4 ms·

>I think there's a fairly trivial distinction ... What's the difference between my Roku TV & my iPhone? My Roku can clearly do some general purpose computing.

by nawgz 6y ago

>I think there's a fairly trivial distinction ... What's the difference between my Roku TV & my iPhone? My Roku can clearly do some general purpose computing. So is it trivially a general purpose computing device or trivially not a general purpose computing device? Let's follow your workflow. >is the system aided by software to operate, vs is the system a platform for executing user-software Hm, I think my Roku is a TV, and so someone would expect to be able to use it without additional software. Indeed, it has about 8 ports on the side I can plug game consoles & cable boxes into. Therefore the system is aided by software to operate. Therefore it is trivially not a general purpose computing device. Now, what about my iPhone? My iPhone has phone in the name. One would expect to be able to make a phone call without additional software. That is indeed the case. Looks like my phone is trivially not a general purpose computing device.

Barrin92 6y ago
I agree that the Roku is arguably not a general purpose device but I don't really see the point about the phone unless you're trying to be intentionally facetious. Of course if you were only using the smartphone like a 50 year old analog phone yes you can make the case that it's actually not a general purpose device, however today virtually the entirely value (and usertime spent) on a phone is in countless of end-user applications it runs. (and that is what proposed regulation would address when it comes to platform obligations). If I had to guess a sizeable number of people doesn't even do calls any more.
- nawgz 6y ago
  I'm trying to be intentionally facetious in some sense, because it was claimed to be "trivial" to distinguish "general purpose compute" from not. Additionally, your argument doesn't really hold water - my Roku TV's value is also almost entirely in end-user applications it runs, like Netflix & other streaming services. My point is that I really don't think distinguishing these two in a legal sense is going to be so easy as posters in this thread are claiming.

by nawgz 6y ago

Barrin92 6y ago

I agree that the Roku is arguably not a general purpose device but I don't really see the point about the phone unless you're trying to be intentionally facetious. Of course if you were only using the smartphone like a 50 year old analog phone yes you can make the case that it's actually not a general purpose device, however today virtually the entirely value (and usertime spent) on a phone is in countless of end-user applications it runs. (and that is what proposed regulation would address when it comes to platform obligations). If I had to guess a sizeable number of people doesn't even do calls any more.

nawgz 6y ago
I'm trying to be intentionally facetious in some sense, because it was claimed to be "trivial" to distinguish "general purpose compute" from not. Additionally, your argument doesn't really hold water - my Roku TV's value is also almost entirely in end-user applications it runs, like Netflix & other streaming services. My point is that I really don't think distinguishing these two in a legal sense is going to be so easy as posters in this thread are claiming.