7 ms·

Why are we continuing to insist that incredibly complicated and unrestricted computing devices which served well a few million highly technical folk a few decad

Why are we continuing to insist that incredibly complicated and unrestricted computing devices which served well a few million highly technical folk a few decades ago can equally smoothly well serve ~8 billion people of varied capacities and hues? At this point we need to accept that severely locked down and curated devices are the easiest and least painful road ahead for the majority of the world's citizens to participate in digital transactions, while unrestricted computing devices can used by those who are learning or specifically involved in technical tasks or are simply those who agree that they know what they're doing and the tradeoffs involved. Am not saying unrestricted devices should be banned. It's just that they should come with warnings on the box and an advisory to use locked devices if the intent is to simply buy it and mindlessly use it.

digi_owl 9y ago
http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html
lallysingh 9y ago
I liked the 'developer mode' switch on chromebooks for this. A switch (maybe a keylock that comes with the machine) that turns on/off admin access.
- btschaegg 9y ago
  I agree that the idea is really nice. The execution, however, still leaves a lot to be desired. The boot screen coming up each time if I put my machine into dev mode is something that really icks me. At least, I should be able to switch it off (without resorting to EFI hacks). Also, it's really easy to wipe your device on that screen if you accidentally press the space bar. If that one screen was a bit more configurable and the driver situation was a little bit better (less blobs/hacks), my ARM-based chromebook would be my daily driver by now.
cm2187 9y ago
So what is going to be the unrestricted device? Looks like it won't running on Windows or MacOS which are going very quickly the locked down route. I would be happy if there was a good alternative.
- naravara 9y ago
  There are lots of flavors of *NIX that can serve this need. The big fear shouldn't be that you won't have anything to run so much as the idea that popular general Operating Systems in the future will integrate too many advanced features and introduce hurdles to general interoperability that makes it harder for open source alternatives to be useful. So far it hasn't been too big of a problem, but if operating systems start being augmented by substantial amounts of AI or machine learning derived efficiency improvements upstarts might have trouble keeping up, but I wouldn't count out the creativity of the Open Source community to address these issues.
  - cm2187 9y ago
    Well, it's one thing to have the OS, but you also need a laptop to run it. I don't see good hardware being release for a small segment of the market.
- Retric 9y ago
  Windows already has several versions, adding a non locked down one seems like an obvious up sell on Microsoft's part.
  - bobsam 9y ago
    So basically windows 10s will be the new mainstream OS and the 1% who really get computers will pay few bucks more to buy windows 10 pro(per)?
    - cm2187 9y ago
      I'd pay more to get rid of cortana, the telemetry, the OS fighting me to do basic things.
backtoyoujim 9y ago
I'm going to need more convincing that digital austerity can bring forth better results than its financial brethren.
stcredzero 9y ago
while unrestricted computing devices can used by those who are learning You can have a machine where you are actually more free to experiment than simply being unrestricted. If you have a machine where you can roll back changes to a saved point, you are more free to experiment, even with dangerous and esoteric mechanisms. This is what we had in Smalltalk. Smalltalk used to be an OS. (There are 4 hooks in the old Smalltalk-80 image for lifting the drive head, putting it down, and moving it in and out.) When I used it, it was no longer an OS, but this is how I know that doing Semaphore allInstances do: [ :each | each release ] Locks up your image so hard, there's often lag when you try to kill the VM process. I can do that with un-checked in code in the image, then restart from a saved image, replay all of my actions from the change log except for the last one, and I'm back in seconds, all of my code nice and safe. This degree of rollback ability would also be great for simplifying parental IT. You'd need to add some sort of cloud storage for storage of authentication secrets and the most important data, but then it would be almost bulletproof.
- blibble 9y ago
  a chromebook?
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    Is the Chromebook's rollback as absolute as, say, that of a device running a Smalltalk based OS in a 'kiosk' mode with a hypervisor overseeing the VM and recovery mode?
    - swdunlop 9y ago
      No, but it comes with a popular browser?
  - mynewtb 9y ago
    The cloud has no rollback nor should the billions of people not have privacy.
    - 9y ago
timdeneau 9y ago
The transition seems well underway, for Apple at least. How long does it take though, a decade? It doesn’t seem unreasonable to think iOS devices will replace 95% of all Macs, with exception to professional users who need massive workstation resources, unfettered system access, etc. I don’t recommend Macs to family or friends anymore, they’re completely unnecessary. The new iPads with the keyboard are enough for normal people. That trend seems to be solving the problem, gradually, leaving the technical system for technical people.
godzillabrennus 9y ago
The alternative is to sandbox everything on the "open" system to enhance security. http://www.bromium.com http://www.bromium.com implements that approach within Windows.
- mc32 9y ago
  Some of Bromium reminds me a bit of moka5. Moka went bankrupt as they had a solution of sorts in search of a problem.
walrus01 9y ago
You don't work for Google (Chromebooks) or Microsoft (the new low cost Windows 10 that can only install apps from the App Store), by any chance, do you?
Tsagadai 9y ago
The restrictions just make spyware easier to hide. Malicious users will still be able to bust into devices but removing or detecting them will be harder as you will not be in control of the device. What about what that curation entails. Should I be forced to watch ads the manufacturer sends me before I can do anything? Should I be forced to pay a rental fee or lose all access to my data? Should all financial transactions be controlled by the manufacturer's prefered system? The problem with walled gardens is lockin and shareholders would be irrational not to encourage the manufacturer to maximize the profit they can extract from each device. I don't want a device where my every interaction is controlled and monetised to maximize my consumption.
legulere 9y ago
You don't need to lock down whole devices. You just need to lock down applications what they can do. The problem is that the basic unix (and windows) APIs are designed with malicious users, but not malicious programs in mind. What iOS and Android tries is bolting on a permission system on those old APIs, leading to overcomplicated brittle systems that fall behind what can be achieved.
- pawadu 9y ago
  > ... basic unix (and windows) APIs are designed with malicious users, but not malicious programs in mind I beg to disagree. Ubuntu for example has apparmor enabled by default [1] and snaps running in containers [2]. And compartmentalization is a huge part of the linux kernel [3]. --- [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppArmor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppArmor [2] https://snapcraft.io/docs/snaps/intro https://snapcraft.io/docs/snaps/intro [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cgroups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cgroups
  - legulere 9y ago
    AppArmor is completely useless for the scenario of malicious programs rather than exploitable programs, as you still need to write profiles for programs. Ubuntu snaps are not sandboxed yet [1] Containers just offer just the same environment as a normal unix. Kernel apis like e.g. Video4Linux or even more basic stuff like the filesystem are not designed for this. How does an app ask the user for permission to use the camera? How does an app ask to open a file outside of its sandbox? Basic things like that are just handwaved away or implemented with extremely complex systems that regularly have security holes. [1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/3063134/linux/ubuntus-snap-packages-arent-yet-as-secure-as-canonicals-marketing-claims.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/3063134/linux/ubuntus-snap-pa...
    - kyrofa 9y ago
      > Ubuntu snaps are not sandboxed yet [1] That's quite a blanket statement: of course they are. Snaps are sandboxed by a set of interfaces requested by the snap in question. If the snap requests networking, it gets networking. If it wants to access the sound card, it gets the sound card. Some of these interfaces are more powerful/dangerous than others. If the snap requests X, it gets X. That makes that particular snap certainly less safe, but it says nothing about snaps that don't use the X interface at all. The user can also disallow access to X (though that probably makes the application less useful) by disconnecting that interface: snap disconnect <snapname>:x11
theknarf 9y ago
Well, that's the most 1984-esque comment I've read today.
- lostlogin 9y ago
  So you read HN before the newspapers?
mr_overalls 9y ago
Maybe it's time to re-engineer our whole computing software stack from the ground up with rigorous security in mind, like the LangSec folks suggest. http://blog.jacobtorrey.com/langsec-taming-the-weird-machines http://blog.jacobtorrey.com/langsec-taming-the-weird-machine...

digi_owl 9y ago

http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html

lallysingh 9y ago

I liked the 'developer mode' switch on chromebooks for this. A switch (maybe a keylock that comes with the machine) that turns on/off admin access.

btschaegg 9y ago
I agree that the idea is really nice. The execution, however, still leaves a lot to be desired. The boot screen coming up each time if I put my machine into dev mode is something that really icks me. At least, I should be able to switch it off (without resorting to EFI hacks). Also, it's really easy to wipe your device on that screen if you accidentally press the space bar. If that one screen was a bit more configurable and the driver situation was a little bit better (less blobs/hacks), my ARM-based chromebook would be my daily driver by now.

cm2187 9y ago

So what is going to be the unrestricted device? Looks like it won't running on Windows or MacOS which are going very quickly the locked down route. I would be happy if there was a good alternative.

naravara 9y ago
There are lots of flavors of *NIX that can serve this need. The big fear shouldn't be that you won't have anything to run so much as the idea that popular general Operating Systems in the future will integrate too many advanced features and introduce hurdles to general interoperability that makes it harder for open source alternatives to be useful. So far it hasn't been too big of a problem, but if operating systems start being augmented by substantial amounts of AI or machine learning derived efficiency improvements upstarts might have trouble keeping up, but I wouldn't count out the creativity of the Open Source community to address these issues.
- cm2187 9y ago
  Well, it's one thing to have the OS, but you also need a laptop to run it. I don't see good hardware being release for a small segment of the market.
Retric 9y ago
Windows already has several versions, adding a non locked down one seems like an obvious up sell on Microsoft's part.
- bobsam 9y ago
  So basically windows 10s will be the new mainstream OS and the 1% who really get computers will pay few bucks more to buy windows 10 pro(per)?
  - cm2187 9y ago
    I'd pay more to get rid of cortana, the telemetry, the OS fighting me to do basic things.

backtoyoujim 9y ago

I'm going to need more convincing that digital austerity can bring forth better results than its financial brethren.

stcredzero 9y ago

while unrestricted computing devices can used by those who are learning You can have a machine where you are actually more free to experiment than simply being unrestricted. If you have a machine where you can roll back changes to a saved point, you are more free to experiment, even with dangerous and esoteric mechanisms. This is what we had in Smalltalk. Smalltalk used to be an OS. (There are 4 hooks in the old Smalltalk-80 image for lifting the drive head, putting it down, and moving it in and out.) When I used it, it was no longer an OS, but this is how I know that doing Semaphore allInstances do: [ :each | each release ] Locks up your image so hard, there's often lag when you try to kill the VM process. I can do that with un-checked in code in the image, then restart from a saved image, replay all of my actions from the change log except for the last one, and I'm back in seconds, all of my code nice and safe. This degree of rollback ability would also be great for simplifying parental IT. You'd need to add some sort of cloud storage for storage of authentication secrets and the most important data, but then it would be almost bulletproof.

blibble 9y ago
a chromebook?
- stcredzero 9y ago
  Is the Chromebook's rollback as absolute as, say, that of a device running a Smalltalk based OS in a 'kiosk' mode with a hypervisor overseeing the VM and recovery mode?
  - swdunlop 9y ago
    No, but it comes with a popular browser?
- mynewtb 9y ago
  The cloud has no rollback nor should the billions of people not have privacy.
  - 9y ago

timdeneau 9y ago

The transition seems well underway, for Apple at least. How long does it take though, a decade? It doesn’t seem unreasonable to think iOS devices will replace 95% of all Macs, with exception to professional users who need massive workstation resources, unfettered system access, etc. I don’t recommend Macs to family or friends anymore, they’re completely unnecessary. The new iPads with the keyboard are enough for normal people. That trend seems to be solving the problem, gradually, leaving the technical system for technical people.

godzillabrennus 9y ago

The alternative is to sandbox everything on the "open" system to enhance security. http://www.bromium.com http://www.bromium.com implements that approach within Windows.

mc32 9y ago
Some of Bromium reminds me a bit of moka5. Moka went bankrupt as they had a solution of sorts in search of a problem.

walrus01 9y ago

You don't work for Google (Chromebooks) or Microsoft (the new low cost Windows 10 that can only install apps from the App Store), by any chance, do you?

Tsagadai 9y ago

The restrictions just make spyware easier to hide. Malicious users will still be able to bust into devices but removing or detecting them will be harder as you will not be in control of the device. What about what that curation entails. Should I be forced to watch ads the manufacturer sends me before I can do anything? Should I be forced to pay a rental fee or lose all access to my data? Should all financial transactions be controlled by the manufacturer's prefered system? The problem with walled gardens is lockin and shareholders would be irrational not to encourage the manufacturer to maximize the profit they can extract from each device. I don't want a device where my every interaction is controlled and monetised to maximize my consumption.

legulere 9y ago

You don't need to lock down whole devices. You just need to lock down applications what they can do. The problem is that the basic unix (and windows) APIs are designed with malicious users, but not malicious programs in mind. What iOS and Android tries is bolting on a permission system on those old APIs, leading to overcomplicated brittle systems that fall behind what can be achieved.

pawadu 9y ago
> ... basic unix (and windows) APIs are designed with malicious users, but not malicious programs in mind I beg to disagree. Ubuntu for example has apparmor enabled by default [1] and snaps running in containers [2]. And compartmentalization is a huge part of the linux kernel [3]. --- [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppArmor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppArmor [2] https://snapcraft.io/docs/snaps/intro https://snapcraft.io/docs/snaps/intro [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cgroups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cgroups
- legulere 9y ago
  AppArmor is completely useless for the scenario of malicious programs rather than exploitable programs, as you still need to write profiles for programs. Ubuntu snaps are not sandboxed yet [1] Containers just offer just the same environment as a normal unix. Kernel apis like e.g. Video4Linux or even more basic stuff like the filesystem are not designed for this. How does an app ask the user for permission to use the camera? How does an app ask to open a file outside of its sandbox? Basic things like that are just handwaved away or implemented with extremely complex systems that regularly have security holes. [1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/3063134/linux/ubuntus-snap-packages-arent-yet-as-secure-as-canonicals-marketing-claims.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/3063134/linux/ubuntus-snap-pa...
  - kyrofa 9y ago
    > Ubuntu snaps are not sandboxed yet [1] That's quite a blanket statement: of course they are. Snaps are sandboxed by a set of interfaces requested by the snap in question. If the snap requests networking, it gets networking. If it wants to access the sound card, it gets the sound card. Some of these interfaces are more powerful/dangerous than others. If the snap requests X, it gets X. That makes that particular snap certainly less safe, but it says nothing about snaps that don't use the X interface at all. The user can also disallow access to X (though that probably makes the application less useful) by disconnecting that interface: snap disconnect <snapname>:x11

theknarf 9y ago

Well, that's the most 1984-esque comment I've read today.

lostlogin 9y ago
So you read HN before the newspapers?

mr_overalls 9y ago

Maybe it's time to re-engineer our whole computing software stack from the ground up with rigorous security in mind, like the LangSec folks suggest. http://blog.jacobtorrey.com/langsec-taming-the-weird-machines http://blog.jacobtorrey.com/langsec-taming-the-weird-machine...