companies that have been successful in the long term with very different principles, like Microsoft and Apple. Stallman had this to say:
"I would say the free software movement has gone about half the distance it has to travel. We managed to make a mass community but we still have a long way to go to liberate computer users. Those companies are very powerful. They are cleverly finding new ways to take control over users. ... The most widely used non-free programs have malicious features – and I’m talking about specific, known malicious features. ... There are three kinds: those that spy on the user, those that restrict the user, and back doors. Windows has all three. Microsoft can install software changes without asking permission. Flash Player has malicious features, as do most mobile phones. Digital handcuffs are the most common malicious features. They restrict what you can do with the data in your own computer. Apple certainly has the digital handcuffs that are the tightest in history. The i-things, well, people found two spy features and Apple says it removed them and there might be more. When people don’t know about this issue they choose based on immediate convenience and nothing else. And therefore they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect."
...if they stop you from eating the scabs on your feet.
Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.
WTF? If anything it was shown that the silly monitoring application had the spyware pieces *DISABLED* on iPhones whereas Android phone sellers had it enabled. Google's original bits did not have it, since Google have their own way of tracking users :)
So how I am supposed to take Stallman seriously?
"And therefore they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect." Or, perhaps, they judged what they want and what they are giving up and chose something of their own accord because they don't care about the same things in their computing experience that RMS does. Crazy, I know.
The network effect is where you need to use (random example) Skype because everyone else you need to talk to uses Skype, and Skype is not built on open standards in a way which would allow you to use an alternative.
I'm not sure why you say "they aren't doing MORE than what everyone else in the industry is doing." They were one of the (if *not* THE) first to come up with a general computing platform that has a digital distribution mechanism for client apps full of DRM *that happens to be the only way to install third-party software on the platform*. By Apple's mandate, there is no sanctioned sideloading of apps. And jailbreaking/rooting doesn't count because that's simply people exploiting security holes in the system that Apple constructed to keep non-App Store apps off the platform.
Sure, everybody else is doing it now, but Apple pioneered that trend. The others followed suit after they saw the success of their platform.
Even if you want to develop a little utility of your own to run on your own device and not sell or distribute to anyone else, you *still* have to pay Apple $99/year for the privilege of loading *your own* software on *your own* device.
-- Nathan
I get the impression he hates on Apple because it's popular to hate on them in particular
RMS doing something becuse it's popular? Huh? Are we discussing the same RMS?
the real problem with the "Just run Linux" solution is that non-Computer Science people want to do things like answer e-mail, write correspondence, and buy software from the store that has a nice, easy installer
When will this lie end? Modern distros are far more useable than Windows, and possibly Apples as well (I wouldn't know). The only thing you got right was the "buy software" part. You don't buy software with Linux, you download it from the distro's repository. It takes one click and no reboots.
Since I am not drinking the Apple hate-eraid, I imagine I will be modded into oblivion.
Apple fans get mod points, too, as seen by your "+3 interesting" comment that's almost 100% incorrect.
Free Martian Whores!
And yet, he's absolutely honest and correct. Any marketing spin would be slightly dishonest and manipulative, and he won't stand for that.
Humans are biased to our own detriment. We'll take immediate payoff (the "convenient features") over a bigger long-term benefit (Linux's flexibility). We'll trust recommendations ("pressure") from authorities as being absolute, rather than re-evaluating solutions to find what's best for us. When surrounded by others doing something, we'll assume that we must do the same (allowing the "network effect")
Humans just suck. Not saying that outright is being nice.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Yes, and it's full of an incomprehensible jumble of hundreds of apps that do the same thing, with a distinct lack of the super-common apps that most people (and the computer kid down the street) know how to use already.
Just to clarify, are you talking about Apples app store, the ubuntu app store, or a 3rd app store like the google play app store or the amazon app store or ?
What you've described is pretty much the inherent characteristics of every bbs file section / ftp site / shareware cdrom / gopher site / file download web site / app store that's ever existed.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
"And therefore they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect."
Convenient features, such as stuff actually working well and doing what it's supposed to without needing tinkering. Pressure from institutions and network effect, aka '90% of my peers use the same software, it works well for our needs and it would be a major undertaking for them to migrate just to satisfy my whims'.
They're there in their room. You're on your own.
What are you talking about? Many engineering students make modifications to vehicles, purely for pleasure.
The issue is simple:
If I WANT to tinker, *I CAN*.
THAT is the freedom being discussed here. I can't just decide one day that I am dissastisfied with the windows file copy dialog box's estimated time to completion algorithm, bust open the source code, and tinker on it.
I *CAN* do that on linux. (Moreover, if my reimplemetation is superior, the linux community eagerly wants my changes!)
If I *want* to modify my fuel injection system on my vehicle, I can. The hood isn't welded shut, and the ECM isn't designed to kill itself when tampered with. Compare that with say, an xbox360 with efuses, and tamper tape.
Stallman is definately a crackpot in a large number of ways. (Harvesting fresh footfungus in front of an audience and all that..) however, arguing about this level of freedom, even if people choose not to make use of that freedom, is definately to the betterment of mankind, and should be supported.
I wonder what kind of car Stallman drives. Seriously. Does he update the firmware controlling the engine timing and fuel injectors?
What's that? The car manufacturers have digitally handcuffed him so that he can't go mucking around with things? Oh - it must be a safety issue. OK, well, surely he can update the firmware for other things in his car, such as the radio display?
People aren't hearded in to giving up their freedoms. There are certain freedoms that those people just don't *need* to begin with. My mother, who has an iPhone, isn't handcuffed - if anything, the device liberates her into using technology that she wouldn't otherwise use in in the modern world.
There are products across the spectrum that address the balance between usable and the freedom to do whatever you'd like. Just because manufacturers lock down their devices doesn't mean there's not a suitable audience that doesn't benefit...
Wrong. Just patently wrong. People care about safety after a host of different attributes, such as: convenience, sex appeal, price, social status, etc...
People don't buy Apple products because they're safe, but because they fit into one of the above mentioned categories. Who would purposely purchase shackles when presented with a "shackle-free" alternative, ninety-nine percent of the (American?) population.*
My favorite science teacher in school told me this, "Life is lazy". Everything wants to do the least amount of work possible. Why would people be any different. I'm not excusing this behavior, just illuminating the cause. Like I tell my students, "If you strive to fit in, you're aiming for the bottom. Be better."
Now, if you had said, "Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather do the "popular" thing", then I would be inclined to agree with you.
We (people in general) have become "fat and happy" and don't want to be hassled with the responsibility of making our own decisions. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke
"Do not go gentle into that good night" -Dylan Thomas
All great minds have railed against the "popular opinion". Why? Because as a people, humans are notoriously unreliable at making good decisions. As individuals, we have made magnificent strides in science, art, literature, etc...
Please, consciously decide against the tyranny of corporate control. They will never have your best interests at heart.
*I can only speak from an American point of view.
"Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
Privacy is a myth, it always has been a myth, and you are wrong.
Sayeth the completely anonymous internet user.
That's funny stuff right there.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
See, the difference is that rivers never used to flow uphill, so yes, there's your myth. Privacy did, in fact, have a significant role in our society -- that is not a myth. This was before folks like you grew up and got into the system. The 4th amendment used to mean something. But what it meant (primarily) was that the federal, and pretty much the state, governments had hard limits on them. They no longer do, as SCOTUS has made perfectly clear. So you're right, when you characterize it as "putting the genie back in the bottle" in terms of difficulty. However, you're very wrong when you characterize it as a myth. Vestiges still remain. As they go, there will be some uproar from those who understand the value of what is being lost, and yes, I know, you don't have to tell me -- that won't include you or people like you.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Right. As if your grandmother would do anything differently when encountering problems under Linux than under Windows -- either she'd ignore it (like my parents do with their infinite number of browser toolbars bogging down their systems), or she'd come to you for help. Most people are entirely incapable of fixing problems under either Windows or OS X, as exemplified by the infinite number of hits you get when googling "repair permissions", the universal remedy for all Mac problems (which are remarkably frequent for a faultless system) that never ever works, suggested by clueless idiots to helpless computer illiterate users every day.
In the end, most users just blame themselves for their computer problems: after all, they have chosen not to learn how the system works. Perhaps that seems less irresponsible with proprietary consumer software, a sort of feel-better-factor, but don't pretend your average computer user is capable of fixing problems under Windows or OS X.
Wether you're for or against things like copyrights, or the fact that it's been twisted and corrupted way beyond the original goal, you need to acknowledge that there's two kinds of files. The ones you create and the ones you buy. This means there is a difference between your property vs the property of other people.
As far as your own files are concerned, in my opinion Apple is not a bad guy, far from it.
Apple supports a lot of formats, some of them licensed and others completely open: .ical files
- Screen captures are in 32-bit PNG
- iCal supports regular
- Mail supports regular pop3 accounts
- Address Book supports vCard files
- iTunes supports AIFF, WAV, MP3, AAC, MPEG-4 and H.264 and their own proprietary Apple Lossless format
- Keynote has its own proprietary format but can export to Quicktime, Microsoft PowerPoint, PDF, images in JPEG/PNG/TIFF, Flash, HTML and even a format for iPods.
- Pages has its own proprietary format but can export to PDF, Microsoft Word, RTF and plain text.
- Numbers has its own proprietary format but can export to PDF, Microsoft Excel and plain CSV text with three choices of text encoding, one of them being UTF-8.
- iChat supports AIM, Jabber and Google Talk.
- Preview supports a shitload of formats
- Any program that can print can create a PDF file
Last week I just discovered that you can even Quick Look a Collada file and rotate the object while still in Quick Look mode, for crying out loud.
Some people will bitch that Apple doesn't support OGG Vorbis or OGG Theora, so let me the 1000th to bitch that such stupid names were bound to fail at grabbing any sensible marketshare. The idiots who thought of those names should be forced to watch this Simpsons episode every day for a year.
In contrast, Microsoft created BMP at a time when there was already at least 10+ graphic formats available, WAV at a time when there was at least 3+ audio formats available and AVI at a time when there was at least 2+ video formats available.
If there's someone who's disrupting your abilities to quit their platforms by chaining down your own documents, it's Microsoft a hell of a lot more than it is Apple.
Media that you paid for, however, is a completely different story. But don't only blame Apple, blame the media companies and remember that there hasn't been DRM on audio files from iTunes for the last five years or so. Just because these people will never understand that you can't lock down bit patterns doesn't mean they won't keep trying.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
... is that handcuffs do nothing but restrain you. An iPhone restrains you in certain ways but it also enables a whole lot of other things. It's all about trade-offs.
It's the difference between an actual prison, and a prison where you can eat delicious food, see your friends, travel to some extent, etc etc etc., versus living "free" in the woods.
Furthermore, they aren't "handcuffs" in that I can get out of them. I might lose some stuff, but then again, I might not -- it all depends on what I'm doing and how. As it happens, there is nothing on my iPhone that I a) care about and b) couldn't easily move to another system. So depending on who you are, they may not be handcuffs at all.
Finally, it's a continuum. There's a difference between "handcuffs" and "oh well, I guess I can't watch this movie I bought in iTunes anymore because I have an Android phone now." I gain nothing from some pursuit of absolute theoretical perfection. Same thing with security: what do I gain by reading SSL certificates, if I'm going to give my credit card to a 19-year-old in a restaurant to take out of my sight for five minutes the next day? "Those who would trade...", yeah yeah yeah. It is impossible to live a life that is perfect in every way. Have you ever tripped? Well then, why don't you just stare at your feet for every single step you take in all of life? Oh, because the benefits of looking around every hour of every day outweigh tripping on things a couple times a year.
The bigger problem with cell phones, really, are the odious terms from the telcos, like AT&T selling me a fixed number of bytes and then charging extra depending on what I want to do with them. Or requiring that all smartphones have data plans in the first place, and then making the "entry level" plans more and more expensive each year.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
While I agree that someone can still be brilliant but completely socially backward, you are equating chewing your fingernails with sitting down in a large lecture, taking your shoe and sock off, picking something off of your foot, and visibly munching down on it.
Biting his fingernails in front of a crowd would be a pretty bad habit. Picking his nose and eating it in front of the crowd (which I'm not sure he wasn't doing earlier in the video, anyway) is very "socially backward". Taking off his shoe and eating his own toenails (or whatever it was) on camera in the middle of hundreds of people is getting pretty borderline. I wouldn't go as far as saying borderline insane, but borderline dementia or some other mental disturbance, possibly...
First off, no, I don't chew my fingernails (I prefer nail clippers, but I don't think it's particularly odd to do) or eat my own boogers (eew!).
But even if I did, I can recognize that there's a large difference between doing either of those things in private, and eating something you just picked off of your foot while not only in public, but while being recorded, in front of an audience. That's the borderline insane part. Any normal person would immediately be aware of the consequences, and have the self-control to not do it, even if they were gross enough to want to. If you can't see the difference, you should be aware that most people can, and the other responses of disgust you can find in this thread are on the low end of the spectrum of reactions you'd get if you showed this video to people outside the Slashdot community.
For histronics, you should probably take a second look at your own post.
<xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
Just finished reading the comments, thank you all, most insightful in understanding the demographics of /. today: rage comic addicts with a depressingly shallow perspective on free software and that would gladly trade their siblings for the next iShiny and that think that saying inanity like "Well, freedom isn't important if the product is usable" is anything more than a mediocre platitude. Reading Computer Shopper adverts was more challenging that this drivel, "Oh, I don't mind that I don't own the software or even know what they do with my data because it is soooo convenient lol this RMS guy is so out of it!".
Magnis nomini umbra indeed Slashdot.
But that's a freedom most of the population couldn't care less about. Let's say I was making a fuss, because I couldn't get the InDesign data for all the books I own, and those books were evil, because they were taking away the freedom to design them in a more legible and typographically sound way. You couldn't care less, but honestly I sometimes don't even consider reading something that is designed just too badly, since I am a typography/design geek. But you might not give a flying f*ck about these things. Sometimes things you consider extremely important are just totally irrelevant to others.
There are two rules for success:
1. Never tell everything you know.
The freedom to tinker means that you can get your oil changed at Jiffy Lube.
The freedom to tinker allows for a greater degree of flexibility, and lower prices, and enables innovators. It's so pervasive in many areas that people like you even take it for granted.
You don't recognize it even when it's staring you in the face.
The freedom to tinker is why the PC even exists. The same goes for any of it's killer apps.
This goes WAY beyond what RMS wants out of a computing device.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
"That's the borderline insane part. " i don't think it's insanity..
is a simple failure to recognize social norms. think about what you do in your car (dig for gold) at a stoplight. you forget you are in a little glass box where everyone can see you.
i've seen women applying makeup, men shaving, people flossing.. BUT those same people (hopefully) don't do that at the fucking dinner table.. RMS is just in his car ALL THE TIME.
brilliant guy, but the social graces of a mountain fucking gorilla...
have you seen his requirements for a personal appearance? I don't think the biggest Hollywood diva's get this specific:
"Above 72 fahrenheit (22 centigrade) I find sleeping quite difficult. (If the air is dry, I can stand 23 degrees.) A little above that temperature, a strong electric fan blowing on me enables me to sleep. More than 3 degrees above that temperature, I need air conditioning to sleep."
complete list: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/pipermail/developers-public/2011-October/007647.html
you didn't read the list.
tea: "A supply of tea with milk and sugar would be nice. If it is tea I ...if he brings his own tea all the time, WTF milk and sugar? if he brings his tea with him, why even mention this?
really like, I like it without milk and sugar. With milk and sugar,
any kind of tea is fine. I always bring tea bags with me, so if we
use my tea bags, I will certainly like that tea without milk or sugar.
audio: It is best to provide audio recordings in the original recorded sample
rate, up to 44100Hz. Monophonic is generally adequate for speech
recordings and saves a lot of space over stereo.
HOW to pay for his tickets? you're getting a free ticket why do you care HOW i pay for it?
If you buy bus or train tickets for me, do not give my name! Big
Brother has no right to know where I travel, or where you travel, or
where anyone travels. If they arbitrarily demand a name, give a name
that does not belong to any person you know of. If they will check my
ID before I board the bus or train, then let's look for another way
for me to travel. (In the US I never use long-distance trains because
of their ID policy.)
Don't give them your name either: please pay for the ticket in cash.
hates breakfast:
I do not eat breakfast. Please do not ask me any questions about
what I will do breakfast. Please just do not bring it up.
don't be polite: So please don't ask me "Where do you want to eat?" or "What kind of ..i can see him storming out of a room because someone asked him a friendly question.
restaurant do you want to go to?" I can't make an intelligent
decision without knowing the facts, and unless I am already familiar
with the city we're in, I can only get those facts from you.
coke vs. pepsi - sure state your preference.. but I don't give a shit WHY
If I am quite sleepy, I would like two cans or small bottles of
non-diet Pepsi. (I dislike the taste of coke, and of all diet soda;
also, there is an international boycott of the Coca Cola company for
killing union organizers in Colombia and Guatemala; see
killercoke.org.) However, if I am not very sleepy, I won't want
Pepsi, because it is better if I don't drink so much sugar.
it's MY EVENT. STFU:
If you plan to restrict admission to my speech, or charge a fee for
admission, please discuss this with me *personally in advance* to get
my approval for the plan. If you have imposed charges without my
direct personal approval, I may refuse to do the speech.
I'm not categorically against limiting admission or fees, but
excluding people means the speech does less good, so I want to make
sure that the limitations are as small as necessary. For instance,
you can allow students and low-paid people and political activists to
get in free, even if professionals have to pay. We will discuss what
to do.
Another method, which works very well in some places, is to allow
people to attend gratis but charge for a certificate of attendance.
If the certificate is given by an educational institution, many will
find it useful for career advancement, while the others could enter
gratis. Whether this would be effective in your country is something
you would need to judge.
can I have your couch? are you kidding me? - I do not have the ability to maintain a sleeping environment temperature +/- 2 degrees
But please DON'T make a hotel reservation until we have fully explored
other options. If there is anyone who wants to offer a spare couch, I
would much rather stay there than in a hotel (provided I have a door I
can close, in order to have some privacy). Staying with someone is
more fun for me than a hotel, and it would also save you money.
REALLY? would YOU stay in a place that doesn't card people?
Please call the hotel and ask whether they will demand to see my
passport, and whether they report all their guests to the police. If
it has thi