You seem far more interested in badgering me into agreeing with your stance than actually listening to what I'm saying. Of course, you'll probably just hound me for being critical of lock down elsewhere, so, see you then.
No you aren't. You're saying "lock down is good and users love it!" when I'm saying that "users aren't aware of what lock down is."
You're ignoring that point because you're wrong, and attempting to change the subject
No, you're trying to push a baseless point and sticking your head in the sand when I point out the holes.
There is no argument past this, unless you have evidence that there are no users who claim those advantages exist.
The problem is you're suggesting that lock down is the VERY REASON those things occur, and that lock down is somehow essential for it. It's not. The reason those come into play is due to the centralization and integration Apple has set up. Blocking end users from being able to load apps without going through the store does NOTHING to ensure that.
The only people that lock down serves is Apple, as it routes everyone through the App Store, and Apple makes a ton of money off that.
But go ahead, continue believing that your argument is absolutely right despite it being full of huge holes.
I want to offer once again the philosophical principle that true freedom implies the right and ability to commit yourself and to constrain your future actions.
Which is valid in the case of things like contracts, but generally those tend to be two-sided. EULAs tend to be almost entirely one-sided contracts where in exchange for basic operation of the device you are giving up all ability to "own" the hardware. Can't quite phrase it like I prefer, but there it is.
the FSF argues that the GPL is actually freer, because it let's you do whatever you want only as long as you let others do whatever they want with the result. Imposing this limitation on freedom, paradoxically, increases freedom.
True, but it's a forward freedom instead of an immediate freedom. BSD guarantees immediate freedoms, at the expense of forward freedom.
This is where the FSF, along with much of the network community, has gotten off on the wrong foot with some of these hardware technologies, in particular Trusted Computing. These technologies allow you to make credible commitments to limit your own freedom. You can promise to run only certain software to handle certain data, and failure to honor your promise can be detected.
Trusted Computing is generally not a problem at all so long as you, the user, hold the keys. The problem arises, and the FSF is entirely right about it, when you the user hold none of the keys and have no option to get out of the cage. It's not so much you agreeing to run only certain software, so much being told as such and having no recourse.
I can understand the concerns that these technologies could be made mandatory. That would obviously be an unacceptable infringement on freedom.
Well, they may not be made mandatory, but there is certainly a desire from many entities (Microsoft, RIAA, MPAA) to make them de-facto.
Stallman is not notoriously amenable to reasonable persuasion.
He's amenable to what he sees as reasonable, of course;)
But I hope the larger community can start to look at these matters with open eyes, and not feel obligated to follow the FSF in lockstep.
I don't think the larger community does follow the FSF in lockstep. Instead, the FSF charges on ahead with their more extreme vision and the rest of us slowly push towards that while making the compromises that they won't. But there are some lines where attention must be paid lest the FSF's polar opposites, the fans of lock down and anti-user security, do an end run and try to shove us all in the box.
But beware, there are more than a few people on slashdot these days who will aggressively attack you for suggesting even bare minimum levels of openness.
It's tragic that your blind, irrational hatred for the FSF has led you to troll a topic that would do well with varied, reasonable discussion instead of one-sided pro-lockdown trolling.
I spoke of "commonly touted advantages". I don't care if they're correct or not.
Soooo, you're basically throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks? Oh and carefully ignoring counterpoints that have been shown to actually happen?
I get it. Is there a latin phrase for "arguing while ignoring valid counterpoints?"
There is no perception that lock down is good. There is a perception (valid, even) that Apple's experience is good. And it would be, even if you weren't forced through the iTunes Store. But go ahead, harp on me more for arguing in favor of the end user (even nowhere near to the ridiculous degree the FSF is.)
Higher quality apps and reduced chance of malware are the most commonly touted advantages.
If you read my response to Desler, that's been shown to be false. What if the WiFi router app had instead been malware? And don't go telling me there are no crap applications on the App Store.
And before you start point out how Android has good quality app
Don't own an Android device, so can't speak to it.
fuck off, I don't care
Obviously you do.
You claimed people don't see an advantage in Apple's system. I'm only pointing out the common advantages people claim to see, and am not making any statements regarding the worthiness of those claims, nor do I have any interest in discussing it.
People see the value in the App Store system, and the tight integration with iTunes. All of that could easily exist without the lock down forcing you to jailbreak.
But you keep harping on me for suggesting that even letting up a little on the lock down would be a good thing. You and Desler, do you have a vested interest in locked down platforms or something?
Is it fear mongering when an entire market, particularly the mobile market, is moving in that direction? What makes you think they won't try to move that lock down up the stack?
the locked-down platform is seen by many of the users as an advantage of something more open like Android.
I don't recall ever hearing an end user trumpet the fact that it is locked down as an advantage over Android. Most users, I suspect, wouldn't care if it was or was not open. That doesn't validate the lock down though.
You still didn't answer my question as to why you so vocally hate the FSF.
Alright: you're an insane, Apple-hating fear-monger, much like a rather vocal minority here on Slashdot who feels they must foist their needs and desires regarding Apple devices upon everyone else, despite never intending to own or use one.
Well, I do own a Macbook. So if ownership is a requirement that must be met to criticize how Apple is handling things on the mobile front, then I guess I qualify. Fortunately it is not.
But I'm no I'm a fear monger. Just look at how the entire mobile market place is turning into the Media Industry's dream world of devices whose security module is slanted against the user. Motorola's already managed an unhackable bootloader, I don't imagine it'd take much more for a device to prevent rooting (or at least delay it beyond the useful lifetime of the device.)
And once you have that done, all you need to do is push it up the stack. After all, last I looked most people treated their computers like black boxes as it is.
And it's funny how I'm the one foisting my "needs" and "desires" on other people when it's Apple feeding lock down to everyone. If I had my way, no one else would even be aware that anything was different, except that I might actually own an iPhone.
It's kinda hilarious, really: you demand choice and freedom, but only insofar as it's *your* choices and *your* definition of freedom.
Explain this to me: I criticize Apple's lock down of mobile spaces, and somehow I am being the oppressive one.
I think your perspective is completely and utterly fucked if you think an argument for ALL people to have more freedom with their property, that they don't even necessarily have to take part in, is a bad thing.
But there are those who do want to take it away, and they stand to profit greatly from it. But go ahead, this isn't the first time you've attacked me for taking a pro-owner, anti-lock down stance.
Well, you can always do without. Or use another brand, or buy used. It's not so much that they're "approved" (I was referring to a handful of standardized tests, which do not require the TI) but the suggestion that TI has somehow landed themselves in a position and are keeping others out by force.
Apple isn't this stupid. I know, I know, you want to believe Apple is stupid. It makes you feel good to think Apple is stupid. But clearly they're not.
I don't believe they're stupid, I believe they're greedy.
People don't *expect* their phone or MP3 player to be open, hackable things
Of course this COMPLETELY JUSTIFIES what Apple does, right? People don't expect their PCs to be open, hackable things either.
Apple would have to be staffed with fucking idiots to take away that ability.
I think you overestimate how much the average person users their computer.
But go ahead, insult me more. It makes your argument stronger.
Why isn't it recognized as a calculator? It's surely not because it can't "calculate." This is an example of the standardized test manufacturers creating an artificial market for TI calculators.
Most of those tests will permit this Casio calculator, most scientific calculators, all the way down to four function calculators if you really, really need it.
Or, to ban calculators altogether in standardized tests.
This, and a paring down of permitted calculator capabilities has been the norm.
This is an *actual* monopoly situation, supported and enhanced by the fact that states do not show any willingness to actually tackle the problems that created it.
But nontheless thems are the rules. They've gotten pickier these days, some tests don't allow calculators with CAS software.
Why don't they just make an app for iPod touch, or a new android device, or any other of the numerous better choices, as well as schools being more lenient on the devices which can be used?
Because all of them are more expensive than what these cost.
Or maybe it's because then teachers would have to actually figure out how some stuff works, instead of just reading from a prepared paper about how the TI-xx model works since every student has it.
That and a device like an iPod Touch isn't recognized as a calculator, so like many laptops and the TI-92, it is barred in many tests were the standard calculator form factor is permitted.
They've made a killing over the last 12 years selling hardware that is essentially minor improvements to their existing calculators. The differences between my TI-89 and the current TI-89s are minor, even with 12 years between them. Combine that with how TI-centric some math textbooks tend to be, and they've got the market locked down pretty tight.
Although, having colors would make it easier to differentiate plots when doing several at one time.
I wonder how long it will be until Apple divides the low and high end Macs via lock down. They seem to have gotten people to buy into it in the mobile space, no reason they can't sucker more people in on the slightly higher end.
Well the one leading this charge certainly seems to be Apple. I pointed this out in another article, but everything bad about Trusted Computing is getting its test runs in the mobile space.
Motorola has already shown that they can lock down the boot loader and kernel well enough that end-users can't replace them. Combine that with HTC's "self-fixing" system that un-roots a phone and you're in anti-user lock down heaven. The irony was me being told "not to buy it." Well, if this continues up the stack you'd better be happy not working with computers, or the internet.
I'm surprised at the hate people get for mentioning the N900. It's almost as if people are incensed at the mention of a non-Android, non-iPhone device.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem far more interested in badgering me into agreeing with your stance than actually listening to what I'm saying. Of course, you'll probably just hound me for being critical of lock down elsewhere, so, see you then.
Hope you're more vulgar next time.
No you aren't. You're saying "lock down is good and users love it!" when I'm saying that "users aren't aware of what lock down is."
No, you're trying to push a baseless point and sticking your head in the sand when I point out the holes.
The problem is you're suggesting that lock down is the VERY REASON those things occur, and that lock down is somehow essential for it. It's not. The reason those come into play is due to the centralization and integration Apple has set up. Blocking end users from being able to load apps without going through the store does NOTHING to ensure that.
The only people that lock down serves is Apple, as it routes everyone through the App Store, and Apple makes a ton of money off that.
But go ahead, continue believing that your argument is absolutely right despite it being full of huge holes.
Which is valid in the case of things like contracts, but generally those tend to be two-sided. EULAs tend to be almost entirely one-sided contracts where in exchange for basic operation of the device you are giving up all ability to "own" the hardware. Can't quite phrase it like I prefer, but there it is.
True, but it's a forward freedom instead of an immediate freedom. BSD guarantees immediate freedoms, at the expense of forward freedom.
Trusted Computing is generally not a problem at all so long as you, the user, hold the keys. The problem arises, and the FSF is entirely right about it, when you the user hold none of the keys and have no option to get out of the cage. It's not so much you agreeing to run only certain software, so much being told as such and having no recourse.
Well, they may not be made mandatory, but there is certainly a desire from many entities (Microsoft, RIAA, MPAA) to make them de-facto.
He's amenable to what he sees as reasonable, of course ;)
I don't think the larger community does follow the FSF in lockstep. Instead, the FSF charges on ahead with their more extreme vision and the rest of us slowly push towards that while making the compromises that they won't. But there are some lines where attention must be paid lest the FSF's polar opposites, the fans of lock down and anti-user security, do an end run and try to shove us all in the box.
But beware, there are more than a few people on slashdot these days who will aggressively attack you for suggesting even bare minimum levels of openness.
Err...
It's tragic that your blind, irrational hatred for the FSF has led you to troll a topic that would do well with varied, reasonable discussion instead of one-sided pro-lockdown trolling.
Soooo, you're basically throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks? Oh and carefully ignoring counterpoints that have been shown to actually happen?
I get it. Is there a latin phrase for "arguing while ignoring valid counterpoints?"
There is no perception that lock down is good. There is a perception (valid, even) that Apple's experience is good. And it would be, even if you weren't forced through the iTunes Store. But go ahead, harp on me more for arguing in favor of the end user (even nowhere near to the ridiculous degree the FSF is.)
They have a perception of integration, not lock down.
No, but I suggest taking a chill pill.
;-;
If you read my response to Desler, that's been shown to be false. What if the WiFi router app had instead been malware? And don't go telling me there are no crap applications on the App Store.
Don't own an Android device, so can't speak to it.
Obviously you do.
People see the value in the App Store system, and the tight integration with iTunes. All of that could easily exist without the lock down forcing you to jailbreak.
But you keep harping on me for suggesting that even letting up a little on the lock down would be a good thing. You and Desler, do you have a vested interest in locked down platforms or something?
Both of which have been show to be false, especially with the App Store.
But your responses come off as so very angry.
You're a sad, sad troll :(
Is it fear mongering when an entire market, particularly the mobile market, is moving in that direction? What makes you think they won't try to move that lock down up the stack?
I don't recall ever hearing an end user trumpet the fact that it is locked down as an advantage over Android. Most users, I suspect, wouldn't care if it was or was not open. That doesn't validate the lock down though.
You still didn't answer my question as to why you so vocally hate the FSF.
I was just asking a question. You seem to be the one that is slightly... unstable.
Why do you keep referring to them as the F$F.
Do you hate them for some reason? Can you explain it in a rational, sensible manner?
Well, I do own a Macbook. So if ownership is a requirement that must be met to criticize how Apple is handling things on the mobile front, then I guess I qualify. Fortunately it is not.
But I'm no I'm a fear monger. Just look at how the entire mobile market place is turning into the Media Industry's dream world of devices whose security module is slanted against the user. Motorola's already managed an unhackable bootloader, I don't imagine it'd take much more for a device to prevent rooting (or at least delay it beyond the useful lifetime of the device.)
And once you have that done, all you need to do is push it up the stack. After all, last I looked most people treated their computers like black boxes as it is.
And it's funny how I'm the one foisting my "needs" and "desires" on other people when it's Apple feeding lock down to everyone. If I had my way, no one else would even be aware that anything was different, except that I might actually own an iPhone.
Explain this to me: I criticize Apple's lock down of mobile spaces, and somehow I am being the oppressive one.
I think your perspective is completely and utterly fucked if you think an argument for ALL people to have more freedom with their property, that they don't even necessarily have to take part in, is a bad thing.
But there are those who do want to take it away, and they stand to profit greatly from it. But go ahead, this isn't the first time you've attacked me for taking a pro-owner, anti-lock down stance.
Well, you can always do without. Or use another brand, or buy used. It's not so much that they're "approved" (I was referring to a handful of standardized tests, which do not require the TI) but the suggestion that TI has somehow landed themselves in a position and are keeping others out by force.
I don't believe they're stupid, I believe they're greedy.
Of course this COMPLETELY JUSTIFIES what Apple does, right? People don't expect their PCs to be open, hackable things either.
I think you overestimate how much the average person users their computer.
But go ahead, insult me more. It makes your argument stronger.
Most of those tests will permit this Casio calculator, most scientific calculators, all the way down to four function calculators if you really, really need it.
This, and a paring down of permitted calculator capabilities has been the norm.
But is there really a problem here?
But nontheless thems are the rules. They've gotten pickier these days, some tests don't allow calculators with CAS software.
Because all of them are more expensive than what these cost.
Perhaps that's beside the point?
That and a device like an iPod Touch isn't recognized as a calculator, so like many laptops and the TI-92, it is barred in many tests were the standard calculator form factor is permitted.
They've made a killing over the last 12 years selling hardware that is essentially minor improvements to their existing calculators. The differences between my TI-89 and the current TI-89s are minor, even with 12 years between them. Combine that with how TI-centric some math textbooks tend to be, and they've got the market locked down pretty tight.
Although, having colors would make it easier to differentiate plots when doing several at one time.
I wonder how long it will be until Apple divides the low and high end Macs via lock down. They seem to have gotten people to buy into it in the mobile space, no reason they can't sucker more people in on the slightly higher end.
Well the one leading this charge certainly seems to be Apple. I pointed this out in another article, but everything bad about Trusted Computing is getting its test runs in the mobile space.
Motorola has already shown that they can lock down the boot loader and kernel well enough that end-users can't replace them. Combine that with HTC's "self-fixing" system that un-roots a phone and you're in anti-user lock down heaven. The irony was me being told "not to buy it." Well, if this continues up the stack you'd better be happy not working with computers, or the internet.
No, it's Flashlight.
I'm surprised at the hate people get for mentioning the N900. It's almost as if people are incensed at the mention of a non-Android, non-iPhone device.