5 ms·

Yes, devices are becoming more hostile to the use, I agree with most of your points. However, I don't think that there is a pure technical solution (open firmwa

by vdaniuk 11y ago

Yes, devices are becoming more hostile to the use, I agree with most of your points. However, I don't think that there is a pure technical solution (open firmware updates etc.) as it depends on technical expertise of the users. Instead, we should support non profits and b-corps which can be trusted by users.

drdaeman 11y ago
No. Scare users about reflashing without having expertise in the field. Warn about not having any support, yet still provide some means to support them if they don't heed the warning and fail, so they don't brick the devices - keep a tiny emergency recovery-only bootloader that would allow to reflash system in any state. But please don't insult their intelligence and don't deny their rights to control their own devices. Sure thing, there are plenty of stupid persons who'd wreck everything and then some. Heck, I hope I'm not too stupid myself, but when I first time flashed a router I screwed things up because of a typo. Let users end with the brick (they were warned, right?), recover it - or pay someone to do so - and learn. The only real issue that's in conflict with this is theft prevention. A legit use should be able to run any software on their device, but some don't want to give that opportunity to anyone but its legitimate owner. The technological part for this is here, but that's not a technical issue, but a purely legal one. But please, don't just shift the trust from vendor to some non-profit. Let the device owners manage their trust by themselves and have the ultimate decision on such matters. And for all the sanity still left in the world, let end-users still be the owners.
- vdaniuk 11y ago
  Your attack is naively misdirected, I fully support the right of device owners to have a full control of their gadgets including firmware, hardware, software, you name it. But as most users (and we already know this) don't care about these freedoms, for-profit companies don't have an incentive to guarantee them. Especially if it weakens their competitive advantage. Hence my call to support non-profits, like Mozilla.
  - drdaeman 11y ago
    Sorry if that sounded like an attack. No offense was meant. I guess I got your point wrong. Now I see. Yes, that makes sense. Even though I don't like, say, Mozilla (I have my reasons), with a popular after-market firmware they may fight for a way for everyone to flash anything - not just their firmware. Just hope this won't end up like it happened with UEFI Secure Boot, where everyone's who's unlucky to have firmware that doesn't support custom keys are stuck with Ubuntu-signed GRUB.
    - vdaniuk 11y ago
      No offense taken :) You may not like Mozilla and that's ok. But you still should support them as Mozilla's interests are mostly aligned with the interests of the users.
      - drdaeman 11y ago
        About Mozilla - I have an impression that they put their own interests (product popularity) somewhat above user interests. Yet, as long as everything doesn't end up with some Mozilla-specific partnerships or highly proprietary (in a sense of uniqueness, not source code availability) solutions that are hard to use for anything but FirefoxOS, I think you're right. Add/Edit: although - in reference to your original comment up the thread - I'd wont say "instead". I think it's what felt wrong to me and got me confused with what you had suggested.
        vdaniuk 11y ago
        In my opinion, popularity of Mozilla products in itself is in the best interests of most users, directly and through positive externalities. Minor transgressions like Pocket integration are a petty reason not to support Mozilla and their mission as a whole. Edit: sure, my wording could be more clear.
    - anonbanker 11y ago
      Did you ever like mozilla, or were these reasons more recent in nature? I personally liked Mozilla up to the SJW/Eich situation. Since then, every move they've made has been counter to the tenets of free software that JWZ and team instilled. Now, I merely use it because everything else is less-free. I'm hoping Servo will end up being to Firefox what Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox was to Netscape.

by vdaniuk 11y ago

drdaeman 11y ago

No. Scare users about reflashing without having expertise in the field. Warn about not having any support, yet still provide some means to support them if they don't heed the warning and fail, so they don't brick the devices - keep a tiny emergency recovery-only bootloader that would allow to reflash system in any state. But please don't insult their intelligence and don't deny their rights to control their own devices. Sure thing, there are plenty of stupid persons who'd wreck everything and then some. Heck, I hope I'm not too stupid myself, but when I first time flashed a router I screwed things up because of a typo. Let users end with the brick (they were warned, right?), recover it - or pay someone to do so - and learn. The only real issue that's in conflict with this is theft prevention. A legit use should be able to run any software on their device, but some don't want to give that opportunity to anyone but its legitimate owner. The technological part for this is here, but that's not a technical issue, but a purely legal one. But please, don't just shift the trust from vendor to some non-profit. Let the device owners manage their trust by themselves and have the ultimate decision on such matters. And for all the sanity still left in the world, let end-users still be the owners.

vdaniuk 11y ago
Your attack is naively misdirected, I fully support the right of device owners to have a full control of their gadgets including firmware, hardware, software, you name it. But as most users (and we already know this) don't care about these freedoms, for-profit companies don't have an incentive to guarantee them. Especially if it weakens their competitive advantage. Hence my call to support non-profits, like Mozilla.
- drdaeman 11y ago
  Sorry if that sounded like an attack. No offense was meant. I guess I got your point wrong. Now I see. Yes, that makes sense. Even though I don't like, say, Mozilla (I have my reasons), with a popular after-market firmware they may fight for a way for everyone to flash anything - not just their firmware. Just hope this won't end up like it happened with UEFI Secure Boot, where everyone's who's unlucky to have firmware that doesn't support custom keys are stuck with Ubuntu-signed GRUB.
  - vdaniuk 11y ago
    No offense taken :) You may not like Mozilla and that's ok. But you still should support them as Mozilla's interests are mostly aligned with the interests of the users.
    - drdaeman 11y ago
      About Mozilla - I have an impression that they put their own interests (product popularity) somewhat above user interests. Yet, as long as everything doesn't end up with some Mozilla-specific partnerships or highly proprietary (in a sense of uniqueness, not source code availability) solutions that are hard to use for anything but FirefoxOS, I think you're right. Add/Edit: although - in reference to your original comment up the thread - I'd wont say "instead". I think it's what felt wrong to me and got me confused with what you had suggested.
      - vdaniuk 11y ago
        In my opinion, popularity of Mozilla products in itself is in the best interests of most users, directly and through positive externalities. Minor transgressions like Pocket integration are a petty reason not to support Mozilla and their mission as a whole. Edit: sure, my wording could be more clear.
  - anonbanker 11y ago
    Did you ever like mozilla, or were these reasons more recent in nature? I personally liked Mozilla up to the SJW/Eich situation. Since then, every move they've made has been counter to the tenets of free software that JWZ and team instilled. Now, I merely use it because everything else is less-free. I'm hoping Servo will end up being to Firefox what Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox was to Netscape.