3 ms·

I’ve been both inside and outside that walled garden. I increasingly prefer life inside the wall. But that’s just me. What concerns me is the tribalism of peop

I’ve been both inside and outside that walled garden. I increasingly prefer life inside the wall. But that’s just me. What concerns me is the tribalism of people. “OMG! You use THAT phone/computer/OS?!?! I would NEVER use that!” Then go on to explain why their buying choices are better than yours. Look at the replies here, they’re rife with it.

Mindwipe 7y ago
> But that’s just me. What concerns me is the tribalism of people. “OMG! You use THAT phone/computer/OS?!?! I would NEVER use that!” Then go on to explain why their buying choices are better than yours. Look at the replies here, they’re rife with it. The thing about being able to install code without permission from a third party is that it's like herd immunity in vaccination - individuals or small groups doing it is not actually very useful in order to ward off harmful effects, it needs to be a widespread, mainstream possibility. Repressive governments are perfectly fine with draconian restrictions and attacks on minorities using computing platforms if they can succeed in 80% of cases. That means they have a much smaller base to attack with targeted "enforcement". Only mass civil disobedience through installation of prohibit code actually works. Many of the fundamental freedoms we cherish only exist because of mass permissionless code installation of the 90s to mid-2000. I wish I could sit there and say you can use whatever you want, I really do. But I think your choices negatively impact me and the rest of society.
- GoofballJones 7y ago
  Ah, and another one, but with the added BS of “OMG! You’re hurting society!” Mkay...
DavideNL 7y ago
> I increasingly prefer life inside the wall. We can have both: live inside the wall and have the freedom to do with our devices what we want; For example, in macOS i can disable 'System Integrity Protection' (SIP), make whatever modifications i want to make, and then re-enable SIP. The same thing could be done with iOS. The real issue is that Apple wants to have control over our devices for economic/financial reasons.
- qrbLPHiKpiux 7y ago
  > The real issue is that Apple wants to have control over our devices for economic/financial reasons. Maybe, maybe not. But I for one like this walled garden because it prevents a lot of stupid people from doing really stupid things. From a computer, infosec security angle.
  - Faark 7y ago
    That's understandable. And those willing to break out will have a price to pay. Like the "your phone is insecure" message on boot after you went to a bunch of complicated steps to unlock your bootloader. That's acceptable. Removing this option entirely is not. Or, you know, having multiple trust sources installed on your phone. I'd like to download apps by microsoft without having to beg google for permission. Manually adding new stores/etc should come with drawbacks / be unacceptable complicated for average users, of cause.
- mailslot 7y ago
  True story: I worked for a mobile app developer that earned a reputation for destroying Android phones. Logging bugs would trash the flash storage in months or weeks. Other bugs and “features” would drain the battery so aggressively that several phones caught on fire, some injuring customers. We found ways to hide our actual power usage and circumvent protections that would have prevented rapid battery discharge. In a meeting, it was said, “Stupid Apple won’t let us run background processes.” To which I thought, “Thank God.” It was Apple’s approval checks and policies that prevented this app maker from potentially physically damaging their customers’ phones with this terrible software. Physical injuries weren’t enough to fix the bugs or stop messing with low level settings. Nope. There are some “choices” that shouldn’t be put upon consumers. There are some profoundly bad developers out there. Shouldn’t there be protections from app makers that intentionally hide their shady tweaks that disable power protection safety? Apple’s approval process does indeed root out many of the worst offenders, like my former employer.
  - umvi 7y ago
    > Other bugs and “features” would drain the battery so aggressively that several phones caught on fire, some injuring customers. We found ways to hide our actual power usage and circumvent protections that would have prevented rapid battery discharge. Was it FIX Health? Their flagship app, The Outbreak[1] is literally the worst app I've ever installed on my phone. I had to install it as a part of a company health incentive so I could get my HSA bonus, but that app is seriously so bad. If I opened it on my Nexus 5X with 30% battery remaining, the OS would immediately start shutting down. Sometimes it froze my phone at full battery such that I couldn't use it or even reach the lock screen again until I did a hard reset. [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.FIX.TheOutbreak&hl=en_US https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.FIX.TheOut...

Mindwipe 7y ago

> But that’s just me. What concerns me is the tribalism of people. “OMG! You use THAT phone/computer/OS?!?! I would NEVER use that!” Then go on to explain why their buying choices are better than yours. Look at the replies here, they’re rife with it. The thing about being able to install code without permission from a third party is that it's like herd immunity in vaccination - individuals or small groups doing it is not actually very useful in order to ward off harmful effects, it needs to be a widespread, mainstream possibility. Repressive governments are perfectly fine with draconian restrictions and attacks on minorities using computing platforms if they can succeed in 80% of cases. That means they have a much smaller base to attack with targeted "enforcement". Only mass civil disobedience through installation of prohibit code actually works. Many of the fundamental freedoms we cherish only exist because of mass permissionless code installation of the 90s to mid-2000. I wish I could sit there and say you can use whatever you want, I really do. But I think your choices negatively impact me and the rest of society.

GoofballJones 7y ago
Ah, and another one, but with the added BS of “OMG! You’re hurting society!” Mkay...

DavideNL 7y ago

> I increasingly prefer life inside the wall. We can have both: live inside the wall and have the freedom to do with our devices what we want; For example, in macOS i can disable 'System Integrity Protection' (SIP), make whatever modifications i want to make, and then re-enable SIP. The same thing could be done with iOS. The real issue is that Apple wants to have control over our devices for economic/financial reasons.

qrbLPHiKpiux 7y ago
> The real issue is that Apple wants to have control over our devices for economic/financial reasons. Maybe, maybe not. But I for one like this walled garden because it prevents a lot of stupid people from doing really stupid things. From a computer, infosec security angle.
- Faark 7y ago
  That's understandable. And those willing to break out will have a price to pay. Like the "your phone is insecure" message on boot after you went to a bunch of complicated steps to unlock your bootloader. That's acceptable. Removing this option entirely is not. Or, you know, having multiple trust sources installed on your phone. I'd like to download apps by microsoft without having to beg google for permission. Manually adding new stores/etc should come with drawbacks / be unacceptable complicated for average users, of cause.
mailslot 7y ago
True story: I worked for a mobile app developer that earned a reputation for destroying Android phones. Logging bugs would trash the flash storage in months or weeks. Other bugs and “features” would drain the battery so aggressively that several phones caught on fire, some injuring customers. We found ways to hide our actual power usage and circumvent protections that would have prevented rapid battery discharge. In a meeting, it was said, “Stupid Apple won’t let us run background processes.” To which I thought, “Thank God.” It was Apple’s approval checks and policies that prevented this app maker from potentially physically damaging their customers’ phones with this terrible software. Physical injuries weren’t enough to fix the bugs or stop messing with low level settings. Nope. There are some “choices” that shouldn’t be put upon consumers. There are some profoundly bad developers out there. Shouldn’t there be protections from app makers that intentionally hide their shady tweaks that disable power protection safety? Apple’s approval process does indeed root out many of the worst offenders, like my former employer.
- umvi 7y ago
  > Other bugs and “features” would drain the battery so aggressively that several phones caught on fire, some injuring customers. We found ways to hide our actual power usage and circumvent protections that would have prevented rapid battery discharge. Was it FIX Health? Their flagship app, The Outbreak[1] is literally the worst app I've ever installed on my phone. I had to install it as a part of a company health incentive so I could get my HSA bonus, but that app is seriously so bad. If I opened it on my Nexus 5X with 30% battery remaining, the OS would immediately start shutting down. Sometimes it froze my phone at full battery such that I couldn't use it or even reach the lock screen again until I did a hard reset. [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.FIX.TheOutbreak&hl=en_US https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.FIX.TheOut...