Slashdot Mirror
How Proprietary Software Lets Companies Cheat (locusmag.com)
"Proprietary software makes it possible to design products to cheat ordinary users..." writes Richard Stallman -- linking to a new essay by Cory Doctorow:
Carriers adapted custom versions of Android to lock customers to their networks with shovelware apps that couldn't be removed from the home-screen and app store lock-in that forced customers to buy apps through their phone company. What began with printers and spread to phones is coming to everything: this kind of technology has proliferated to smart thermostats (no apps that let you turn your AC cooler when the power company dials it up a couple degrees), tractors (no buying your parts from third-party companies), cars (no taking your GM to an independent mechanic), and many categories besides.
All these forms of cheating treat the owner of the device as an enemy of the company that made or sold it, to be thwarted, tricked, or forced into conducting their affairs in the best interest of the company's shareholders. To do this, they run programs and processes that attempt to hide themselves and their nature from their owners, and proxies for their owners (like reviewers and researchers). Increasingly, cheating devices behave differently depending on who is looking at them. When they believe themselves to be under close scrutiny, their behavior reverts to a more respectable, less egregious standard. This is a shocking and ghastly turn of affairs, one that takes us back to the dark ages.
All these forms of cheating treat the owner of the device as an enemy of the company that made or sold it, to be thwarted, tricked, or forced into conducting their affairs in the best interest of the company's shareholders. To do this, they run programs and processes that attempt to hide themselves and their nature from their owners, and proxies for their owners (like reviewers and researchers). Increasingly, cheating devices behave differently depending on who is looking at them. When they believe themselves to be under close scrutiny, their behavior reverts to a more respectable, less egregious standard. This is a shocking and ghastly turn of affairs, one that takes us back to the dark ages.
At least on PCs I could figure out what was crap, and delete it. With my phone, I know what's crap but I can't delete it. Worse, that crap lives in internal memory, which is usually too small and too expensive compared to an easily installed SDCC card (why is a 64G SDCC card cheaper than a 16G internal storage upgrade?).
I've love to see a class action suit filed that would force Facebook, Groupon, Snapchat, and dozens of other apps I'll never use explain why they are taking up precious and expensive space in my phone.
Hopefully once that hurdle is cleared it will create a precedence for the other abuses.
I think Richard Stallman must feel like Cassandra these days. All the bad tidings he's been warning about for years are coming true.
Sometimes the "writing on the wall" is blood spatter...
LOL what? So the plague and public hangings and horse shit in the streets?
Seriously, anyone who has read Doctorow's latest novel Walkaway knows he's nothing but a left-wing activist.
All the things that Stallman hates are used by a few billion people and all the products he approves of are used by almost nobody because they are inferior crap.
Stallman is a crank who can be ignored.
Huh, in 2017, does anyone doubt anymore that we don't live in a neo-feudal system?!
Choose a phone and simply unlock it if that really scares you, what a stupid article.
If you are really bothered by all that "shovelware" then don't buy a phone that contains it. It really is that simple.
Corporations do not have customers, they have marks.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
. . . there are cell providers who will sell you a cheap phone from a generation or two back, but have the image set so you CAN'T re-flash it with a generic image. . . .
Hint: if it's last-year's phone and offers "free" cell and net. . .steer far away. . .
The crapware and mandatory upsells after your tiny allotment of "free" minutes and data are not worth the (alleged) savings. . .
This sort of behavior works great for companies...until it doesn't anymore. When it stops working the companies which relied upon it start to fade away. IBM once relied on a similar lockin strategy. When they lost it, they began to fade. They are only still around because they had so many real assets (as in real estate).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
"Increasingly, cheating devices behave differently depending on who is looking at them."
Great gaslighting tool!
His preaching is about as productive as my neighbor's dog barking.
Instead of bitchy rants perhaps he should go chase down some Californian venture capital to make something capitalist happen with all the GNU code
Why this guy continues to get trotted out as some self-ordained sage is beyond me.
It's not a "proprietary software" problem.
It didn't start with printers. "Vendor Lock-in" has been a very real problem that started back with Standard Oil. GM and Ford did it with customized bolt and but sizes and styles requiring special tools. Even government gets involved with HD broadcast and cellphone standards.
Microsoft via Windows 10 and Apple already snoop and direct used actions (or had Cory missed the rewrite of the music player on the iPhone to direct users to their streaming service) and so does the NON-proprietary Firefox which captures users data and directs ads at them.
As for the thermostats that are power company controlled - well that's thanks to proprietary government intervention that's trying to save the earth from global warming Cory. It's all government approved. It also why you can't get plasma TVs anymore because California mandated a massive surcharge on plasma TVs sold within the state because they use too much power.
What you're rebelling against here, Doctrow and Stallman, isn't evil fat cat corporationy people. You're arguing against central government control and planning dictating winners and losers with an insane need for data collection to make sure everyone is behaving.
This is what you get with an always on world and groups of people trying to impose their morality on others - which increases the value of data and polling to the point it's too valuable to not collect. Even limited government won't stop it because you need a big enough government to regulate it which will promptly become corrupted by the power to use the data for itself.
TL;DR - it's not proprietary software - it's a systemic issue worldwide.
When they believe themselves to be under close scrutiny, their behavior reverts to a more respectable, less egregious standard.
Doesn't that sound familiar?
It's Dieselgate writ small -- and this time around, there is no government agency tracking this sort of shit. That's why I rather suspect it will fail to make the radar of lawmakers until something particularly egregious happens. It probably will happen though.
Making a plan now and waiting until it's politically expedient to trot it out is better than having to make up policy on the fly, although it also allows greater chances of nasty poison pills getting embedded in it.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Open source doesn't stop all abuse. Look at systemd.
The phone companies are acting like a monopoly in that regard. They add as much malware as their competitors, effectively making the whole market the same. To be fair it's partially the consumers fault for being willing to pay twice as much as long as its spread out over two years and some of it comes from their soul instead of their wallet.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
I always feel icky agreeing with him; but he's not entirely wrong. Of course the obfuscation of closed-source isn't the only stick they can beat you with; but it's the most convenient one. They could open all the software and lock you into a server too. I think the GPL v3 was RMS's attempt to block that; but I'm not sure how widely adopted it is. Even if all the software were GPL'd, you can still be alienated from certain rights via a contract; so I guess I don't have to agree that much with him, or really feel that icky.
What's fair is fair, and what's not is not. Eliminating all closed-source is a sledgehammer approach that won't really fix this problem, and will introduce others.
Absolutely!
Because, you know what? its actually IMPOSSIBLE to buy a phone thats not from a carrier, IMPOSSIBLE I say!
Oh, wait a minute, they are everywhere, and there is actually no need to buy a carrier phone in the first place.
So companies are delegating the terms of the contracts, and deciding what their customers get. Because there is some feature of the phone that is such a hot ticket item, perhaps one of those "no-no's" mention in the OP? Don't really see a solution to this. Apparently the gains outweigh the losses for most individuals.
For years Eben Moglen has been pointing out "Stallman was right" in his talks. Moglen regularly cites how Stallman got there years before the corporate-minded press (and thus repeater sites like /. don't promote that point of view). It's very much the problem we see with the open source advocacy for nonfree software (or, put differently, the open source enthusiasts' unwillingness to stand by their pitched development methodology). I understand it rankles to read someone pointing out that free software and open source aren't the same, but when it comes to endorsing proprietary software they certainly are not and this endorsement ought not be pushed aside. Red Hat has a cozy relationship with Microsoft which includes bundling .NET software despite patent claims that render such software nonfree particularly if one wants to do something with the software they can do with free software—adding covered code to another project.
You still see people here (even on this topic) posting something that demonstrates an unfounded belief they have more control over their nonfree OS-running computer than they have. "At least on PCs I could figure out what was crap, and delete it.", for example. Taking "PC" not to mean "personal computer" but computer running Microsoft Windows, there are plenty of examples of programs that either don't include working uninstallers or installers that purposefully leave something behind which can't be easily uninstalled (Sony's rootkit which also interfered with CD ripping, for example).
/.'s user-driven censorship scheme effectively increases the odds that freedom-talk goes unseen. If you want to see your post never get moderated up (and thus be less likely to show up for most /. readers using default settings), try pointing to any of the GNU Project's malware pages. These pages are highly informative lists which are helpfully divided into useful subcategories. They all explain how nonfree or proprietary software most computer users run deserve the alternative name "user-subjugating" and point to stories written by others, naming names and leaving no doubt as to their authenticity. /. wants clicks and like any click/like-oriented publication, adherence to established corporate norms is the heart of the effort. Stories like this come along once in a while but clearly the mainstay of tech press is convincing people to argue over minor technicalities while they narrow the allowable debate to which proprietary programs shall run on one's system.
Digital Citizen
You don't own the software. Worse, you agree the provider/manufacturer of the device, can change the software at any time.
Who do I complain to when a Samsung firmware update installs Facebook? Software isn't held to the 'built to purpose' responsibility that hardware is. But again, you didn't buy the software.
How many printer reviews mentioned the RRP and expected output of the required printer cartridges? How many phone reviews and retailers list the crap-ware installed by the provider/manufacturer?
This is the problem with a "shoe-event horizon" or a "build it and they will come" market: Pointless demand means there's no need to supply a better product. Worse, a new phone will be dumped in 2 years, so the provider/manufacturer is driven to avoid accountability until its enforcement is pointless.
I just posted on the thread about Equifax about how they identify more with hackers than customers. We have reached the bizarre and unsustainable state where in computing, the customer is simultaneously the customer, the product, and the enemy.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
netflix can drop the rooted phones block or google can enforce some rules / have dev mode be able to do more.
This article reeks of hysteria. Take a deep breath and chill. Every business transaction and purchase for that matter has benefits, costs and risks. Having an app on your phone that can't be deleted doesn't sound like a life threatening event to me. If a product you want does not have the features or provisions you want vote with your wallet.
hardware and software, i want to be able to install my choice of Linux on it and know all the hardware will function properly because the hardware is open source so the open source Linux will be able to run the phone's features & functions
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
In RMS' world, end-users are honest and can support themselves.
In real life end-users lie, cheat, and do stuff to equipment then say to support "I have no idea why it doesn't work, you need to replace this POS."
Unlike RMS, companies live in the Real World, where incompetent people do dumb things then complain when you can't fix it.
Put RMS on level 1 support and see what he thinks afterwards.
The old Slashdot that I used to love! :)
A free market is an unattainable dream, just like true communism or true freedom.
If people have true freedom then inevitably some will abuse that freedom in order to subjugate others for their own ends.
The purpose of government, and indeed of the GPL is to impose some restrictions in order to ensure a fair system where everyone is guaranteed the same level of freedom. Governments for instance typically don't allow you to go around killing or enslaving people, because in doing so you would be taking away their freedom.
The same is true in a free market, companies would quickly realise that there are greater profits to be had by colluding and merging. You'd end up with one large supplier controlling the entire supply chain and noone else would have the resources to ever compete with them.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
This is a shocking and ghastly turn of affairs, one that takes us back to the dark ages. /quote
Well, guess I missed the news about the Black Death being back in town...last I looked we still had aircon and running water too.
The handset is powered by Qualcomm's beastly Snapdragon 820 SoC, and offers 4GB of RAM along with 32GB storage.
How do you expand that built in 32 GB storage? Would a hammer be enough or does one need powertools or corrosive chemicals?
Same goes for that 4GB of RAM, choked with processes and services and various crap you simply don't want to be running in the background, trying to be "smart" for you until you're barely managing not to throw the phone at the wall.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Let's create a world he finds nothing to complain about. It's not like we'd be worse off for it.
no one forces you to buy a locked down device. if more people acted like this there maybe would be some measurable market demand for open devices and thus an incentives for manufacturers to sell such devices. but when every neckbeard on the block still wants the newest shiny transistor brick that only runs proprietary software, hoping that he will be able to root/jailbreak it, nothing will change.
let actions follow your words.
For the *most* part I am always a bit surprised about the complaints. I mean it is like buying a shovel, that is designed to have spikes on the handle, for the only discernible reason being so that you also have to buy their special gloves in order to use it... When said persons are questioned on if they think that was a good idea, inevitably the response is, "Ya but it is a really GOOD shovel". But is it?
This is of course predicated on the fact that there are many other shovels laying around without spikes one might purchase. In some cases, either one industry is so dominated by either one company, or that the few companies that do exist, but more less all collude together to the same business model of screwing their customers VIA said locked in software. In that case it is truly detestable as there isn't much the consumer can do about it (provided they actually NEED said services/products). One would hope that is where government and consumer protection might step in (of course provided they aren't taking political contributions from said companies).
I could accept a proprietary baseband if it was perfectly isolated from the rest of system,
communicating only through a narrowly defined interface,
or if it needs DMA, protected by an IOMMU.
Fuck this world
Wait, what? Since when?
You don't know what free market means. It means a market place without coercion. No one forcing you to buy, no one forcing you to sell and no one setting prices but the people doing the buying and the selling. A free market requires government regulation. A free market is created by government regulation. It requires the rule of law, contract law and tort law. Without those things no one can trust their counter party. When people say free market they mean a market free of government coercion, not free of government regulation. The problem with the debate is both sides of the public are so poorly educated they don't even understand what is being argued about (this includes you apparently). Anti trust law is perfectly compatible with free market principles. No honest person informed about the topic would argue otherwise. While you are busy attacking this straw man of market capitalism give some thought to who created it and what their ulterior motives might be. Every time we are promised socialism what we get is fascism. It is not though the absence of government that the rich get richer, they rely on government to protect their wealth, it is through the abuse of government. The easiest way to get your money is with a gun, and government has a monopoly on violence.
My Phone is not leased, I OWN it. And any company including my carrier that tries to force software on me, I consider it to be a military attack and their networks are subject to the same.
Please don't kill the messenger; instead, go to the root cause and kill it with a stake to the heart.
And sorry, this is not that insightful, also.
All this is a consequence of exactly what the article talks about. Don't kill the flies one by one, remove what's attracting them in the first place!
With proprietary software, we'll always have that. Because there will always be a lame greedy jerk who will profit from what is really the very cause of the problem: everybody not giving a fsck.
Sure, Doctorow and Stallman point to serious problems, but I'd like to add the following views, if I'm allowed:
a) cheaters are not rational; sometimes it's the old scorpion tale... -- "why did you do it, if you knew you might be caught?" --"it's my nature";
b) besides, even rational cheaters reason that there is a probability of succeeding... and they might be of the opportunistic, risk-seeking type, those for which even zero gain is reason enough to try;
c) and mostly everyone contributes to that by buying closed-software machines and thinking "I'll get rid of shovelware", or "fine, I'll give my info to have a way to contact people whenever I want, even when they don't want to be contacted" or "ok, I might lose my data, but such is life" (there's actually a Google ad about losing useless photos and then losing those precious mementos of people no longer here).
So, don't fix the problem. Don't say, "I usually delete them". We should treat these guys as the Typhoid-marys they are, spreading loss of time and forcing purchase of new hardware even when not necessary. It's like a dragon gone mad because of worms inside it and eating the Earth as a result.
I believe nothing will be solved unless we take a much more serious stance about the problem, and knock on the big software producers to demand a more responsible service.
What you stated is only what was in the news. What others are out there that you don't even know about. Lenovo could have embedded code in the firmware or drivers that are spying on you right now.
This concept that a manufacturer can dictate what you can do with a purchased piece of tech has precedents going back over 150 years. The Edison Trust lawsuits set precedent that such a practice is unlawful. Time for some more class action to reinforce it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Patents_Company
NRRPT/RCT
Technology in general is almost becoming too complex to resolve this on the side of user freedom. Clearly what's needed is an open source computer design. Everything from BIOS/FIRMWARE/CPU/GPU/NETWORK/SOUND needs to be open source/open spec. I doubt it'll ever happen though. There's just not enough money/demand in it. Everyone wants an open computer platform with the caveat that it runs at 3-4ghz speed and runs x86 software. This is always going to be a fatal hindrance to it existing. x86 is locked up so tight by Intel and AMD noone is ever going to break that dominance unless China pulls off some sort of miracle, but then the CCP will probably build their own controls in.
Do you have a tutorial on plugging a PC into your car engine and installing this fantastical OS to control your car?
This "fantastical OS" is the likes of OpenWRT or pfSense and you seem to not understand the point if you think they can be used to control a car. These are router operating systems and they enable you to replace the firmware on many commercially available routers or even install them on a computer and use that as your router.
Just cause you can slap together a custom router with some PC hardware you have lying around, doesn't mean everyone else is a brainwashed idiot.
Just because you cant use your custom router to fix your farming equipment doesnt mean it isnt worth doing and it is a pretty pathetic corporate apologist excuse to peddle:
Forget buying devices supported by projects like Cyanogen and forget open source routers, your car isnt open source so just dont bother.
Corporate shills like you are the real problem.
except in the case of Sprint or Verizon. Even if you buy something like the Google pixel which fully supports both carriers they will generally only activate the one that is branded by their company. And yeah, you could argue "don't use Sprint or Verizon" but some people are stuck in family plans by financial necessity
People should be trained in what software freedom means and why it matters. Instead they're trained in evaluating all options on the basis of price (and misstating the price, at that, because no price is placed on their privacy or their other rights), convenience (without regard to other values), and on fashion (functionally, there's very little that separates the older button-oriented look & feel UI from the modern swiping and OpenGL-effects-laden UIs but that the latter requires more expensive hardware which can mostly be operated only with nonfree software).
So people should determine how computers are used by critically examining ethical arguments they're never taught to value until it's too late. This puts most computer users at a severe disadvantage and software freedom activists are up against very wealthy adversaries. But we all know that software freedom treats people in a defensibly better way we can explain in detail. We should argue for improving public education along lines that matter—software freedom and the underlying ethics of that social movement—not price, fashion, and convenience in the moment.
Digital Citizen
Ain't using no US OS