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...
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
Um. Thermostats controlled by the utility are optional. You can go your own way if you want. The reason they are good is not that they are cheating, but rather than it's to everybody's benefit not to overload the grid: if you overload it, it goes down, and then everybody loses. It's called cooperation. This is not what Stallman and Doctorow are talking about. Open source software in those devices would be great, and indeed there are some pretty nice open source home energy control systems available today.
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.
What happens if cooperation is necessary for sustainability, but people don't cooperate and control the thermostats themselves? Who then should have the final say?
Money works. Where I used to live there was a discount on power bills if you agreed to have a smart switch on your A/C. I never noticed any difference in temperature, and I paid less. I benefitted from the arrangement and so did the utility.
With there being significant pressure to increase unstable power generation methods like solar and wind, it is a good thing to be able to control the load somewhat on demand. Heating and AC are good candidates for this.
Building a phone is not the mission of the FSF, the FSF's concern is about the wider politics of software users and software distribution. The FSF are happy to partner with projects that have the goal of promoting user freedom through phone software and phone hardware. Anybody is free to run such a project, it's just that there isn't any investment capital to do such a thing within the existing FSF associated projects.
The preaching is important because without it, nobody will demand for a change in the status quo and then invest into that change - nobody will understand that there is a problem that needs fixing. First the education has to happen before society will choose to invest into changing the status.
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.
How do you expand that built in 32 GB storage? Would a hammer be enough or does one need powertools or corrosive chemicals?
It's called an SD-Card slot, an SD card is a memory card that allows you to expand the phone's available storage. Quite some time ago Android added the ability for applications to be installed on SD cards as well. Buying a phone that gives you this option of adding storage (or even better one that is supported by alternative OS distributions) is a way of "voting with your wallet". There is a vibrant and active community working to solve exactly the problem you are complaining about so support them by helping to write documentation, code or donating money.
Exactly what is your proposed solution? Or are you just here to suggest that everything is hopeless?
Um. Thermostats controlled by the utility are optional. You can go your own way if you want. The reason they are good is not that they are cheating, but rather than it's to everybody's benefit not to overload the grid: if you overload it, it goes down, and then everybody loses. It's called cooperation. This is not what Stallman and Doctorow are talking about. Open source software in those devices would be great, and indeed there are some pretty nice open source home energy control systems available today.
It is true that keeping the grid up is important. But where I live, that isn't a problem. We don't get black outs unless a storm rolls though, we don't get brown outs. This may change in the future but isn't happening now. Utility controlled thermostats are currently a way for the energy company to save millions while the consumers save a couple dollars each.
The basic idea is a good one. If you can stagger HVAC units coming on by even a few seconds it can massively reduce the peak loads. That's good for everyone.
The problem is that the system is proprietary. I'd have no issue connecting my AC unit to wifi so it can use an open protocol to talk to the power company and negotiate when to turn on. What I don't want is some black box connected to my system that I have no control over and no idea what it is doing.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC